Recommended Posts

What the hell is that?? :huh:

From Wikipedia

A favicon (short for favorites icon), also known as a website icon, shortcut icon, url icon, or bookmark icon is an icon associated with a particular website or webpage (
)

Better than the purple thing they had before..

If you guys don't see it, its the typical Google colors shaped to make a white "g"

I agree.

Yeah, I noticed the change. I first thought it was for Google Images only, because the old favicon showed for Google web search, although I later realized it was because my favicon cache hadn't cleared. I prefer the blue 'g' favicon though as it's much more subtle.

Yeah I saw it too. I don't know what the deal is with that colour scheme though :wacko: :D

I had to re-read your post a few times until I saw that grin :p

This is what I said about the new favicon before:

I like it, although I think it's maybe wayyyy to colourful for something like Google which has the worst website design I have ever seen! The last favicon went with their boring, disgusting layout much better than this one.

I wish they would update their layout to go with this new favicon and be less 'minimal' and I might actually start liking Google!

Even Microsoft Live Search got rid of their beautiful interface become more 'minimalistic' to please the lovers of Google's disgustingly minimal user interface! :/ (although Microsoft did their 'minimal' design better, it's a shame Google's relevance in search results seems better).

I had to re-read your post a few times until I saw that grin :p

This is what I said about the new favicon before:

I like it, although I think it's maybe wayyyy to colourful for something like Google which has the worst website design I have ever seen! The last favicon went with their boring, disgusting layout much better than this one.

I wish they would update their layout to go with this new favicon and be less 'minimal' and I might actually start liking Google!

Even Microsoft Live Search got rid of their beautiful interface become more 'minimalistic' to please the lovers of Google's disgustingly minimal user interface! :/ (although Microsoft did their 'minimal' design better, it's a shame Google's relevance in search results seems better).

I use a search engine to find stuff, not look pretty.

I use a search engine to find stuff, not look pretty.

That's fair enough, Joel. Each to his own :)

However, if you say that, surely the same should be applied to any website you use? Any software you use? Even, any operating system you use? After all, you are just using Google to search for websites, just like you are just using Windows, Mac OS X or Linux to run applications, right?

I don't know what operating system you use, but would you not mind then if Windows, Apple or the developers of the Linux distro you use decided to strip all the decent images and colours out of their design and just go for a plain white design with a few horrible blue links in random places? And, of course a logo in a horrible Times New Roman font with different colours...

How about if the same was applied to the iPod touch (or whatever MP3 player you use)? After all, you are only using that to listen to music.

If the interface of your mobile phone was just plain pure white with a few blue links for menu items and black text, I take it you wouldn't mind? After all, you are just using your phone to make calls, take pictures, text people, view calendars, etc, right? Why care about a nice looking interface...?

Google has the functionality, so what's the harm in implementing a nice look which wouldn't disadvantage the loading time? (i.e. just a few divs and different shades/colours? Maybe some light images here and there).

The new favicon is brilliant and the logo needs a better font style, I reckon!

That's fair enough, Joel. Each to his own :)

However, if you say that, surely the same should be applied to any website you use? Any software you use? Even, any operating system you use? After all, you are just using Google to search for websites, just like you are just using Windows, Mac OS X or Linux to run applications, right?

I don't know what operating system you use, but would you not mind then if Windows, Apple or the developers of the Linux distro you use decided to strip all the decent images and colours out of their design and just go for a plain white design with a few horrible blue links in random places? And, of course a logo in a horrible Times New Roman font with different colours...

How about if the same was applied to the iPod touch (or whatever MP3 player you use)? After all, you are only using that to listen to music.

If the interface of your mobile phone was just plain pure white with a few blue links for menu items and black text, I take it you wouldn't mind? After all, you are just using your phone to make calls, take pictures, text people, view calendars, etc, right? Why care about a nice looking interface...?

Google has the functionality, so what's the harm in implementing a nice look which wouldn't disadvantage the loading time? (i.e. just a few divs and different shades/colours? Maybe some light images here and there).

The new favicon is brilliant and the logo needs a better font style, I reckon!

So, you like form over function?

I use Windows XP, in Classic mode. I don't use an MP3 player. My phone's UI is just enough for me (Motorola v635).

Your first example about websites makes no sense. If the website is flashy, it's probably trying to get your attention to sell you something. That's called advertising. Most informational sites are not cesspits of colours and Flash. Can you imagine if Wikipedia looked like something Tinky Winky barfed up? No one would go near the place.

So, you like form over function?

I use Windows XP, in Classic mode. I don't use an MP3 player. My phone's UI is just enough for me (Motorola v635).

Your first example about websites makes no sense. If the website is flashy, it's probably trying to get your attention to sell you something. That's called advertising. Most informational sites are not cesspits of colours and Flash. Can you imagine if Wikipedia looked like something Tinky Winky barfed up? No one would go near the place.

No. I like good form and efficient functionality. I look at functionality in products first (which is why I am looking above the new Windows Live Photo Gallery's inconsistencies and the fact we cannot change the colour, like we can on the rest of the Windows Live Essentials). However, it does not take much effort to implement a nice simple, minimalistic, user interface as well as keeping the effcient functionality which is already present. Google have opted to include an ugly, minimalistic, user interface. It looked a bit better when they decided to use tabs for the different search options and even better when they moved these search options to the top left of the screen, but the blue on the links is still an awful colour (maybe a lighter shade or a darker shade of blue would look nicer, or, even a nice shade of green). The logo is stll a horrible Times font (although I will accept that this is how people recognise Google and maybe that will have to stay like that) :rolleyes:. There is also too much white.

Google could easily implement a few more shades of whitish colours, or lighter shades of colours in it's logo around the homepage and search results page. I mean after all it's new favicon is colourful, why not the website? If they didn't want to opt for a colourful website when they could have more whitish or greyish shades (like a bit of a darker white on that top bar with the links).

My suggestions here are not the best, but Google really could make it all look much better than it does. Even changing the colour of the links and messing about with different HEX codes would benefit the layout.

Like I said, I choose form and functionality. Windows now has the features, so why not make it look nice by using the beautiful Aero glass and using things like Flip3D every now and then.

The features are there whether you use classic mode or Aero (or on XP that awful Fischer Price looking Luna theme - I can see why you use classic).

Obviously, like I said, each to his own, but why use an awful looking interface and why make your website look awful when it already has the functionality and it does not take much effort (and will not increase loading times) by just tweaking the interface a bit to make it look nicer).

cJr., I think you've kinda looked into Joel's statement about only using Google to search a bit too much ;).

Haha :D

I don't see how I have really?

It is the same principle - if he doesn't care about the look of Google because he only uses it to search then he shouldn't care about the look of his operating system or any other user interface he uses surely? (as he only uses it for functionality).

:)

Joel has already replied to proove that he doesn't care about the look of Windows, etc, anyway.

I care more about the features of a product than anything, but it helps a lot if that interface looks nice :)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Who is paying for this 30x scale-up? Its sounds expensive.
    • Millions of users to benefit from Windows 11's new performance boost on Adobe Photoshop by Sayan Sen Despite the advent of AI-generated imagery, Adobe's Photoshop remains one of the most popular tools on this planet. Adobe does not have a publicly reported total user count but it's probably not wrong to assume there are millions. As of 2025, Adobe Creative Cloud has had approximately 41 million paid subscribers, many of whom likely use Photoshop. In addition, more than 166,000 companies worldwide are apparently also using the app. These figures are according to a very recent report by SQ Magazine. Out of them, it is fair to assume that many are probably running Windows. As such, there is good news for these users as Microsoft has announced Photoshop is getting a big 20% performance boost on x86-64 (AMD64) systems and a 13% bump-up on Arm devices. This is definitely great news for them as many have complained about the slow performance and general sluggishness of Photoshop on Windows 11 ever since the advent of the latter back in 2021. If you are wondering how Microsoft managed to do this, the answer lies in a combination of compiler-level optimizations and a technology called Sample Profile Guided Optimization (SPGO). According to Microsoft, Adobe worked closely with the company’s Visual C++ team and adopted the latest MSVC toolchain enhancements together with SPGO to squeeze more performance out of Photoshop’s CPU-bound workloads. Unlike traditional Profile Guided Optimization (PGO), which requires developers to create special instrumented builds and run lengthy training workloads, SPGO gathers performance data directly from optimized release binaries. This means Adobe could collect real-world usage information which gives a major advantage to this technique, as companies could leverage data collected from actual customer workloads rather than only relying on synthetic benchmark runs. In theory, this should allow optimizations to better reflect how users interact with software in the real world. Thanks to this, there are improvements to code layout, function inlining, hot-and-cold code separation, and other low-level tweaks that help processors execute instructions more efficiently. Essentially the compiler is better able to identify “hot” code paths, those which are most frequently executed, and optimize them accordingly.
    • "The 2TB Samsung 990 PRO NVMe SSD hits lowest price in over three months¨ I'd prefer to see the lowest price in over a year
    • Glad these prices are starting to come down, but that is still crazy. I bought the 2TB 9100 Pro (slightly more expensive version with PCIe 5.0) last year for $240.
    • The 2TB Samsung 990 PRO NVMe SSD hits lowest price in over three months by Sayan Sen Yesterday, we covered a really good deal wherein you can get a 4TB TeamGroup T-FORCE G50 NVMe PCIe Gen4 SSD for a low price of just $400 with a special discount coupon. That's just $100 per TB, making it a very good offer during these hard times. The deal is still live, so you can check it out in its dedicated article here if you do not want to miss out. Meanwhile, if you don't have that kind of budget but still wish to buy an SSD for a good price, the 2TB variant of the TeamGroup SSD at $280 its lowest price in over three months. Meanwhile, those seeking 2TB but faster performance can check out Samsung's 990 PRO, which has hit the lowest price also in the last quarter or so, as it's on sale for $370 (purchase links under the specs table down below). Thus, you want a faster drive, get the 990 Pro, or you want more capacity, grab the TeamGroup 4TB linked in the first para. The 990 PRO is a PCIe Gen4 NVMe SSD and still one of the fastest drives available today for under $500. Speaking of fast, sequential reads and writes are rated at 7450 MB/s and 6900 MB/s, respectively. The random throughputs for reads and writes are 1400K IOPS and 1550K IOPS, respectively. The 990 PRO is based on Samsung's 7th Gen V-NAND flash, and it too is TLC. It packs 2 gigs of LPDDR4 DRAM cache, which helps the random performance. The endurance rating for this is 1200 TBW (terabytes written), which should be sufficient for most users. The Samsung 990 PRO is compatible with the PlayStation 5, but if you are going to use the 990 PRO on a PC, check out the Samsung Magician app that lets you track your drive's health, update its firmware, customize various settings, and more. The tech specs are given below: Specification TeamGroup T-FORCE G50 2TB Samsung 990 PRO 2TB Interface PCIe 4.0 x4, NVMe 1.4 PCIe Gen 4.0 x4, NVMe 2.0 Form Factor M.2 2280 M.2 2280 Controller InnoGrit Controller Samsung In-house Controller NAND Flash 3D TLC 3D TLC DRAM Cache None (HMB supported) 2GB LPDDR4 Sequential Read (Max) 5,000 MB/s 7,450 MB/s Sequential Write (Max) 4,500 MB/s 6,900 MB/s Random Read (4K) Up to 600,000 IOPS Up to 1,400,000 IOPS Random Write (4K) Up to 700,000 IOPS Up to 1,550,000 IOPS TBW (Endurance) 1,300 TBW 1,200 TBW MTBF 3,000,000 hours 1,500,000 hours Operating Temperature 0°C to 70°C 0°C to 70°C Storage Temperature -40°C to 85°C -40°C to 85°C Shock Resistance 1,500G / 0.5ms 1,500G / 0.5ms Heatsink Patented Graphene Heat Spreader No Get them at the links below: Samsung 990 PRO SSD 2TB (MZ-V9P2T0B/AM): $369.99 (Sold and Shipped by Amazon US) TEAMGROUP T-Force G50 2TB SSD (TM8FFE002T0C129): $279.99 (Sold by TeamGroup, Shipped by Amazon US) Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      Jocimo earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      suprememobiles48 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      Prasann earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Prasann earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      519
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      174
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      90
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      81
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!