So we now have a new default theme for Firefox on Windows, called Winstripe. The problem is that the new theme is heavily inspired by MacOS design and does not blend in on Windows XP. This blog entry is about my view of the situation and an attempt to point out what needs to be done in order to make this work.
First of all, congratulations to Kevin Gerich and Stephen Horlander for being chosen to create the new default theme. Pinstripe is a beautiful MacOS X theme and proves that you guys are very talented and pay great attention to the details of MacOS design guidelines.
Second, my deepest sympathies to Arvid Axelsson (author of Qute, the default theme for Firefox up until now) who wasn't informed about the new plans until they were already decided. Apparently, Arvid's experience with Qute wasn't even used by the Visual Identity Team. Instead they chose to develop Winstripe without Arvid's knowledge, while he was still checking in updates on Qute. Clearly, Mozilla.org are having some communication problems and this is not the first time I've noticed this. Hopefully both parties can learn from their mistakes and move on. Enough said, let's focus on the Winstripe theme!
Jon Hicks mentioned in Kevin Gerich's web log that he finds Qute to be unprofessional. Mr Hicks is a professional and most probably knows what he's talking about, but I can't say his comment makes that much sense in this case. Qute conforms strictly to the Windows XP icon design guidelines, which includes a number of important attributes. Winstripe, at its current state, hardly conforms to any of them.
With all due respect, the MacOS-inspired Winstripe theme is best suited for... MacOS. It even has the vertical drop shadow that is so typical for that platform. It is indeed an excellent (MacOS) theme, but it has no place in the Windows (Luna/Classic) interface at its current state. It's pretty obvious that Kevin and Stephen are using Macintosh, which leads me to the key question: What's the point of designing a Windows theme if the artists don't want to conform to the Windows XP guidelines? What good does it do to make Firefox look like a MacOS application on Windows, when an overwhelming 83.32%Based on visitor stats for Firefox Help on May 2004. of the user base are running Windows and only 2.86%Based on visitor stats for Firefox Help on May 2004. are running Macintosh?
Anyway, the decisions have already been made. So how do we make Winstripe look good on Windows XP? Well, there are a number of things that need to be done in order to achieve the Windows XP (Luna) appearance. Here are my suggestions:
This is the most apparent weakness of Winstripe at its current state. For example, the Home icon looks strict and dull compared to the inviting Home icon of Internet Explorer, or Qute. Look at the icons in the Windows XP start menu. None of them have hard edges. All of them use soft, smooth, cute looking shapes, such as the Calculator icon mentioned above. This is key to the Windows XP icon design, and if we're not going to follow that guideline, we're not going to blend in on Windows XP.
This is being used in Winstripe already, to some extent. But the icons still look as if they were designed pixel by pixel, unlike the native Windows XP artwork which look like scaled vector graphics, and as such, much softer.
Windows icons should not be flat anymore. They were in Windows 3.1 and 95. They still were flat to some extent in Windows 98/Me/2000, but in Windows XP, which should be the primary target, the icons have a 3D-looking appearance. This can be achieved by having a common light source from the top-left corner and a subtle drop shadow on the lower-right corner.
This is just not the convention on Windows XP. I've never seen it used before and it actually looks strange. Drop shadows should be used sparsely in toolbar icons and as mentioned above, they should be located on the lower-right corner.
The Mail & News icon is wider than the other icons. The Back/Forward triangles appears to be wider than the Reload icon. I could probably come up with more examples. The end result is inconsistency. It just doesn't look balanced.
This is a vague suggestion, I know. The current Winstripe theme just doesn't attract me. Try to look cool and modern, try some new ideas, drop the strictness, try to make an impression. I can't express it better, the Winstripe theme is just too squarish, flat, strict and uninspired. A default theme should be inviting, the buttons should encourage you to click on them. The goal of Winstripe should be to blend in with the Windows XP artwork as successfully as Pinstripe does on MacOS X.
I hope this feedback is of any use and that I managed to be specific enough about the current flaws of Winstripe. I'm confident that this can turn out to be a great theme. Personally, however, I much prefer Qute since it already is a perfect fit for Windows XP.
Good luck Kevin and Stephen and keep up the great work!
Posted by djst at June 7, 2004 03:00 PM | TrackBack>>Second, my deepest sympathies to Arvid Axelsson (author of Qute, the default theme for Firefox up until now) who wasn't informed about the new plans until they were already decided.
He didn't want to open Qute, so why should they say "pretty please and we'll keep Qute forever?"
>>Apparently, Arvid's experience with Qute wasn't even used by the Visual Identity Team. Instead they chose to develop Winstripe without Arvid's knowledge, while he was still checking in updates on Qute.
Why should they use his experience with Qute? Winstripe is totally different and the Qute guy couldn't help at all. Also, other developers spend lots of time on a feature and then it's turned into something else.
>>Clearly, Mozilla.org are having some communication problems and this is not the first time I've noticed this. Hopefully both parties can learn from their mistakes and move on. Enough said, let's focus on the Winstripe theme!
Why do people need to be informed of things like name changes, theme changes, things that don't change the quality of the browser? Why can't people accept Mozilla Suite is crap because of the community and Firefox is the work of a great dictator?
>>Jon Hicks mentioned in Kevin Gerich's web log that he finds Qute to be unprofessional. Mr Hicks is a professional and most probably knows what he's talking about, but I can't say his comment makes that much sense in this case. Qute conforms strictly to the Windows XP icon design guidelines, which includes a number of important attributes. Winstripe, at its current state, hardly conforms to any of them.
Ever noticed that we were stuck with his little moon throbber for a REALLY long time and that his icons are choppy in small size? Plus he put too much artistry into icons like Reload, which makes it less than obvious. While XP uses bright shiny colors, Qute is dull.
>>With all due respect, the MacOS-inspired Winstripe theme is best suited for... MacOS. It even has the vertical drop shadow that is so typical for that platform. It is indeed an excellent (MacOS) theme, but it has no place in the Windows (Luna/Classic) interface at its current state. It's pretty obvious that Kevin and Stephen are using Macintosh, which leads me to the key question: What's the point of designing a Windows theme if the artists don't want to conform to the Windows XP guidelines? What good does it do to make Firefox look like a MacOS application on Windows, when an overwhelming 83.32%Based on visitor stats for Firefox Help on May 2004. of the user base are running Windows and only 2.86%Based on visitor stats for Firefox Help on May 2004. are running Macintosh?
Mac users hate ugly things. Windows users don't care, as long as it looks good(not like XP) they're okay with it. Does it really look like Mac OS X? Have you noticed that OS X icons are like mini-photographs not simplistic buttons? Sure somethings are OS X like the Bookmarks, but Windows users probably never heard of OS X or care if the Bookmarks are too glossy
>>Use rounded shapes
I don't know why everything has to be rounded these days, but the hard edges make them more obvious as to what they do.
>>Use gradients
Winstripe doesn't need to be any more shiny than it is.
>>Use more depth
2D is in your face and easy too understand, which is why design experts at Mac suggest 2D for toolbars. Also notice that Windows Media Player, Quicktime, Real use 3D buttons but are facing towards you, not away, like Qute.
>>Don't use a vertical drop shadow
Yay! I agree!
>>Use the same width for all icons
They all look the same to me
http://gallery.cybertarp.com/albums/userpics/11673/preview.png
>>Blend in and look modern :)
You're making sound like people use apps for the theme. The theme should be subdued, so it doesn't get in the way of browsing. Have you seen Microsoft's Longhorn's theme? It's modern AND ugly.
>>A default theme should be inviting, the buttons should encourage you to click on them.
I don't click Back/Forward on Firefox because it looks "inviting" I click it because I want to go to a previous page. A default theme should just be not ugly.
>>The goal of Winstripe should be to blend in with the Windows XP artwork as successfully as Pinstripe does on MacOS X.
It does it kind of. Uses XP colors and all. Also, how many products outside of Microsoft look XP? Java, Flash, Quicktime, Real all use some proprietary look.
Good luck Kevin and Stephen and keep up the great work!
Posted by: PK at June 7, 2004 05:15 PMEverybody and some people more seem to assume that the email posted on MzillazineForums indeed was the hole communication between m.o an Arvid. It`s 5 month old isn`t it?
Why does everybody assume that Arvids claims are true. He is the guy posting such email in public, should Ben act the same and post more emails and chat logs, if there are any?
Don`t know how long the thread already is, but the first 11 pages nobody even considered this.
Everybody seems to bash Ben/m.o for a lack of profesionalism and communication. They do not have any proof for that, tey all assume that waht they are reding is the whole truth. Seems naiv to me.
Why it should look like Luna? Not all users use Windows XP. There are still many people using Windows 2000, some even Windows 98...
I personlly HATE Luna style which is so ugly... the new theme looks nice... and I rarely use the buttons anyway (mouse geasure does almost everything), so the theme doesn't really matter...
Posted by: minghong at June 7, 2004 06:57 PMOk "PK", clearly you haven't read or understood the Icon Guidelines or why they are important to follow. As I said, the goal of Winstripe should be to blend in with the Windows XP artwork as successfully as Pinstripe does on MacOS X.
"It does it kind of. Uses XP colors and all."
And "all"? No. Not by a long shot. Just don't comment on stuff you don't understand, ok?
"A default theme should just be not ugly."
If that's your only requirement, then I can see why the Windows XP guidelines don't matter to you. Fortunately, there are other people who do care about professionalism. First impression is crucial.
">Use the same width for all icons
They all look the same to me"
Look at the mail icon again. It's wider than the other icons. And even if you somehow manage to prove that it technically isn't, it still looks like it, which is what matters.
Posted by: David Tenser at June 7, 2004 07:17 PM