Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New Google Favicon Deja Vu All Over Again?

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the matters-of-deep-significance dept.

Google 227

theodp writes "Last June, Google rolled out a new favicon, the small branding icon that graces your URL bar when you visit Google. Which, as it turned out, bore a striking similarity to Garth Brooks' Circle-G logo. Well, Google went back to the drawing board and has come back with a new favicon, which it says was inspired by — not copied from, mind you — its users' submitted ideas. Some are also seeing inspiration elsewhere for the new favicon, which consists of white 'g' on a background of four color swatches. Take the AVG antivirus icon, for instance. Or everybody's favorite memory toy, Simon. Or — in perhaps the unkindest cut of all — the four-color Microsoft Windows logo, shown here with a superimposed white '7'. Anything else come to mind?" What comes to mind for me is just how obsessed many people are with the Google favicon.

cancel ×

227 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Really, timothy? (5, Insightful)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411753)

What comes to mind for me is just how obsessed many people are with the Google favicon.

You mean like the Slashdot editors who think it's important enough to put on the front page?

Re:Really, timothy? (5, Funny)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411871)

News for NERDS. Yes, we (the nerds) care about such things. Pedantic is our middle name.

Re:Really, timothy? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412135)

GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
 
Version 3, 29 June 2007
 
Copyright &#169; 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. <http://fsf.org/>
 
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
Preamble
 
The GNU General Public License is a free, copyleft license for software and other kinds of works.
 
The licenses for most software and other practical works are designed to take away your freedom to share and change the works. By contrast, the GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change all versions of a program--to make sure it remains free software for all its users. We, the Free Software Foundation, use the GNU General Public License for most of our software; it applies also to any other work released this way by its authors. You can apply it to your programs, too.
 
When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for them if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs, and that you know you can do these things.
 
To protect your rights, we need to prevent others from denying you these rights or asking you to surrender the rights. Therefore, you have certain responsibilities if you distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it: responsibilities to respect the freedom of others.
 
For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must pass on to the recipients the same freedoms that you received. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their rights.
 
Developers that use the GNU GPL protect your rights with two steps: (1) assert copyright on the software, and (2) offer you this License giving you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify it.
 
For the developers' and authors' protection, the GPL clearly explains that there is no warranty for this free software. For both users' and authors' sake, the GPL requires that modified versions be marked as changed, so that their problems will not be attributed erroneously to authors of previous versions.
 
Some devices are designed to deny users access to install or run modified versions of the software inside them, although the manufacturer can do so. This is fundamentally incompatible with the aim of protecting users' freedom to change the software. The systematic pattern of such abuse occurs in the area of products for individuals to use, which is precisely where it is most unacceptable. Therefore, we have designed this version of the GPL to prohibit the practice for those products. If such problems arise substantially in other domains, we stand ready to extend this provision to those domains in future versions of the GPL, as needed to protect the freedom of users.
 
Finally, every program is threatened constantly by software patents. States should not allow patents to restrict development and use of software on general-purpose computers, but in those that do, we wish to avoid the special danger that patents applied to a free program could make it effectively proprietary. To prevent this, the GPL assures that patents cannot be used to render the program non-free.
 
The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and modification follow.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
0. Definitions.
 
"This License" refers to version 3 of the GNU General Public License.
 
"Copyright" also means copyright-like laws that apply to other kinds of works, such as semiconductor masks.
 
"The Program" refers to any copyrightable work licensed under this License. Each licensee is addressed as "you". "Licensees" and "recipients" may be individuals or organizations.
 
To "modify" a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of an exact copy. The resulting work is called a "modified version" of the earlier work or a work "based on" the earlier work.
 
A "covered work" means either the unmodified Program or a work based on the Program.
 
To "propagate" a work means to do anything with it that, without permission, would make you directly or secondarily liable for infringement under applicable copyright law, except executing it on a computer or modifying a private copy. Propagation includes copying, distribution (with or without modification), making available to the public, and in some countries other activities as well.
 
To "convey" a work means any kind of propagation that enables other parties to make or receive copies. Mere interaction with a user through a computer network, with no transfer of a copy, is not conveying.
 
An interactive user interface displays "Appropriate Legal Notices" to the extent that it includes a convenient and prominently visible feature that (1) displays an appropriate copyright notice, and (2) tells the user that there is no warranty for the work (except to the extent that warranties are provided), that licensees may convey the work under this License, and how to view a copy of this License. If the interface presents a list of user commands or options, such as a menu, a prominent item in the list meets this criterion.
1. Source Code.
 
The "source code" for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. "Object code" means any non-source form of a work.
 
A "Standard Interface" means an interface that either is an official standard defined by a recognized standards body, or, in the case of interfaces specified for a particular programming language, one that is widely used among developers working in that language.
 
The "System Libraries" of an executable work include anything, other than the work as a whole, that (a) is included in the normal form of packaging a Major Component, but which is not part of that Major Component, and (b) serves only to enable use of the work with that Major Component, or to implement a Standard Interface for which an implementation is available to the public in source code form. A "Major Component", in this context, means a major essential component (kernel, window system, and so on) of the specific operating system (if any) on which the executable work runs, or a compiler used to produce the work, or an object code interpreter used to run it.
 
The "Corresponding Source" for a work in object code form means all the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control those activities. However, it does not include the work's System Libraries, or general-purpose tools or generally available free programs which are used unmodified in performing those activities but which are not part of the work. For example, Corresponding Source includes interface definition files associated with source files for the work, and the source code for shared libraries and dynamically linked subprograms that the work is specifically designed to require, such as by intimate data communication or control flow between those subprograms and other parts of the work.
 
The Corresponding Source need not include anything that users can regenerate automatically from other parts of the Corresponding Source.
 
The Corresponding Source for a work in source code form is that same work.
2. Basic Permissions.
 
All rights granted under this License are granted for the term of copyright on the Program, and are irrevocable provided the stated conditions are met. This License explicitly affirms your unlimited permission to run the unmodified Program. The output from running a covered work is covered by this License only if the output, given its content, constitutes a covered work. This License acknowledges your rights of fair use or other equivalent, as provided by copyright law.
 
You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains in force. You may convey covered works to others for the sole purpose of having them make modifications exclusively for you, or provide you with facilities for running those works, provided that you comply with the terms of this License in conveying all material for which you do not control copyright. Those thus making or running the covered works for you must do so exclusively on your behalf, under your direction and control, on terms that prohibit them from making any copies of your copyrighted material outside their relationship with you.
 
Conveying under any other circumstances is permitted solely under the conditions stated below. Sublicensing is not allowed; section 10 makes it unnecessary.
3. Protecting Users' Legal Rights From Anti-Circumvention Law.
 
No covered work shall be deemed part of an effective technological measure under any applicable law fulfilling obligations under article 11 of the WIPO copyright treaty adopted on 20 December 1996, or similar laws prohibiting or restricting circumvention of such measures.
 
When you convey a covered work, you waive any legal power to forbid circumvention of technological measures to the extent such circumvention is effected by exercising rights under this License with respect to the covered work, and you disclaim any intention to limit operation or modification of the work as a means of enforcing, against the work's users, your or third parties' legal rights to forbid circumvention of technological measures.
4. Conveying Verbatim Copies.
 
You may convey verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice; keep intact all notices stating that this License and any non-permissive terms added in accord with section 7 apply to the code; keep intact all notices of the absence of any warranty; and give all recipients a copy of this License along with the Program.
 
You may charge any price or no price for each copy that you convey, and you may offer support or warranty protection for a fee.
5. Conveying Modified Source Versions.
 
You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the terms of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
 
    * a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it, and giving a relevant date.
    * b) The work must carry prominent notices stating that it is released under this License and any conditions added under section 7. This requirement modifies the requirement in section 4 to "keep intact all notices".
    * c) You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this License to anyone who comes into possession of a copy. This License will therefore apply, along with any applicable section 7 additional terms, to the whole of the work, and all its parts, regardless of how they are packaged. This License gives no permission to license the work in any other way, but it does not invalidate such permission if you have separately received it.
    * d) If the work has interactive user interfaces, each must display Appropriate Legal Notices; however, if the Program has interactive interfaces that do not display Appropriate Legal Notices, your work need not make them do so.
 
A compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work, and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program, in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an "aggregate" if the compilation and its resulting copyright are not used to limit the access or legal rights of the compilation's users beyond what the individual works permit. Inclusion of a covered work in an aggregate does not cause this License to apply to the other parts of the aggregate.
6. Conveying Non-Source Forms.
 
You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms of sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the machine-readable Corresponding Source under the terms of this License, in one of these ways:
 
    * a) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by the Corresponding Source fixed on a durable physical medium customarily used for software interchange.
    * b) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a written offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as long as you offer spare parts or customer support for that product model, to give anyone who possesses the object code either (1) a copy of the Corresponding Source for all the software in the product that is covered by this License, on a durable physical medium customarily used for software interchange, for a price no more than your reasonable cost of physically performing this conveying of source, or (2) access to copy the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge.
    * c) Convey individual copies of the object code with a copy of the written offer to provide the Corresponding Source. This alternative is allowed only occasionally and noncommercially, and only if you received the object code with such an offer, in accord with subsection 6b.
    * d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no further charge. You need not require recipients to copy the Corresponding Source along with the object code. If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party) that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements.
    * e) Convey the object code using peer-to-peer transmission, provided you inform other peers where the object code and Corresponding Source of the work are being offered to the general public at no charge under subsection 6d.
 
A separable portion of the object code, whose source code is excluded from the Corresponding Source as a System Library, need not be included in conveying the object code work.
 
A "User Product" is either (1) a "consumer product", which means any tangible personal property which is normally used for personal, family, or household purposes, or (2) anything designed or sold for incorporation into a dwelling. In determining whether a product is a consumer product, doubtful cases shall be resolved in favor of coverage. For a particular product received by a particular user, "normally used" refers to a typical or common use of that class of product, regardless of the status of the particular user or of the way in which the particular user actually uses, or expects or is expected to use, the product. A product is a consumer product regardless of whether the product has substantial commercial, industrial or non-consumer uses, unless such uses represent the only significant mode of use of the product.
 
"Installation Information" for a User Product means any methods, procedures, authorization keys, or other information required to install and execute modified versions of a covered work in that User Product from a modified version of its Corresponding Source. The information must suffice to ensure that the continued functioning of the modified object code is in no case prevented or interfered with solely because modification has been made.
 
If you convey an object code work under this section in, or with, or specifically for use in, a User Product, and the conveying occurs as part of a transaction in which the right of possession and use of the User Product is transferred to the recipient in perpetuity or for a fixed term (regardless of how the transaction is characterized), the Corresponding Source conveyed under this section must be accompanied by the Installation Information. But this requirement does not apply if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has been installed in ROM).
 
The requirement to provide Installation Information does not include a requirement to continue to provide support service, warranty, or updates for a work that has been modified or installed by the recipient, or for the User Product in which it has been modified or installed. Access to a network may be denied when the modification itself materially and adversely affects the operation of the network or violates the rules and protocols for communication across the network.
 
Corresponding Source conveyed, and Installation Information provided, in accord with this section must be in a format that is publicly documented (and with an implementation available to the public in source code form), and must require no special password or key for unpacking, reading or copying.
7. Additional Terms.
 
"Additional permissions" are terms that supplement the terms of this License by making exceptions from one or more of its conditions. Additional permissions that are applicable to the entire Program shall be treated as though they were included in this License, to the extent that they are valid under applicable law. If additional permissions apply only to part of the Program, that part may be used separately under those permissions, but the entire Program remains governed by this License without regard to the additional permissions.
 
When you convey a copy of a covered work, you may at your option remove any additional permissions from that copy, or from any part of it. (Additional permissions may be written to require their own removal in certain cases when you modify the work.) You may place additional permissions on material, added by you to a covered work, for which you have or can give appropriate copyright permission.
 
Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, for material you add to a covered work, you may (if authorized by the copyright holders of that material) supplement the terms of this License with terms:
 
    * a) Disclaiming warranty or limiting liability differently from the terms of sections 15 and 16 of this License; or
    * b) Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or author attributions in that material or in the Appropriate Legal Notices displayed by works containing it; or
    * c) Prohibiting misrepresentation of the origin of that material, or requiring that modified versions of such material be marked in reasonable ways as different from the original version; or
    * d) Limiting the use for publicity purposes of names of licensors or authors of the material; or
    * e) Declining to grant rights under trademark law for use of some trade names, trademarks, or service marks; or
    * f) Requiring indemnification of licensors and authors of that material by anyone who conveys the material (or modified versions of it) with contractual assumptions of liability to the recipient, for any liability that these contractual assumptions directly impose on those licensors and authors.
 
All other non-permissive additional terms are considered "further restrictions" within the meaning of section 10. If the Program as you received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is governed by this License along with a term that is a further restriction, you may remove that term. If a license document contains a further restriction but permits relicensing or conveying under this License, you may add to a covered work material governed by the terms of that license document, provided that the further restriction does not survive such relicensing or conveying.
 
If you add terms to a covered work in accord with this section, you must place, in the relevant source files, a statement of the additional terms that apply to those files, or a notice indicating where to find the applicable terms.
 
Additional terms, permissive or non-permissive, may be stated in the form of a separately written license, or stated as exceptions; the above requirements apply either way.
8. Termination.
 
You may not propagate or modify a covered work except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to propagate or modify it is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License (including any patent licenses granted under the third paragraph of section 11).
 
However, if you cease all violation of this License, then your license from a particular copyright holder is reinstated (a) provisionally, unless and until the copyright holder explicitly and finally terminates your license, and (b) permanently, if the copyright holder fails to notify you of the violation by some reasonable means prior to 60 days after the cessation.
 
Moreover, your license from a particular copyright holder is reinstated permanently if the copyright holder notifies you of the violation by some reasonable means, this is the first time you have received notice of violation of this License (for any work) from that copyright holder, and you cure the violation prior to 30 days after your receipt of the notice.
 
Termination of your rights under this section does not terminate the licenses of parties who have received copies or rights from you under this License. If your rights have been terminated and not permanently reinstated, you do not qualify to receive new licenses for the same material under section 10.
9. Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies.
 
You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or run a copy of the Program. Ancillary propagation of a covered work occurring solely as a consequence of using peer-to-peer transmission to receive a copy likewise does not require acceptance. However, nothing other than this License grants you permission to propagate or modify any covered work. These actions infringe copyright if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or propagating a covered work, you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so.
10. Automatic Licensing of Downstream Recipients.
 
Each time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensors, to run, modify and propagate that work, subject to this License. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties with this License.
 
An "entity transaction" is a transaction transferring control of an organization, or substantially all assets of one, or subdividing an organization, or merging organizations. If propagation of a covered work results from an entity transaction, each party to that transaction who receives a copy of the work also receives whatever licenses to the work the party's predecessor in interest had or could give under the previous paragraph, plus a right to possession of the Corresponding Source of the work from the predecessor in interest, if the predecessor has it or can get it with reasonable efforts.
 
You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the rights granted or affirmed under this License. For example, you may not impose a license fee, royalty, or other charge for exercise of rights granted under this License, and you may not initiate litigation (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that any patent claim is infringed by making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the Program or any portion of it.
11. Patents.
 
A "contributor" is a copyright holder who authorizes use under this License of the Program or a work on which the Program is based. The work thus licensed is called the contributor's "contributor version".
 
A contributor's "essential patent claims" are all patent claims owned or controlled by the contributor, whether already acquired or hereafter acquired, that would be infringed by some manner, permitted by this License, of making, using, or selling its contributor version, but do not include claims that would be infringed only as a consequence of further modification of the contributor version. For purposes of this definition, "control" includes the right to grant patent sublicenses in a manner consistent with the requirements of this License.
 
Each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free patent license under the contributor's essential patent claims, to make, use, sell, offer for sale, import and otherwise run, modify and propagate the contents of its contributor version.
 
In the following three paragraphs, a "patent license" is any express agreement or commitment, however denominated, not to enforce a patent (such as an express permission to practice a patent or covenant not to sue for patent infringement). To "grant" such a patent license to a party means to make such an agreement or commitment not to enforce a patent against the party.
 
If you convey a covered work, knowingly relying on a patent license, and the Corresponding Source of the work is not available for anyone to copy, free of charge and under the terms of this License, through a publicly available network server or other readily accessible means, then you must either (1) cause the Corresponding Source to be so available, or (2) arrange to deprive yourself of the benefit of the patent license for this particular work, or (3) arrange, in a manner consistent with the requirements of this License, to extend the patent license to downstream recipients. "Knowingly relying" means you have actual knowledge that, but for the patent license, your conveying the covered work in a country, or your recipient's use of the covered work in a country, would infringe one or more identifiable patents in that country that you have reason to believe are valid.
 
If, pursuant to or in connection with a single transaction or arrangement, you convey, or propagate by procuring conveyance of, a covered work, and grant a patent license to some of the parties receiving the covered work authorizing them to use, propagate, modify or convey a specific copy of the covered work, then the patent license you grant is automatically extended to all recipients of the covered work and works based on it.
 
A patent license is "discriminatory" if it does not include within the scope of its coverage, prohibits the exercise of, or is conditioned on the non-exercise of one or more of the rights that are specifically granted under this License. You may not convey a covered work if you are a party to an arrangement with a third party that is in the business of distributing software, under which you make payment to the third party based on the extent of your activity of conveying the work, and under which the third party grants, to any of the parties who would receive the covered work from you, a discriminatory patent license (a) in connection with copies of the covered work conveyed by you (or copies made from those copies), or (b) primarily for and in connection with specific products or compilations that contain the covered work, unless you entered into that arrangement, or that patent license was granted, prior to 28 March 2007.
 
Nothing in this License shall be construed as excluding or limiting any implied license or other defenses to infringement that may otherwise be available to you under applicable patent law.
12. No Surrender of Others' Freedom.
 
If conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot convey a covered work so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not convey it at all. For example, if you agree to terms that obligate you to collect a royalty for further conveying from those to whom you convey the Program, the only way you could satisfy both those terms and this License would be to refrain entirely from conveying the Program.
13. Use with the GNU Affero General Public License.
 
Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, you have permission to link or combine any covered work with a work licensed under version 3 of the GNU Affero General Public License into a single combined work, and to convey the resulting work. The terms of this License will continue to apply to the part which is the covered work, but the special requirements of the GNU Affero General Public License, section 13, concerning interaction through a network will apply to the combination as such.
14. Revised Versions of this License.
 
The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions of the GNU General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to address new problems or concerns.
 
Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program specifies that a certain numbered version of the GNU General Public License "or any later version" applies to it, you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that numbered version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of the GNU General Public License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation.
 
If the Program specifies that a proxy can decide which future versions of the GNU General Public License can be used, that proxy's public statement of acceptance of a version permanently authorizes you to choose that version for the Program.
 
Later license versions may give you additional or different permissions. However, no additional obligations are imposed on any author or copyright holder as a result of your choosing to follow a later version.
15. Disclaimer of Warranty.
 
THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.
16. Limitation of Liability.
 
IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MODIFIES AND/OR CONVEYS THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
17. Interpretation of Sections 15 and 16.
 
If the disclaimer of warranty and limitation of liability provided above cannot be given local legal effect according to their terms, reviewing courts shall apply local law that most closely approximates an absolute waiver of all civil liability in connection with the Program, unless a warranty or assumption of liability accompanies a copy of the Program in return for a fee.
 
END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs
 
If you develop a new program, and you want it to be of the greatest possible use to the public, the best way to achieve this is to make it free software which everyone can redistribute and change under these terms.
 
To do so, attach the following notices to the program. It is safest to attach them to the start of each source file to most effectively state the exclusion of warranty; and each file should have at least the "copyright" line and a pointer to where the full notice is found.
 
    <one line to give the program's name and a brief idea of what it does.>
    Copyright (C) <year> <name of author>
 
    This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
    it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
    the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
    (at your option) any later version.
 
    This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
    but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
    MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
    GNU General Public License for more details.
 
    You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
    along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
 
Also add information on how to contact you by electronic and paper mail.
 
If the program does terminal interaction, make it output a short notice like this when it starts in an interactive mode:
 
    <program> Copyright (C) <year> <name of author>
    This program comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `show w'.
    This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it
    under certain conditions; type `show c' for details.
 
The hypothetical commands `show w' and `show c' should show the appropriate parts of the General Public License. Of course, your program's commands might be different; for a GUI interface, you would use an "about box".
 
You should also get your employer (if you work as a programmer) or school, if any, to sign a "copyright disclaimer" for the program, if necessary. For more information on this, and how to apply and follow the GNU GPL, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.

Re:Really, timothy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412307)

Was that really necessary?

Re:Really, timothy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412203)

No, we don't.

Re:Really, timothy? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412211)

My middle name is Clive, you insensitive clod!

Re:Really, timothy? (-1, Troll)

iNaya (1049686) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412225)

Excuse me! My middle name is arsehole. Pedantic comes right after that. Yes, I'm an arsehole pedantic, not a pedantic arsehole.

Re:Really, timothy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412837)

If Slashdot readers were as pedantic as you seem to think, they might actually take the time to comprehend trademark laws and would realize what a non-issue this is. As it is, these allegedly pedantic nerds can't get their heads out of their asses long enough to realize that there's an entire world out there that not only do they not understand, but are only vaguely aware of its existence. And other, much more intelligent nerds, have mastered this world.

You guys are all bottom-feeder IT idiots with a DeVry-equivalent education. The real nerds just come here to laugh at you.

Get over yourselves. I haven't seen an intelligent discussion, on ANY subject, on Slashdot in years.

Re:Really, timothy? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26411901)

This is Slashdot? Shit! I thought I was on the Half Life forums...

News just in (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26411935)

... the "S" in Slashdot looks similar to the "S" in MicroSoft!

Unpossible (5, Funny)

the-bobcat (1360969) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412183)

Everyone knows that it's spelled Micro$oft.

Re:Unpossible (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412263)

Everyone knows that it's spelled Micro$oft.

Exactly! And judging by the way the editors are posting this crap purely to get pagehits, it's safe to call it $la$hdot.

Re:News just in (1, Redundant)

click2005 (921437) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412405)

No, this is Slashdot, we spell Micro$oft differently.

Re:Really, timothy? (2, Interesting)

zobier (585066) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412635)

What comes to mind for me is just how obsessed many people are with the Google favicon.

You mean like the Slashdot editors who think it's important enough to put on the front page?

Well, I noticed it first thing this morning when I started my workstation.
Personally I think it's damn ugly -- which surprised me for Google.
Maybe I'll put a custom one in my userChrome.css.

Re:Really, timothy? (4, Funny)

linhares (1241614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412821)

It's not ugly if your benchmark is Ubuntu.

Re:Really, timothy? (1)

linhares (1241614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412851)

There are no ugly women if your benchmark is Ubuntu.

I'm not really seeing the similarity (5, Insightful)

Trepidity (597) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411765)

The Garth Brooks one is particularly ridiculous---the only similarity appears to be that both have, at various times, used a lowercase 'g' in an entirely unremarkable font as a logo. Yes, congratulations, two instances of a lowercase 'g' can look similar!

The rest aren't much more convincing. Google uses some simple arrangements of primary colors, and, amazingly enough, so do some other companies, even some other tech companies. But they don't even look particularly similar (especially the Windows one).

Re:I'm not really seeing the similarity (4, Insightful)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411869)

Google uses some simple arrangements of primary colors, and, amazingly enough, so do some other companies, even some other tech companies. But they don't even look particularly similar (especially the Windows one).

Not to you, slashdotter, who sees these logos all the time. To the casually stroller-by, who sees tech logos once per fortnight, they will easily be confused. What is red, green, and blue and deals with computers? If today it is AVG / Google / MS and tomorrow it is something else then there _will_ be confusion and brand dilution.

Re:I'm not really seeing the similarity (2, Insightful)

countvlad (666933) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412139)

Not to you, slashdotter, who sees these logos all the time. To the casually stroller-by, who sees tech logos once per fortnight, they will easily be confused. What is red, green, and blue and deals with computers? If today it is AVG / Google / MS and tomorrow it is something else then there _will_ be confusion and brand dilution.

The letter g might be confused with the letter g? Say it aint so!

Re:I'm not really seeing the similarity (5, Funny)

TuaAmin13 (1359435) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413065)

Today's episode of /. is brought to you by the letter G

Re:I'm not really seeing the similarity (5, Insightful)

Pinckney (1098477) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412277)

It doesn't matter if they look similar. Favicons are tiny, and nobody is going to use them to identify a product. If there were potential for confusion, think of the chaos we would see, with thousands of sites not using favicons!

Re:I'm not really seeing the similarity (4, Informative)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412969)

It is my opinion that the favicons for a site are very important for recognition (e.g. for completion in the URL bar) for the average user.

Favicons are not necessarily tiny actually. Konqueror has the feature (that I like very much) to set the favicon as the application icon. That has the nice effect that in your pager (the virtual desktop manager in the ) the window area is filled with the favicon. Very nice for switching desktops to the right browser window.

Thirdly, I use http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/27548 [userscripts.org]
It helped me to completely block out that google changed their favicon to an ugly one I can't associate with their website and I can live in my tiny world where they didn't.

Re:I'm not really seeing the similarity (5, Insightful)

JustinOpinion (1246824) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411927)

Indeed. When you get down to minimalist, iconic designs, at favicon resolution, there is only so much parameter space. One of those links claims:

AVG favicon + 90 degree turn + Old favicon + Some smudging -> New favicon

Give me a break! Newsflash: any icon can be conceptually transformed into any other icon in a finite number of image-manipulation steps. Like: "Slashdot favicon + Convert to B&W + Duplicate the slash 3 times + flip two of the slashes -> Wikipedia's favicon" ... OMG! Wikipedia is stealing ideas from Slashdot!

The summary is so patently ridiculous that I really have to wonder if it was submitted as a joke or is an attempt to troll Slashdot. Google's new favicon has a "g" and 4 primary colors. It bears some resemblance to other 4-primary-color emblems (of which there are thousands). Get over it.

Re:I'm not really seeing the similarity (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412271)

I love it how we get into rants about how something doesn't matter, and how everyone should get over it... then... Oh, I just ranted about it. That means... I ... care ... nooo!

Re:I'm not really seeing the similarity (1)

ObiWonKanblomi (320618) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412523)

The summary is so patently ridiculous that I really have to wonder if it was submitted as a joke or is an attempt to troll Slashdot.

You just had to say "patently" in the context of this thread didn't you?

PS - to you smartasses, yes I know there's a difference between trademarks, copyrights, patents, etc.

Re:I'm not really seeing the similarity (2, Insightful)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412063)

A lowercase 'g' in two entirely different, unremarkable fonts.

Re:I'm not really seeing the similarity (5, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412417)

Yes, I agree that this whole thing seems a little nit-picky. It's pretty hard to design a good logo. Ask a designer, and many will say that they find it to be one of the hardest things to design, since they should usually be extremely simple designs, immediately identifiable, and wrap up a lot of meaning into a single impression.

It's even harder to create an logo that doesn't resemble any other logo. You can't really do it. Art in general takes from prior works, even if only stylistically, and nothing is entirely original. People are usually inspired by something, or draw an idea from someone else's work. Besides that, like I said, logos should usually be pretty simple, and if you make a million designs, all of them extremely simple, then every design will resemble at least a couple of the others.

Knowing all that, consider the form of the favicon. They're 16px by 16px, and IIRC some browsers only support 8-bit graphics (256 colors, no alpha channel). That's going to narrow your options a bit.

Also, using multiple primary colors are popular in logos. They stand out, and can be used to convey a childish simplicity (fun) or an elemental nature of the product. Using a single letter or only a couple letters is popular in logos-- I don't think I need to explain why. When you put this all together, it would be amazing if lots of favicons didn't resemble each other in various ways.

Re:I'm not really seeing the similarity (1)

demonlapin (527802) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412913)

It's even harder to create an logo that doesn't resemble any other logo. You can't really do it.

Sometimes they don't even try. Go look up the work of Saul Bass: he loved blue, especially blue circles: AT&T "Deathstar", Minolta, and Continental Airlines being three examples of logos that were obviously part of the same thought.

Hardcore Slashdotters won't notice... (5, Funny)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411777)

...because lynx does not support favicons, you insensitive clod!

Re:Hardcore Slashdotters won't notice... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412261)

I use w3m, you insensitive clod!

Re:Hardcore Slashdotters won't notice... (5, Funny)

dsginter (104154) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412283)

...because lynx does not support favicons, you insensitive clod!

Lynx!?

Real hackers just stick the UTP on their tongue and decipher the signals with their taste buds. SIDE NOTE: I once discovered the hard way that a telephone ring signal is 90vac.

On a related note, I have been storing all of my favorites on the bookmark bar (or whatever it is called). As more sites are using the "favicon", it has been helpful to just edit the bookmark and remove the title altogether (leaving just the icon). You can fit a lot of favorites in the toolbar in this manner.

Re:Hardcore Slashdotters won't notice... (1)

oasisbob (460665) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413051)

As more sites are using the "favicon", it has been helpful to just edit the bookmark and remove the title altogether (leaving just the icon).

That's rad, thanks for the tip. I never thought of doing it that way.

Makes me wonder if browsers will use favicons in a more prominent way in the future. A SVG favicon could scale up into all sorts of UI elements.

Re:Hardcore Slashdotters won't notice... (5, Informative)

Idiomatick (976696) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413099)

There is also a firefox addon which lets you pick your own favicons. I've got my whole bar filled with every site i'll ever need that way. :D

this place now dies for this script (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26411807)

looks like someone tossed 4 colors on a square LOL
------------
and im getting annoyed at:
This comment will not be saved until you click the Submit button below.
You failed to confirm you are a human. Please double-check the image and make sure you typed in what it says.

To confirm you're not a script,

Re:this place now dies for this script (0, Offtopic)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411893)

looks like someone tossed 4 colors on a square LOL
------------
and im getting annoyed at:
snip idiot a/c

Then go away LOL

yuck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26411813)

It's pretty ugly. Favicons are very useful when you have a decent number of tabs open, and now I miss the old Google icon. The new one confuses my brain; it looks too much like the AVG logo.

Re:yuck (1)

LordMyren (15499) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412587)

I cant stand it because its too attention grabbing; it overwhelms the tab-bar. I'd installed this userscript [userscripts.org] on a handful of my most used systems to revert the last blue/grey favicon to the older blue/white icon, but now that they've made it even more ugly, I've been compulsively installing the old favicon on every single system I touch.

Just WOW! (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26411861)

This is just a great example of Slashdot Fanboi Masturbation. I mean, GOOD GRIEF! Top story! New Google Fav Icon! Stop the fucking presses!

Wow... (5, Funny)

zwekiel (1445761) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411877)

This is such important news. Man, the people at the New York Time s are going to be kicking themselves if their morning paper has already been sent out to the printer.

Re:Wow... (2, Funny)

MarkRose (820682) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412783)

It's no wonder why they're going bankrupt, missing headline stories like this!

Fishing for emotional validation. (4, Insightful)

Spazntwich (208070) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411883)

What comes to mind for me is just how obsessed many people are with the Google favicon.

Maybe editors are so hard up for pageviews that they'll post whatever inconsequential slop comes to mind, and internet users are just so hard up for interesting news that they'll comment on whatever garbage the editors feed them.

If the tech sites puked out story after story about motherfucking lolcats apparently Timothy would take the comments to indicate mass obsession with them, which, shit... bad example.

But seriously, who is actually obsessed with Google's favicon and who is just bored?

Re:Fishing for emotional validation. (3, Funny)

PenGun (794213) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411955)

No no ... really I came here hoping there would be something about this.

Re:Fishing for emotional validation. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412233)

Flamebait? I'd mark this Insightful if I had any mod points.

Re:Fishing for emotional validation. (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412605)

Tsk tsk, this is Slashdot you know.

Re:Fishing for emotional validation. (1)

Spazntwich (208070) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413059)

Personally I want to know why a flamebait comment can't also be insightful, even if I think my above comment was more stating the obvious.

News is slow and Ars Technica has already declared the death of internet advertising. Those editors need to keep the content flowing before the gravy train derails.

One of the reasons is dont like to use icons.... (1, Interesting)

drolli (522659) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411885)

is that all the idiotic designers think GUIs are a playground. From 1988 to 1995 Icons changed only marginally with time, but since the web-culture has spoiled the idea of consistent, clean UIs, i prefer to turn on the icon name whereever possible.

Re:One of the reasons is dont like to use icons... (1)

drolli (522659) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411931)

a small additional note:

it is especially annoying that nowadays there are a lot of "circular icons, where some kind of arrow or direction indicator hides a letter or a circular sign which carries a letter". These take a lot of space, and force you to remember the color which is which if you wan to click fast.

Re:One of the reasons is dont like to use icons... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412467)

While I don't exactly agree with your first post, at least I can understand the argument you're making. But this second post makes no sense to me at all. Can you give some examples of all these round icons you're referring to?

Re:One of the reasons is dont like to use icons... (1)

drolli (522659) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413227)

E.g. click on the preinstalled dearch bar in firefox.

creative commons, amazon, ask, google have a dominant circle-like feature

Almost Identical to Printing Company in Austin (4, Interesting)

marchingwest (1450259) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411905)

Almost a direct copy of an Austin-based printing company's logo: http://www.ginnysprinting.com/ [ginnysprinting.com]

Re:Almost Identical to Printing Company in Austin (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412267)

and ginny's is in turn a blatant rip-off of mr. gatti's pizza.

Re:Almost Identical to Printing Company in Austin (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412565)

If by a direct copy, you mean both have the letter g, then yes. yes you are right.

Re:Almost Identical to Printing Company in Austin (5, Funny)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413219)

Damn! You caught me!

You see, I'm Google's brand designer. I was totally stumped when they told me they wanted a new logo, but then I thought: hey! There's that printing company in Austin!

I didn't think anybody would see the connection! *sob*

Apple (2, Insightful)

michaelmalak (91262) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411919)

How many different ways can one make a trashcan icon?

Obssession. (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411969)

What comes to mind for me is just how obsessed many people are with the Google favicon.

I'm always amazed at the sheer number of people that are obssessed, period. It seems to be a mark of distinction nowadays if you're just completely gaga about some particular product or brand (Apple owners come to mind, for some reason.) Well, unreason seems to be a defining characteristic of modern civilization, so I guess this should come as no surprise. Too bad psychiatrists are so expensive: there are a lot of folks that could use a little therapy.

Looks Like a Paw. Brings to mind Pet Supplies. (5, Insightful)

Ron Bennett (14590) | more than 5 years ago | (#26411973)

Looks like a blotch of random colors. I had no idea there was a lowercase "g" in it until I read the article here.

IMHO, the old favicon was much better - knew right away what it was. A bunch of random colors brings to mind websites about photoshopping, psychology (think blotch tests), or even a pet supply site, since it looks kinda like a paw print.

Ron

Re:Looks Like a Paw. Brings to mind Pet Supplies. (2, Informative)

shermo (1284310) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412125)

Even after reading the article it took me a long time to see the 'g' in there.

Re:Looks Like a Paw. Brings to mind Pet Supplies. (1)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412141)

Ok, then I'm not the only one. I guess I only noticed it in safari. But, I see in firefox the G is more apparent due to the gray tab surrounding it.

Re:Looks Like a Paw. Brings to mind Pet Supplies. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412241)

I had no idea there was a lowercase "g" in it until I read the article here.

For the sake of another data point (since there's those other people agreeing with you), I saw a G immediately. And I'm a pathologically unobservant person :|

Looks like a red-beaked parrot to me (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412253)

Looks like a red-beaked parrot to me.

You're right, it is an inkblot test. And apparently I have some repressed issues with parrots.

Re:Looks like a red-beaked parrot to me (1)

Bohiti (315707) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413023)

Oh, I wish you hadn't said that. That's all I'm going to see now.

Re:Looks Like a Paw. Brings to mind Pet Supplies. (5, Interesting)

im_thatoneguy (819432) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412301)

Agreed. For the first few days I kept noticing the new favicon for google and wondering in my head "Why is google putting up a jumble of random shapes for their favicon?" I had assumed it was like the anniversary of some grand puzzle maker or something. Only yesterday did it suddenly hit me "OH that's a g!"

Terrible logo. In the middle it's at least legible.

Re:Looks Like a Paw. Brings to mind Pet Supplies. (4, Interesting)

El_Isma (979791) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412525)

The original (the old old) logo was way better. And the favicon they did is worse than the one they got the inspiration from.

I don't get it, why do they keep changing it? I thought forming a brand meant keeping the same recognizable logo as long as you could, not arbitrarly changing it every 6 months!

Bring back old logo (4, Insightful)

Em Ellel (523581) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413081)

The original (the old old) logo was way better.

Amen to that. I thought I was the only one that thought the original blue G on white background was great. It was simple, clean and unmistakable. Now it is getting worse and worse with each iteration.

-Em

Re:Looks Like a Paw. Brings to mind Pet Supplies. (2, Funny)

MarkRose (820682) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412847)

Hey, I'm sure some Google Vice-President is proud of the fact his kid puked up a bunch of crayons that vaguely resemble a "g".

Barf.... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26411981)

Barfity barfity barf barf.

Today's magic word: faceted

i just got off the toilet (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26411983)

i shit out an obama.

and just as a side note, i don't give a fuck about google. i am glad to see faggot muslims getting their throats cut though. we do need to see the end of this shit religion. a violent end to it suits me fine.

Re:i just got off the toilet (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412733)

an obama, eh? So It was half black (turd) and half white (cum from last night's fudge packing).

it reminds me baidu.com foodprint (0, Offtopic)

anton_kg (1079811) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412039)

which is chinese search enginge

a bear footprint I mean (1)

anton_kg (1079811) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412065)

N/A

Good job! (1)

EggMcGuffin (1450261) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412045)

I like it. More distinctive than the other one while pleasing to the eye. Hey, just think, it could have had LOLCATZ... *shudder*

The best thing about this article... (1)

billybob_jcv (967047) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412129)

...is that now I know it's a lowercase 'g'...

Do you know what's sad? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412143)

I was cleaning up my Firefox extensions yesterday when I came across "favicon picker". I uninstalled it because I thought to myself "...well, I haven't actually changed an Icon for anything in ages, may as well get rid of it" and literally minutes later, Google's favicon changed.

They mock me.

Well Google farted, so... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412147)

let's all talk about it. Seriously, anyone else tired of the 15 Google stories/day?

AVG Logo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412173)

Haha the first thing I thought when I saw the new logo was "wow... that looks like the AVG logo."

What I have learned (5, Funny)

PK_ERTW (538588) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412311)

So, before this article I knew the google had changed there "little-icon-thingy".

Yes, as far as I knew that is what it is called.

What I have learned so far from this article is:

  • Little-icon-thingy is not the correct name
  • Favicon is the right name. I like mine more.
  • Many companies use an assortment of primary colours.
  • Google's makes a lower case 'g'. Cool, had not noticed that yet.

What falls in the what else is new category:

  • Some people don't think a story belongs on the front page

PK

Too many bad associations (0, Troll)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412315)

Who can forget the image of the Google "g" atop the tower in the destruction of Isengard [today.com] ?

Spammer (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412473)

Do you do anything on Slashdot other than post links to lame "humour" on your monetized blog?

Re:Spammer (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26413245)

He's also a fuckwit Wikipedia administrator who's been slagged up and down on Wikitruth [wikitruth.info] .

TELL THE WIKITRUTH

Re:Too many bad associations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26413133)

I can, because it's not funny or relevant?

Are you all seeing the same icon I am? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412329)

All I see is a blotch of red green and yellow, with a smidge of blue and some indistinct wavy white marks. At least the old icon had a clear G.

Saw it the other day - Ugh (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412351)

I noticed this the other day when I was using google.co.jp ... I thought it was just the Japanese one. My first thought was 'Oh wow, that's ugly.' Now I see it's going to be used for google.com, too... Ugh.

The user-submitted ones in the blog look way, way better, including the one they took the concept from. What were they thinking?

Only so much you can do (1)

ryanduff (948159) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412379)

There's only so much you can do with a 16x16px square. How unique do you think the favicon can be? Either way, I dislike the new logo.

Chrome. (1)

naz404 (1282810) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412435)

It's very clear that Google is pimping its Chrome browser (see color scheme).

Google is now pulling a Microsoft and may put other browsers out of business, or at least seriously undercut revenues.

See: Mozilla Foundation Google current awkward relationship. What's to complain about tho? Mozilla existed Google supported it.

I find it really nice that Google's try to kill MS IE 6 tho ;) It's about time that standards-deviant monstrosity was put to pasture.

Cheers!

-Naz

Re:Chrome. (1)

naz404 (1282810) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412447)

typo: should be Mozilla existed before Google supported it.

I can't stand it (2, Insightful)

yakumo.unr (833476) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412531)

I can't stand it, the g that is entirely reprasentative of the company doesn't stand out anywhere near clearly enough, the entire thing is just a blob and it makes tracking Google tabs in firefox a nightmare.

The user submitted favicons FTFA by by Hadi Onur Demirsoy, Lucian E. Marin and Yusuf Sevgen are all considerably better.

Re:I can't stand it (1)

LordMyren (15499) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412571)

On a decent number of systems I've been using a UserScript [userscripts.org] (aka greasemonkey script) that gives me the original white/blue G, but with this new even more hideous favicon I now compulsively install the script on every computer I touch: the new one is such an offensive eye-sore in the tab-bar.

Typical Engineers (1, Interesting)

TheModelEskimo (968202) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412545)

That it's 2009 already and Google are having trouble nailing down a favicon is pretty silly to me. This is something you see in companies that are too immature to understand that Engineer != Designer != Writer != Marketer != Salesman and so on.

Naturally I'm bitter because I'm a graphics person, and I've seen so many engineers try to do "design wheelies" with the drawing tools in Excel and get hopelessly stuck on the role of decoration in design during lunchroom conversations...but come on. Your opinion matters as far as your experience does. At some point you have to admit that the designer with an MFA did actually learn a thing or two and your brain can't always make up with ingenuity what it lacks in experience.

Yank the engineers out of the identity process and get somebody who looks in from the outside and does the real research on identity with *real* experience. Hire the Paul Rand or whoever and get it over with already - this blog-friendly approach to identity is so democratic that it makes you look like a bunch of indecisive hippies who take my graphic design class rather than the ultra-innovative next-generation types you aspire to be. sorry...

Re:Typical Engineers (3, Funny)

gustar (125316) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412839)

Right on! You tell them! Clearly the lack of keen insights such as yours into the nature of critical elements such as a favicon is what is holding Google back from becoming a hugely successful juggernaut of a company...

Oh wait, they are a hugely successful juggernaut of a company... so much for your keen insight. Maybe you should stick to lecturing the indecisive hippies in your class.

Re:Typical Engineers (3, Informative)

TheModelEskimo (968202) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412965)

>Clearly the lack of keen insights such as yours

s/insights/experience ...but you're right, they are clearly beyond saving in this area. :-)

>hugely successful juggernaut of a company

Uhh, yeah. You mean a very rich, successful company. And a company that is going to have one jacked up corporate culture in 15-20 years. We're still waiting to see how that part's going to develop. These companies get so big so fast, full of so much hot air, that we end up paying a creativity tax years down the road as they raise service fees to pay for all the middle managers who got in while the getting was good.

Sure, right now they're a big successful company with a lot of engineering divas and XKCD readers who think that they can literally do anything they want in life, and every door is open to them.

From my experience, immature corporate policy just feeds this crap. Individual personalities will differ; I'm sure there are some fantastic people there. But I'm talking not about money, or about individuals. I'm talking about the company's personality. How deluded it is. How many people are going to get cut once the hubris levels come down a bit. How long they can do no evil when they can't even publish guidelines for duplicating a graphic logo (that I've been able to find...)

>Maybe you should stick to lecturing the indecisive hippies in your class.

Yeah, sure. And you stick to heckling the lecturers of said hippies.~

Re:Typical Engineers (1)

gustar (125316) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413157)

Uhh, yeah. You mean a very rich, successful company. And a company that is going to have one jacked up corporate culture in 15-20 years. We're still waiting to see how that part's going to develop. These companies get so big so fast, full of so much hot air, that we end up paying a creativity tax years down the road as they raise service fees to pay for all the middle managers who got in while the getting was good.

Sure, right now they're a big successful company with a lot of engineering divas and XKCD readers who think that they can literally do anything they want in life, and every door is open to them.

From my experience, immature corporate policy just feeds this crap. Individual personalities will differ; I'm sure there are some fantastic people there. But I'm talking not about money, or about individuals. I'm talking about the company's personality. How deluded it is. How many people are going to get cut once the hubris levels come down a bit. How long they can do no evil when they can't even publish guidelines for duplicating a graphic logo (that I've been able to find...)

I do not know about all that. I am not a Google insider and I am not going to pretend at knowledge of their corporate culture I simply do not have. From the outside looking in I get the sense their a bunch of type-A, work-o-holics constantly looking ahead to the next thing that will take help them keep the edge. I do not get any more sense of arrogance from then I get from many other big companies really.

It is not like they do not have good branding, or somehow lack the concept of building and image/brand. Clearly they have huge name recognition.

Mostly it just sounds like you have something personal against Google, which is fine by me. I do not like lots of companies, but my personal dislike for a company is not some indicator of its weakness as a company.

Yeah, sure. And you stick to heckling the lecturers of said hippies.~

Check, can do... I did not get a hurumph out of that guy! HURUMPH! HURUMPH!

Terrible (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26412583)

This new favicon is simply awful. Terrible.
I never noticed the white "g" until I read this on Slashdot.

I really thought it was one of those different Google logos or special occasions but they wanted to do this to the favicon instead. I thought today was maybe the birthday of some famous artist (it resembles blobs of paint).

Andre Resende (4, Informative)

zanybrainy941 (972076) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412675)

Andre Resende got it right in the first place.

Impairing usability (2, Insightful)

jspenguin1 (883588) | more than 5 years ago | (#26412799)

The purpose of a website's icon -- or any icon, for that matter -- is to provide a visual way to quickly find something in a list. Sometimes, the icon represents some abstract concept; in most applications, the "save" icon is a floppy disk, even though they're nearly obsolete. However, if the icon is unique, experienced users have no trouble connecting it with what it represents. I use icons exclusively for my bookmarks toolbar.

Of course, this only works when the icons don't change. Google has recently changed their icon again, just as I was getting used to the second one. Call me old-fashioned, but I happen to like the original Google icon.

I can understand changing the logo on the front page for special holidays (which seems like just about every day now), but icons shouldn't be changed just for the hell of it.

(C&P from my blog)

permutations (1)

mattwarden (699984) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413093)

How many ways can you create a 16x16 pixel image? At what point does trademark/copyright no longer apply?

Re:permutations (1)

tjscott (1122845) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413247)

How many ways can you create a 16x16 pixel image? At what point does trademark/copyright no longer apply?

If one restricts themselves to a 256 colour palette for compatibility, that gives only 16*16*256 = 65536 different favicons. You can increase the number of colours available, but at some point the differences between them is quite imperceptible to the human eye.

Whatever happened to "don't be evil"? (1)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413189)

All you /.'ers jumping out to defend google, now you see what it's come down to. "Don't be evil", right?

I guess we see how that really works, now don't we.

failquail (1)

EoN604 (909459) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413203)

Firstly, Andre Resende's version looks far more clear & easily identifiable to the eye. The currently useed one looks like complete garbage. what is it? pushing the 'g' over to the side looks terrible - who made that decision? What the hell were they on? To be honest it looks like some balls. Secondly, what's with the square with 4 colours overuse everywhere? Microsoft Windows, AVG, Code::Blocks, Codecharge, Google, IBM, Sony, Panasonic, Toyota all look EXACTLY the same. Anyone who disagrees is entirely wrong.

"All over again" - a tautology (1)

tjscott (1122845) | more than 5 years ago | (#26413229)

A pet peeve of mine: "Deja Vu" has a perfectly good meaning, it doesn't need to be doubled up with "all over again". Yogi Berra used the phrase with his tongue firmly placed in his cheek, laughing at the stupidity in which people use and abuse the English language. http://www.quotedb.com/quotes/1304 [quotedb.com]
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?