How to retain native application icons?

[Israel]

Hi, I'd like to add an answer to the question here.
This is GNU/Linux.  You can modify your system HOWEVER you want.
The way you can modify the icon to use the 'original' icon is in the
desktop files.
open a terminal and type
cd /usr/share/applications

Look for the program name.  I'll use firefox as the example

firefox.desktop is the file you want.
edit it with your editor of choice from the terminal
i.e.
gksu leafpad firefox.desktop
(note: you have to run this as gksu it will ask for your password since
you are modifying the system)
Now edit the line
Icon=firefox

save and voila!
You have modified your system in a way unsupported by the designers of
integrated themes.
The easier answer is of course to use a theme that doesn't have
integrated icons for apps, as Rafael suggested.

Don't be offended by him.  Sometimes it is easy to be offended when it
seems as someone is criticizing your hard work.  I understand that you
expected native icons from all apps having come from Windows.  GNU/Linux
is very much geared towards tight visual aesthetics in the overall look
of a DE.  We are able to customize the UI to a degree impossible in
other OS, and we fully take advantage of this.


On 06/15/2014 01:42 PM, Rafael Laguna wrote:
> I think my last answer was too rough. My apologies if you got
> offended. It's just that sometimes the concepts of design are
> difficult to understand, or even totally misunderstood. If you are new
> to Linux you'd find a lot of things really different from other
> operating systems.
>
> So, I "dare" you to test other themes, desktop and systems, to see
> which one fits your needs. Maybe a "changeling" desktop metaphor is
> not for you. So, again, sorry.
>
> --
> Rafael Laguna
> Lubuntu Artwork Team
>
>
> 2014-06-15 18:31 GMT+02:00 Rafael Laguna <rafaellaguna at gmail.com
> <mailto:rafaellaguna at gmail.com>>:
>
>     The choose gnome icon theme. It retains "original logos". Or maybe
>     their icons don't resemble Windows enough and you think the folder
>     will become unrecognizable?
>
>     Don't speak about me. Let's look to ACYL icons, totally diferent.
>     You should thank to people like this author the time he spent on
>     "modifying and screwing up" the original logos just to bring users
>     an homogeneous look for their system, with no mixed balls,
>     squares, triangles, romboids, and infinite forms that, from a
>     designer point of view, as mine, is a real and complete shit.
>
>     And don't misunderstand me, I love Gnome icons and his creator,
>     Jimmac, but the purpose of an icon theme is make a pleasant and
>     smooth visual sensation. Don't give me lessons of design, I'm a
>     designer and Box is a concept (not a way of destructing logos)
>     widely accepted. There's a thing called "creative overall
>     justification" or guidelines (did you read it before using Box? I
>     post these notes twice a year, on every Lubuntu release:
>     https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/Artwork/Guidelines). Every design
>     has one to explain things, like why we enclose logos in squares or
>     use circles, or whatever.
>
>     If you don't like a theme, just choose another. That is freedom.
>
>
>     --
>     Rafael Laguna
>     Lubuntu Artwork Team
>
>
>     2014-06-15 17:13 GMT+02:00 John Niendorf <john at jfniendorf.org
>     <mailto:john at jfniendorf.org>>:
>
>         Well I am new to the list, but this strikes me as, well, silly.
>         Is the debate really over how someone chooses to display an
>         icon on
>         their system?
>         If you like the "default" icons or are afraid of violating a
>         trademark
>         then by all means feel free to use whatever icon came with the
>         software...as for me I prefer icons that match my theme...
>
>         John
>
>         On 06/15/2014 04:29 PM, N. W. wrote:
>
>         > well, I think customizing icons is a fine thing, as long as
>         you only
>         > customize things like folder icons or some arrows or buttons or
>         > something like that.
>         >
>         > But logos? No, I think that's wrong.
>         >
>         > Why?
>         >
>         > Because logos are "trademarks". The app developers probably
>         put a lot
>         > of thought and work into making their logos and they
>         probably were
>         > striving for recognizability and identiy and so on.
>         >
>         > Now, look at your Audacious or Sylpheed or Thunar logos for
>         example
>         > (just three examples). They are completely different from
>         the original
>         > logo. You kinda damage the recognizability and identity with
>         that.
>         >
>         > And that's what I do not like. I would like the application
>         to have
>         > their original logos.
>         >
>         > Regards
>         >
>
>         --
>         Lubuntu-users mailing list
>         Lubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
>         <mailto:Lubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com>
>         Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>         https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/lubuntu-users
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Regards

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/lubuntu-users/attachments/20140615/c8d61972/attachment.html>