Revin Kevin (+1.0)
12/5/04 4:13PM |
Well done to rcomp. |
fylfot (+1.0)
12/5/04 4:17PM |
Cool, a reason to buy Grapevine. |
fylfot (+1.0)
12/5/04 4:19PM |
hmm, I still hate the icons in Grapevine, unless they just forgot to update the screenshots. |
jonix (+1.0)
12/5/04 4:34PM |
The screenshots do look very poor although I'm not really a fan of the Grapevine product page at all. That aside, it looks like a useful product. |
imj (+1.0)
12/5/04 7:08PM |
Grapevine is one of the most visually disgusting RISC OS applications there ever has been. A truly embarassing piece of software to be seen using. It works, though. Most of the time. Maybe I'd consider the upgrade simply if they made it look less grim. |
arawnsley
13/5/04 9:40AM |
Guys, the icons are sprite files, so there's no reason you can't skin it if you like. Also GV2 supports any size emoticons so you can change those too. All I can say is that GV graphics are a matter of taste, like all such things, and if you have alternative design's, we'd be interested to see any mockups etc. One of the things which may well get added to GV2 is a skin selector of some kind, too, if people are interested. |
arawnsley
13/5/04 9:43AM |
PS, some of the gfx have changed a little, but overall look is still coloured buttons per protocol, based on the over-riding colour of that protocol's corporate image. What I would say, is that if you try using ICQlite (or pro for that matter) on Windows, and come back and use GV, you'll probably be rather pleased with the consistancy in GV's UI and design. |
jonix
13/5/04 11:44AM |
I like consistency within the OS. I don't want every app on my desktop to look completely different. It's one of the most annoying things that developers can do. |
mavhc
13/5/04 1:32PM |
Why, whenever there's a program with skins, there's no OS skin? |
fylfot
13/5/04 1:42PM |
In reply to arawnsley:
From what I can gather, the current icons only appeal to a very narrow group of people.
The default icons should be plain and clean. After all, most people don't have the time to be messing about with icons themselves. Also, you might sell some more copies if it looked clean and tidy like most RISC OS applications do.
And if people are still desperate for a bunch of tacky, and as img described, "visually disgusting" icons, they can put some in themselves.
fylfot, in an over-the-top mood.  |
vshears
13/5/04 4:22PM |
Is how the Icons look really that important?.
What should matter is how well the application does the job it was intended for, is it easy to set up / use and is it well supported?.
Using those criteria Grapevine is a verry verry good application and potentially a great one.
Vic |
Grek1
13/5/04 4:30PM |
I like those icons |
fylfot
13/5/04 4:40PM |
In reply to vshears:
"Is how the Icons look really that important?"
Yes, it is important. How it looks will influence whether or not someone will buy it. This is the reason why most websites show screenshots of programs. Looks are important.
I agree that the most important thing is functionality, but one of the reasons I like RISC OS is that applications are clean and, on the whole, visually appealing. Look at the new GUI for NetSurf for example, it's absolutely superb; the developers have kept window funiture to a minimum.
Of course you can't please everyone, but keeping things clean, neat and tidy is a good start - you can hardly offend anyone with this approach. And if they find that boring, then they can change it. |
vshears
13/5/04 6:45PM |
I can understand that you may use the way Icons look as one of your criteria in choosing an application for a task when many alternatives are available to do it.
However Grapevine is the only RISCOS messenger client to work with the current MSN protocol so in this case the Icons seem to have a very low priority.
Vic |
jonix
13/5/04 11:12PM |
I can only completely agree with what fylfot says. The consistent look of applications happens to be one of the main reasons I use RISC OS. By all means support fancy themes in addition to the default OS look and feel but do not force these onto the user. Call me shallow but in this case, looks are important and in this case, might be costing sales. |
vshears
14/5/04 12:02PM |
You may have a point.
Some peole may be so shallow that they woukd rather do without an MSN messenger client than but up with a few non RISC OS standard Icons but I do not think the number would be very high?.
Especially as with GV all the menus etc are standard RISC OS format. It is only the actual protocol windows which use the non standard Icons and as Amdrew has stated there is nothing to stop you changing them. Heck he has even requested input into alternative design's and stated that if there is a demand they may well add a skin selector to GV2. |
Fuzzie
14/5/04 12:07PM |
I dont think the Icons are disgusting ! Its one of the most useful apps.I stay in touch with mates from all around the world, send files. Its the only app which works with MSN chat for our platform.
Whatever happened to AOL chat ?
Great app thanks RComp |
arawnsley
14/5/04 1:02PM |
As far as I am aware, AOL and ICQ use very similar protocols (since ICQ is owned by AOL and was changed by them). Therefore, subject (of course) to ongoing sales of GV2 funding development.... |
fylfot
14/5/04 3:37PM |
"Some peole may be so shallow that they woukd rather do without an MSN messenger client."
I don't think there's any need to start insulting people.
Everyone makes decisions differently and it is for this reason that I would advise R-Comp provide a more neutral looking version of Grapevine so that they will hopefully gain more sales.
Surely we don't have to 'put up and shut up' simply because it's a RISC OS program? |
vshears
14/5/04 4:58PM |
Pardon! I was insulting no one. I was simply picking un on what Jonix had said ie "call me shallow" and stating that I could not belive that the number of people that would not purchase a useful application because they did not like a few Icons that they could easily change would be very high.
Please read peoples comments more carefully before accusing them.
Vic |
| |
