Desktop Icons or Not Thread last updated on 2003-06-15 05:59:21

Posted by member 2112 on 2003-06-12 23:06:56

Myself, I don't believe desktop icons are useful and because of that I couldn't be bothered including such a feature in my own themes. But if a significant number of others still rely on them I might make the effort to include such a feature.

Posted by member 35747 on 2003-06-13 00:39:36 link

i say no, it's better to see a clean desktop, I've made a setting popup menu to hide all my bar. It look better. I'can waw my wallpaper perfectly, and i save my cpu to generate the icons. Use a folder to put some craps... not desktop ;)

Posted by member 1 on 2003-06-13 00:46:51 link

I vote no out of personal preference...but it should be an option. :)

Posted by member 2184 on 2003-06-13 02:23:38 link

I dont need no STINKING icons!

Posted by member 3985 on 2003-06-13 04:44:35 link

I don't use them normally so i vote no but having the option is a good thing, i have this in my $PersonalDir$popup.rc

*Popup "Desktop" Folder
*Popup "Show Icons" !reloadmodule "$LitestepDir$desk.dll"
*Popup "Hide Icons" !unloadmodule "$LitestepDir$desk.dll"
*Popup "Refresh Icons" !execute [!unloadmodule "$LitestepDir$desk.dll"][!reloadmodule "$LitestepDir$desk.dll"]

You could try having something like this in your theme popups.

Posted by member 1783 on 2003-06-13 05:19:31 link

well, personally i don't use them, but it would be a really nice feature if they were optional.
my new theme (god knows when it's gonna be released:) should include such a feature.

Posted by member 424 on 2003-06-13 07:40:22 link

one of the first reason I got into LiteStep to begin with was to get rid of everything on my desktop but the wallpaper. Even if I wasn't using LiteStep, I would still try and find a way to hide my desktop icons, I just don't like 'em ... so you guess what my vote was, that's right ... no!

Posted by member 602 on 2003-06-14 06:10:05 link

Should absolutly be optional. If you want them, use them. If you don't, then well don't. And since we now have iconDesk there's no buggy stuff to consider, as far as I know at least. Also, if the module load is commented out then no one will loose resources, just disk space. I know I could live with that.

Posted by member 23675 on 2003-06-14 07:07:10 link

I like desktop links (or shortcuts if you like M$ speak) but i dont like the MS style of small, specified size icon with text below. I like to use an image of my chosen shape and size and put it how I want it.

So I am not voting as I am unclear as to the meaning. Do you mean shortcuts made at random by program installers, or pre-included in themes (yuck!) or just all together anything on the desktop?

Posted by member 7223 on 2003-06-14 11:32:05 link

I'll always make the vindication of minimal themes; then, I say NO!

Posted by member 2112 on 2003-06-14 17:27:42 link

Tin - I mean desktop shortcuts in the same style as MS. Or what ever IconDesk is able to produce (I haven't seen it in use before)

Well, even though the no's dominate many of you believe that it should be optional so I will put it in. It's good to know what people expect from a theme. Thanks for the comments.

Posted by member 16108 on 2003-06-15 05:59:21 link

I personnaly think that it's easier to do anything with a right click anywhere on the desktop than to go on a specific point to do ONE thing, so no, but as everybody says, should be an option, because use habits are very personnal and for the sake of democracy ;)