Closed Bug 340976 Opened 14 years ago Closed 12 years ago

Firefox should have a larger Icon for Vista

Categories

(Firefox :: Shell Integration, enhancement, P1)

x86
Windows Vista
enhancement

Tracking

()

VERIFIED FIXED
Firefox 3

People

(Reporter: u49640, Assigned: Gavin)

References

Details

Attachments

(7 files, 2 obsolete files)

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; de; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060508 Firefox/1.5.0.4
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; de; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060508 Firefox/1.5.0.4

when i set my desktop icons in Vista Beta2 to large, the firefox icon looks badly scaled. (but the IE7 Icon isnt that much better)

see screenshot

Reproducible: Always



Expected Results:  
Firefox should have a larger icon included
Attached image Firefox and IE Icon on Vista Beta2 (obsolete) —
Attached image the correct File, sorry
Attachment #225010 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Blocks: 333484
Flags: blocking-firefox2?
OS: Windows NT → Windows Vista
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox 2 beta1
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
You are on windows vista I dont think so you have the first version of it but its still windows xp pro you are running...
By looking at your logs its running well lol.
(In reply to comment #3)
> You are on windows vista I dont think so you have the first version of it but
> its still windows xp pro you are running...
> By looking at your logs its running well lol.
> 

I'm sorry, but i dont understand this comment.
Flags: blocking-firefox2? → blocking-firefox2+
Target Milestone: Firefox 2 beta1 → Firefox 2 beta2
I checked the Microsoft site for guidelines for Vista icons and found that "This content hasn't been written yet. Please check back later for updated guidelines." [1]

In the meantime, I've attached a version of the Firefox ico file that includes 128px and 256px sizes. I don't have Vista, so I can't test.


[1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/UxGuide/UXGuide/Visuals/Icons/Icons.asp
Assignee: nobody → beltzner
Comment on attachment 227265 [details]
Firefox ICO file with 128px and 256px sizes included

As I understand it, checking this in over our existing .ico file simply makes the larger sizes available should the OS want to use them.
Attachment #227265 - Flags: approval1.8.1?
Whiteboard: [needs approval][mustfix]
Attachment #227265 - Flags: approval1.8.1? → approval1.8.1+
Attached image the new icon in Vista
looks fine here (left: old one, right: new icon) with Vista Beta2
Whiteboard: [needs approval][mustfix] → [checkin neededl][mustfix]
Whiteboard: [checkin neededl][mustfix] → [checkin needed][mustfix]
mozilla/other-licenses/branding/firefox/firefox.ico 	1.2.18.2
mozilla/other-licenses/branding/firefox/firefox.ico 	1.4
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 14 years ago
Keywords: fixed1.8.1
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Whiteboard: [checkin needed][mustfix] → [mustfix]
Depends on: 346214
This new icon breaks builds using VC6 (see bug 346214) so it will need to be backed out of the branch. There is a workaround solution listed at http://www.rw-designer.com/compile-vista-icon in case we want to change our Windows build process to work around it, but I'm thinking that maybe we don't care that much.
I had to back the icon out of the branch to fix bug 346214.
Keywords: fixed1.8.1
Benjamin, can you please see the workaround referred to in comment 9 and let us know if it's possible to add that as a step in our official build process so we can get this icon shoehorned into Firefox 2 builds?

Resetting the blocking flag to "?" to see if, given this new workaround requirement, we still feel that this is significant enough to fix for release. I can't target it at a 2.0.0.1 release, otherwise I'd be tempted to!
Flags: blocking-firefox2+ → blocking-firefox2?
Target Milestone: Firefox 2 beta2 → Firefox 2
I worry vaguely about installing/using random tools off the internet. Integrating with the build environment shouldn't be all that hard. Do we want to make everyone who builds with --enable-official-branding have this tool?
I'm totally fine with requiring anyone building officially-branded builds to have an additional tool.  That said, I would hope we can find a better way of doing this, and we've already pushed out other Vista integration issues until we have time to focus and have a more finished version of the OS.
Flags: blocking-firefox2? → blocking-firefox2-
Whiteboard: [mustfix] → [Fx 2.0.1]
Duplicate of this bug: 376763
Duplicate of this bug: 378364
Would it be as simple as just using the Vista SDK version of rc.exe & rc.dll on the 1.8 tinderboxen? Or has this bug just been shelved for Fx2?
do those work with VC6?  I didn't think they would...
I'll try it and let you know.
I just successfully built Firefox 2.0.0.4 from the tarball source today with VC6 SP5 with rc.exe & rcdll.dll build 6.0.5724.0 and the newer icon attached to this bug. I simply replaced those two original rc files in the Visual Studio install dir with the Vista SDK versions instead. Upon clobbering my tree, the build went without a hitch and I confirmed with Resource Hacker than the new icon was indeed being used.

So I guess that answers that!
Attached file RC files used
For posterity's sake, here are the two rc files I used to replace the original VC6SP5 rc files.
Asking for blocking 1.8.1.5. I think this is a simple and rather low-risk fix and I've shown it can be done without resorting to any third party tools. It could easily be turned on early in a release cycle for nightly testing long before it made it into a shipping release to ensure no regressed functionality.

It's very worthwhile given the other efforts that have been made to make Firefox look polished in Vista given that Fx2 is going to be around for quite awhile still.
Flags: blocking1.8.1.5?
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=4377f86d-c913-4b5c-b87e-ef72e5b4e065&displaylang=en is the link to the Vista SDK.  What type of risk is revving the SDK (or pulling the rc.exe/dll out of the SDK and spot-replacing) going to be?  This is something that does make a difference on Vista...
FYI, the new Win32 refplatform will be using MozillaBuild, which doesn't currently detect the Vista SDK.  That's filed as bug 374074.
per mconnor build probably won't be able to get to this one for 1.8.1.5, but definitely wanted.
Flags: wanted1.8.1.x+
Flags: blocking1.8.1.5?
Flags: blocking1.8.1.5-
Like I said previously, the only method I've tested for this was directly replacing the resource compiler binaries with the newer versions from the Vista SDK. I haven't tried a total build with VC6 + the Vista SDK.  I'll try that in the future and if it works, I'll post my configuration here for you guys to use (since we're obviously going to want a customized SDK install that doesn't include the C++ compiler for obvious reasons :-)...)
Duplicate of this bug: 389028
Flags: blocking1.8.1.7?
Polish is nice, but this will happen in FF3. The 1.8 branch releases are always so tight there's no room for mucking with build files unless it's a security bug.
Flags: blocking1.8.1.7? → blocking1.8.1.7-
I think we should back this icon out on trunk until the Win32 tinderbox has the appropriate prerequisites to support compiling it.  See the discussion in bug 346214.  In addition, once that happens and we can re-land this, we should check in the same kind of icon for the unofficial branding, so that we can ensure everything works right *before* we try to release something with official branding.
(In reply to comment #28)
> I think we should back this icon out on trunk until the Win32 tinderbox has the
> appropriate prerequisites to support compiling it.  See the discussion in bug
> 346214.  In addition, once that happens and we can re-land this, we should
> check in the same kind of icon for the unofficial branding, so that we can
> ensure everything works right *before* we try to release something with
> official branding.
> 

I wholeheartedly support this plan.
Backed out the icon.

Stephen, can you give us a Vista-sized Minefield icon so we never regress this again? :)
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Flags: blocking-firefox3+
Priority: -- → P2
Resolution: FIXED → ---
Whiteboard: [Fx 2.0.1]
Target Milestone: Firefox 2 → Firefox 3 M11
Depends on: 402848, 406085
No longer depends on: 346214
Priority: P2 → P1
Mike, I think I might have mistook your smiley emoticon for an indication of sarcasm. You do need the vista-sized minefield icon, right? Mind if I take some comic liberties in the giant version?
(In reply to comment #31)
> Mike, I think I might have mistook your smiley emoticon for an indication of
> sarcasm. You do need the vista-sized minefield icon, right?

Yeah, we need it so that we can actually use a Vista-based icon in the unofficial builds, too, so that we know our build system is working properly with it, rather than only finding out during release build time that our build system doesn't support the icon.

>  Mind if I take some comic liberties in the giant version?

I'm not mconnor, but I wouldn't see why not, as the current bomb-in-world icon for Minefield is already pretty comedic in itself. ;)
>  Mind if I take some comic liberties in the giant version?

I'm personally in favor of comic liberties :)  Apple seems to have established a bar that small jokes must be included in high resolution versions of icons.

Our tone for betas seems to be in general far less formal than the actual product:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/novemberborn/2110674112/
The Firefox build machines have all been updated to the new PSDK. We can safely land the new icon now.

As mconnor suggested above, we should also get a Vista-sized Minefield icon. I think this should go in really soon (ie, before we spin Beta 3).
Here's a minefield icon that includes the 128px and Vista 256px sizes. It's actually just a resampling of the 128px icon, but it should do. I'll see if I can get a higher-quality original.
Gavin, can you reland the vista-sized Firefox and Minefield icons?

Steven, could we get an unbranded icon (the globe-only image) so we have all branding sets covered?
Assignee: beltzner → gavin.sharp
Status: REOPENED → NEW
Landed both the Firefox and the Minefield icon:
mozilla/browser/app/firefox.ico 	1.4
mozilla/other-licenses/branding/firefox/firefox.ico 	1.6
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 14 years ago12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
I backed out the minefield icon, because it broke stuart's machine and we're not sure how common the bustage is. Filed bug 414082.
*** VERIFIED

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9b3) Gecko/2008020514 Firefox/3.0b3
via comment 39
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
It turns out the previous Firefox icon with the new vista sizes was based on the Firefox 1.5 icon rather than the updated Firefox 2 icon. Shame on me! Here's the proper Firefox 2 icon with the Vista sizes. This is what should be used in Firefox 3.
Attachment #227265 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Status: VERIFIED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---
Attachment #320176 - Flags: ui-review?(faaborg)
Attached image Comparison of icons
Here are comparisons of the the new icon to the previous one, on XP (left) and Vista (right).  I'm seeing slight color variations, but very strangely only on XP.

The color variations are imperceptible, so it likely isn't worth trying to track down what is causing it.
Comment on attachment 320176 [details]
Firefox icon with new Vista-friendly sizes

Thanks for quickly fixing the issue.  Overall this looks great, notes on some slight color variations are in comment #42.
Attachment #320176 - Flags: ui-review?(faaborg) → ui-review+
Attachment #320176 - Flags: approval1.9?
Attachment #320176 - Flags: approval1.9? → approval1.9+
Does this new icon need to land on the branch as well?
That is, did attachment 227265 [details] (which was checked in on the branch for Firefox 2) also have this problem?
mozilla/other-licenses/branding/firefox/firefox.ico 	1.7 
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: Firefox 3 beta3 → Firefox 3
Version: unspecified → Trunk
Looks fine on Vista now. Marking as verified. Attaching screenshot.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Attached image FF Icon Large
It looks sharp. :)
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.