consider modernizing the Flashblock icons

RESOLVED FIXED

Status

defect
RESOLVED FIXED
9 years ago
9 years ago

People

(Reporter: phiw2, Assigned: phiw2)

Tracking

Details

Attachments

(3 attachments)

39.72 KB, image/png
Details
5.71 KB, application/zip
alqahira
: review+
stuart.morgan+bugzilla
: superreview+
Details
86.69 KB, application/x-xpinstall
Details
Assignee

Description

9 years ago
Overall consensus in the forums and on irc is they look a little dated.

Proposal: http://dev.l-c-n.com/camino/flashblock/index2.html
interactive demo, icon on light, dark and multi-color background
Assignee

Comment 1

9 years ago
Posted file the icons
the 4 icons, crushed png format
Assignee: nobody → phiw
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #492916 - Flags: review?

Comment 3

9 years ago
Posted file Flashblock 1.5.15a1
Flashblock with new buttons - these will only show up on os=Darwin

https://www.mozdev.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=23490#c1

> Nice but they look very Mac specific. I'll take them but I'll make these Mac
> specific retaining the current images for non-Mac platforms. Which isn't to say
> that they don't badly need modernizing.

One thing I noticed is that they look too washed up especially on dark or black backgrounds on Windows at least. Perhaps you could increase the opacity. Or perhaps this is the current Mac look. I've attached a version of Flashblock for testing on Firefox+OSX. On any other platform the placeholder images remain the same.
Assignee

Comment 4

9 years ago
(In reply to comment #3)
 
> One thing I noticed is that they look too washed up especially on dark or black
> backgrounds on Windows at least. Perhaps you could increase the opacity. Or
> perhaps this is the current Mac look. I've attached a version of Flashblock for
> testing on Firefox+OSX. On any other platform the placeholder images remain the
> same.

(repost from https://www.mozdev.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=23490#c4)
It is about the same values as what Click2Flash uses (WebKit/Safari equivalent of Flashblock); the G. Chrome built-in plugin blocker uses slightly darker grays (but doesn't uses translucency).

It is meant to look good on both dark backgrounds (think YouTube, that shows on a black background, at least on Mac) and light backgrounds.
Comment on attachment 492916 [details]
the icons

r=ardissone, fwiw.  I checked a couple of light backgrounds (youtube, google maps streeview-on-top-of-maps) and a couple of dark backgrounds (youtube, ) and was quite pleased with the results.

This is a packaging implementation detail based on the way we have Flashblock integrated (i.e., it's a directive in chrome.manifest in the Flashblock extension that Philip attached, and we'd make ordinarily make corresponding changes to camino/flashblock/jar.mn), so we can just pave over the existing icons in our tree and not have to worry about any added complexity or additional folder hierarchies.

FWIW, http://www.printomatic.com/shockwave/pmatic/ and http://www.itapages.com/newweb/ if you want to check the Shockwave and Authorware icons in action.
Attachment #492916 - Flags: superreview?(stuart.morgan+bugzilla)
Attachment #492916 - Flags: review?
Attachment #492916 - Flags: review+

Comment 6

9 years ago
Comment on attachment 492916 [details]
the icons

sr=smorgan
Attachment #492916 - Flags: superreview?(stuart.morgan+bugzilla) → superreview+
http://hg.mozilla.org/camino/rev/f023d394a9e3
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.