512x512 Icon

That’s it, just a 512x512 icon for DEVONthink Pro.


Just curious but why? Is your screen that huge? :slight_smile:

It is specified in Apple’s Human Interface Guidelines:

developer.apple.com/Mac/library/ … Icons.html

"Creating Icons for Mac OS X v10.5 and Later
If you’re designing an application icon for Mac OS X v10.5 and later, you should supply a 512 x 512 pixel version of the image. When you do this, be sure to treat the 512 x 512 pixel version as its own resource; that is, don’t create it by blowing up each pixel of the 128 x 128 pixel version of the icon. For example, the 512 x 512 pixel version of the icon should not have thick strokes or look “vectorized.“ In general, the larger icon should be a higher quality rendition of the 128 x 128 pixel resource, which exhibits:

Richer texture
More details
Greater realism
For example, the 512 x 512 pixel version of the Front Row application icon (shown in Figure 11-20) reveals more detail in the wood grain of the chair frame and the velvet of the upholstery than in the 128 x 128 pixel version, resulting in a more realistic image."

I was amused by Apple’s language, in this context.

I’ve drafted a lot of laws and regulations. Legally, the word ‘should’ is pretty meaningless. ‘Shall’ is the word that removes loopholes, omissions and reservations.

In engineering parlance, ‘should’ doesn’t make a specification. ‘Should’ is just encouragement. Standard-setting organizations like ASTM avoid ‘should’ when they write specifications. (I’ve served on an ASTM committee to develop technical standards.)

‘Should’ allows Apple’s own developers to depart from such guidelines whenever they please — which is fairly often. :slight_smile:

If someone wants a big, pretty picture of the DT Pro icon, maybe Eric has one lying around, perhaps larger than 512 x 512. I would like one. (Just kidding, Eric.)

I avoid using “should” and “supposed to” as much as possible. Reminds me of this:

Exorcising the Demon Should


Hey Bill - no offence; but if the DevonThink team paid a little more attention to Apple’s User Interface Guidelines, DTP mightn’t be a spectacularly USEFUL product crippled by an incoherent, butt-ugly interface.

Just saying! Know that I love what you guys do otherwise!

Could you bash it more unabashedly? :slight_smile:

I agree there are usability incoherence issues, though the look is more bland than ugly to me.

I’m curious if you have any examples of apps that might be considered in DT’s category with interfaces you consider coherently and visually superior.

I don’t know what apps drspk might have in mind, but I would think that Together is a visually appealing application. Overall, the performance and feature set in Together is not where DT is, but it is easy on the eyes. Having said that, I would add that I consider the Shelf in Together to be arguably superior to the Sorter in all three categories-performance, visual appeal, and feature set.

I agree, based on testing it awhile ago. At that time it had a lot of annoying bugs and intolerably poor performance; I’m sure both have improved since then.

That seems to be the consensus around here based on Shelf vs. Sorter comparisons in other threads.

I’ve never tried it (and have not desire to), but recent releases of SOHO Notes are visually appealing to me based on what I can see from the small, limited product page screenshots.

Hi Bill, nothing too important to add in here except I have found what Devonthink does to be the absolute best in class for information organizers. It is first rate.

The user interface is neither best in class or first rate. While I do not think a 512x512 icon is urgent and really more important then a lot of other things, I do think that instead of reading the Apple HIG and taking the time to make fun of it and mock the wording, you all might be a little more receptive to input in this area because Devonthink is neither first in class nor first rate, so far as the interface to the program goes.

The nicest thing you could say about Devonthink is that the user interface was a confusing ugly mess that is slowly becoming less confusing and less ugly.

I’ve had very good responses to my own posts in this area, one I remember in particular was the ugly old groups panel, where someone listened and changed it to a hud. It looks much nicer now without changing the function in any way. A lot of people have big monitors, with snow leopard some people are using bigger then 128 icons. The way I read the request it was only a comment that devonthink does not have a 512 icon like most new programs. It doesn’t have one, most programs with updates in the last few months do.

You want butt ugly? Here’s butt ugly:butt_ugly.jpg

Ha! Put that thing in taxi yellow and you have what we call in our family “Aztec Ugly”!

Speaking of fugly cars, there’s a rather homely powder blue station wagon down the block here I can never resist laughing at.

I don’t know why I answer this, because I know that legacy users are going instantly to deny any design claims done in this forums using legal arguments.

Just wanted to say that I agree with the suggestion for better icons. And + 1 vote for better interface design. I’m a designer and I appreciate icon design. And DEVONthink Pro and DEVONthink Pro Office icons are not very “stylish”.

Doesn’t your neighborhood association have restrictions on junkers parked on the street or in front yards? IIRC some town in CA enforced such a restriction on a taxi yellow Aztek. Also the Pontiac design engineer for that monstrosity is now working in the Zune division at M$.

I agree–and have always agreed–that DT UI lacks a certain easy and attractive sophistication. In fact, I believe its learning curve is unnecessarily steepened by the UI. Having used Together in the past, I really liked the UI, but gave it up for the much better capabilities of DTPO. I also have to admit that the latest versions of DTPO have moved the meter on the UI gauge. The sad thing is that bringing DTPO’s UI up to today’s design standards wouldn’t take a major push. It appears to have the bones, it just needs a skin level makeover…with a few useability injections to iron out the remaining wrinkles.

The term “ugly” suggest that we are mainly talking about the look. This is to some degree a matter of taste. I just downloaded Together because everyone here is so in praise of it. I was disappointed. Personally I can’t see why the look of Together should be better.

Speaking of the UI as usability as a whole is an other matter. Again this is to some degree depending on the personal workflow. Comparing again with Together I agree, that Together has an easy and clear Interface. But that’s not so hard to archive with 20% of the features. (Okay it is unfair to make this judgement after half an hour poking around in a new App and compare it to the App I use ten hours a day.) But the point remains: it seems many people like Together for the easy of use, but switch to DTP because its power. Sorry folks, you can’t have one’s cake and eat it too :wink:

But I agree that there are UI glitches in DTP. The list is growing thinner though (we are still in beta, aren’t we). And of course there’s always room for improvement.


That’s a very eloquent way of putting things, I like the mixed metaphors.

Yes DevonThink is more complex then its competitors, it does more and better, but having a snarky attitude and belittling the concerns of someone who noticed a lack of a 512px icon possibly because they are using larger then 128px icons right now isn’t the best reply.

DTPO is light years past what its nearest competitor can do. This makes people tolerate the interface and put up with it. That isn’t exactly what you should be hoping for, it could use some improvement and creative brainstorming or more then a after-thought about where to add more buttons or another key combination.

I am underwhelmed by Together, I too have heard a lot about it and looked at it during different times during it’s updates but it just looks like a very simple and dumb version of Devonthink with 15% of the function present. I do not know how well it scales or what it really holds up to but it looks like no big deal, it toggles more core anim effects on :slight_smile:

This is only my opinion, I don’t see anything special about Together, Eagle Filer which is really ugly, Yohimbo, but all of these are much smaller apps which are not I think the same audience as devonthink pro office, none of them does very much, maybe they compare to devon personal? I have never looked at it so I don’t know.

SOHO notes is a program more in the capabilities and price range of Devonthink which has some very nice user interface design, unfortunately it is like the reverse of Devonthink. Devonthink looks well it looks like what it looks like, it could use some help, but it works beautifully. SOHO notes looks better and hardly works at all when you start adding a lot of content.

Yep is also a very nice program to look at I think.

I am also using Devonthink now because of what it does and it is true, I tolerate the interface because there is nothing which does all of it and works for me to switch to, but you are doing your own company a disservice by not taking what the program looks like more seriously, obviously people do care, we are all reading and writing to this post.

You do know at least some of this, compared to pics I have seen of Devonthink 1, the 2 beta is beautiful but has a way to go still. I can see how 1 would be dated and ugly by modern standard, 2 is not so awful but it is still nothing special, which is too bad for you, because the program is very special :slight_smile:

Which UI is better, iPhoto or Aperture?

For those comparing DT’s UI to that of much less functional programs, it might be worth it to sit down with a sheet of paper and try drawing a mockup of your “ideal” DT UI. Just saying “DT is ugly!” isn’t very helpful.

It’s easy to make simple programs beautiful. It’s much harder to make a complex program beautiful without burying its functionality.

There’s also the resource issue. We’re coming up on a year since the first version 2 beta, and that’s without a UI makeover. What piece of the new functionality would you sacrifice to make the UI look better?