Better icons and look needed YES it is
Moderators: white, Hacker, petermad, Stefan2
-
- Member
- Posts: 136
- Joined: 2010-02-26, 11:52 UTC
Better icons and look needed YES it is
I have heard the argument before that its all fine as it is because you can change it to look better etc. Yeah but for a new user it's ugly, the icons on the toolbar are horrilbe and very early computer 80s. I have been using the program for a month and still dont find it easy or know how to change them. Therefore I think if you want this program to be used by as many people as possible it really needs an update so that a new user doesnt have to find out how to make it look better.
What you dont see is what you get!
Each button---
2neverthelesshello
Hello !
• You may replace any icon of any button with you own one, I mean an *.ICO file you can draw by yourself, that I do for a decade and more…
- There are good icon editors around, for instance GreenFish (gratis) which support also the *.ICL creation… and much more
KR
Claude
Clo
Hello !
• You may replace any icon of any button with you own one, I mean an *.ICO file you can draw by yourself, that I do for a decade and more…
- There are good icon editors around, for instance GreenFish (gratis) which support also the *.ICL creation… and much more
KR
Claude
Clo
#31505 Traducteur Français de T•C French translator Aide en Français Tutoriels Français English Tutorials
Well, some of us really doEveryone else enjoys TC's state of the art design
Anyway - TC mostly uses standard Windows elements, so if your TC looks bad, so must your Windows look
License #524 (1994)
Danish Total Commander Translator
TC 11.03 32+64bit on Win XP 32bit & Win 7, 8.1 & 10 (22H2) 64bit, 'Everything' 1.5.0.1371a
TC 3.50 on Android 6 & 13
Try: TC Extended Menus | TC Languagebar | TC Dark Help | PHSM-Calendar
Danish Total Commander Translator
TC 11.03 32+64bit on Win XP 32bit & Win 7, 8.1 & 10 (22H2) 64bit, 'Everything' 1.5.0.1371a
TC 3.50 on Android 6 & 13
Try: TC Extended Menus | TC Languagebar | TC Dark Help | PHSM-Calendar
-
- Member
- Posts: 136
- Joined: 2010-02-26, 11:52 UTC
Like your sense of humourLefteous wrote:2neverthelesshello
You are actually the first user who complains about TC's visual appearance. Everyone else enjoys TC's state of the art design
as to the other replies, yes I know you can learn how to change stuff but some may find that difficult and my point is - shouldnt the look be updated as the default and then if experienced users want a retro look they can easily do what they want. I am sure there are so many people who have tried it and hated the look and moved on - To be honest i tend to use another program because of the look of TC.
What you dont see is what you get!
Hi, folks.
As has been stated earlier today,
Therefore, it may be a good idea to deploy Total Commander with e.g. 3 sets of configuration:
Kind regards,
Karl
As has been stated earlier today,
As a consequence, there will never be one set of icons and one set of fonts which will please everybody.karlchen wrote:beauty (or ugliness) is in the eye of the beholder only. So there is no arguing about beauty (or ugliness).
Therefore, it may be a good idea to deploy Total Commander with e.g. 3 sets of configuration:
- Default configuration for fresh installations: using current Windows fonts and icons taken from shell32.dll only.
(Have not verified that all needed icons can be found there. I doubt that it will be that simple.) - T.C. proprietary configuration: using the current default fonts and stickynomad's icons
- T.C. for N.C. purists: making T.C. look as much like the ancient Norton Commander as possible.
Kind regards,
Karl
-
- Member
- Posts: 136
- Joined: 2010-02-26, 11:52 UTC
It it a bad idea to use shell32.dll since in different Windows versions icons in this file have different indexes, also in Vista there is new file with just 'cool' icons.
Anyway, if someone wants to improve TC appearance, he/she should try different existing ICL packs and maybe some own packs - if he/she doesn't like TC standard icons, he/she may dislike any custom icons pack, so he/she should try to find best for himself/herself. It is an easiest thing - to blame creator, but it is a best thing - to do something nice and to allow people to use it.
You want to see 'better' icons. What exactly? In which way better? There are infinity of possible views and how will we know which of them do you prefer?
And, please show me software of 80's which looks so nice as modern TC - its very interesting for me to see it.
Anyway, if someone wants to improve TC appearance, he/she should try different existing ICL packs and maybe some own packs - if he/she doesn't like TC standard icons, he/she may dislike any custom icons pack, so he/she should try to find best for himself/herself. It is an easiest thing - to blame creator, but it is a best thing - to do something nice and to allow people to use it.
You want to see 'better' icons. What exactly? In which way better? There are infinity of possible views and how will we know which of them do you prefer?
And, please show me software of 80's which looks so nice as modern TC - its very interesting for me to see it.
-
- Member
- Posts: 136
- Joined: 2010-02-26, 11:52 UTC
my whole point really is that it should be made to look as nice as possible from the beginning so that new users wont have to spend a lot of time trying to figure out how to change it.
The reason I made this post is because I am a member of a few forums and Tc gets mentioned every time they discuss file managers. I have seen so many people comment that they tried TC but it looked horrible so they moved on. I havent heard anyone complain of how another file manager looks - Just TC!
I can live with it but my point is I think TC is loosing users because of how it looks.
The reason I made this post is because I am a member of a few forums and Tc gets mentioned every time they discuss file managers. I have seen so many people comment that they tried TC but it looked horrible so they moved on. I havent heard anyone complain of how another file manager looks - Just TC!
I can live with it but my point is I think TC is loosing users because of how it looks.
What you dont see is what you get!
Hello, neverthelesshello. Hello, MVV.
Anyway:
What I have in mind is similar to what you can do e.g. in Firefox. You download and install a pre-fabricated configuration set which modifies the appearance of your Firefox: Firefox themes (side note: urgh, I dislike this personas stuff).
Basically, the following factors determine what your Total Commander looks like:
Why just 3 pre-fabricated configuration sets:
This is mostly a pragmatic decision. There is only one developer. There is only one stickynomad. So resources are limited. Moreover we do not really wish to force Christian to raise the license fees, do we.
Moreover, beauty lies in the eye of the beholder only. So even if T.C. came along with a dozen pre-fabricated configurations sets, there would still be people who would not like any of the offered interface designs.
Kind regards,
Karl
And my previous post was meant to support this idea, even though the overall concept may be a bit too rough and even though using icons from shell32.dll may be not a good idea. But this is a minor implementation detail. We should not start discussing the details of implementation bevor we have agreed on the basic idea.my whole point really is that it should be made to look as nice as possible from the beginning so that new users wont have to spend a lot of time trying to figure out how to change it.
Anyway:
What I have in mind is similar to what you can do e.g. in Firefox. You download and install a pre-fabricated configuration set which modifies the appearance of your Firefox: Firefox themes (side note: urgh, I dislike this personas stuff).
Basically, the following factors determine what your Total Commander looks like:
- (1) the basic Windows appearance: Classic Theme vs. Luna or Classic vs. Aero or Classic Theme vs. <whatever_the_new_theme_name_is>
(It is really hard to make T.C. or any programme look good on a Classic Theme. - My perspective.) - (2) directory brackets on or off
- (3) T.C. filepanel background colors and using alternating background colors for even and for odd lines
- (4) Fonts used for file panels and dialogue boxes
- (5) Iconsets used for the filepanels and for the buttonbars
Why just 3 pre-fabricated configuration sets:
This is mostly a pragmatic decision. There is only one developer. There is only one stickynomad. So resources are limited. Moreover we do not really wish to force Christian to raise the license fees, do we.
Moreover, beauty lies in the eye of the beholder only. So even if T.C. came along with a dozen pre-fabricated configurations sets, there would still be people who would not like any of the offered interface designs.
Kind regards,
Karl
2karlchen
One great design would be just fine.
The tears are tripping me. More people would buy and use the program if it wouldn't look as it does right now.There is only one developer. There is only one stickynomad. So resources are limited. Moreover we do not really wish to force Christian to raise the license fees, do we.
One great design would be just fine.
You have to admit that there are many eyes out there complaining about TC's aesthetics.beauty lies in the eye of the beholder only
Hi, Lefteous.
Cheers,
Karl
You may have noticed that my sentence has not been used to reject requests to polish the Total Commander interface. The opposite is true.You have to admit that there are many eyes out there complaining about TC's aesthetics.karlchen wrote:beauty lies in the eye of the beholder only
Cheers,
Karl
- StickyNomad
- Power Member
- Posts: 1933
- Joined: 2004-01-10, 00:15 UTC
- Location: Germany