Next: New Perspectives On GUI
Up: Document and Standardize Visual
Previous: Document and Standardize Visual
Contents
Many computer operating systems perform similar functions on similar
objects--a user of command-line Vax, UNIX, DOS; or graphical
X-Windows, Open-VMS, MS-Windows, and Macintosh will still `copy'
files, `delete' files, create `directories' or `folders,' and connect
to other machines on a network using invisible protocols. Why not
settle on some well-designed, standardized icons to represent
these objects and actions in all graphical environments?
A major force that opposes any effort to standardize many computer
icons is the desire of many developers to be unique. Every designer
wants his application to stand out, and quite frankly, it is more
fun to design a special set of icons without trying to imitate
others. Often a company wants to reflect its corporate logo in its
icons. There has also been an effort by some creative designers to
copyright striking and innovative glyphs. It is the user who suffers
most from the lack of conformity on individual computers and between
computer systems.[20]
Standardization works in airports, train stations, and on traffic
signs all over the United States and Europe. Maybe designers don't
understand the benefit that such standardization could have for
users- especially those who must work with more than one application
or operating system. If the manufacturers won't agree, perhaps the
artists can.
Next: New Perspectives On GUI
Up: Document and Standardize Visual
Previous: Document and Standardize Visual
Contents
sean dreilinger