Welcome to MSDN Blogs Sign in | Join | Help

Microsoft RSS Blog

All about RSS and feed technology at Microsoft and across the community
The orange icon...

It’s great that a discussion of icons has recently restarted in the RSS community. We are in the process of figuring out what icon to use on our toolbar in IE7 to represent feeds.  

There are five parts of the experience for feeds in IE7: discovering if a webpage has a feed, previewing the feed, subscribing to the feed to get continual notifications of new items, managing the list of the subscribed feeds, and reading the feed contents.  The icon in this post is for the first two parts which shipped in Beta 1.  The icon is visible in the IE7 frame to indicate the presence of a feed for the current webpage.  Clicking on the feed icon takes the user to readable preview of the feed from which the user can subscribe to it.

The choice of what icon to use is challenging because it should be universally symbolic, but today there is no single icon for that represents feed.  Instead there’s a variety of mostly orange rectangles with the words “XML”, “RSS”, “ATOM”, “FEED”, or “Subscribe.”

Our goal is to make sure that the icon is something that is understandable by all of our users: novice, advanced, developer, business, international, etc.  These are the principles that we are using when selecting an icon:
  1. It conveys the important attributes of feeds: newness, activity, subscription, and continual information.   
  2. It builds on the most consistent and identifiable element used to represent feeds today: the orange rectangle.   
  3. It avoids the use of text.  Icons that have text do not generally work well for a global audience. For example, an icon with the text “FEED” may be cryptic to users whose primary language is non-Latin based.  Text is very important to support an icon (in tool-tips or accompanying text). In English, we will be using the verb “subscribe” fairly widely whenever text is appropriate.

We took a look at the prevalent icons used today but none of them fit our principles.  The Firefox icon is close, but it lacks the rectangular dimension (principle #2).  Here are some of the ideas that we’ve been playing around with:

    1 – We use a variation of the gleam to convey that feeds are updatable.
               

    2 – The ring illustrates movement around a feed.
               

    3 – This is a spark to show new information being broadcasted.
               

    4 – We use waves to show broadcasting of content.
               

    5 – This is the Beta 1 icon with our new requirements.
               

We have a couple of weeks to get the final design.  Please leave comments with any feedback or links to other good ideas!

- jane

Update 12/16: A decision was made. Check it out here. Thanks for all the comments.

 

 

Posted: Saturday, October 08, 2005 6:32 AM by rss
Filed under:

Comments

Bob W said:

You should follow the W3C's recommendation
# October 8, 2005 1:59 AM

Wolf Logan said:

Bob W: as far as I can tell, the W3C hasn't weighed in on this yet. they're maintaining their distance from RSS entirely for the time being.

I think #2 should be dropped on strictly graphic-design criteria: it involves lots of shading and subtlety that won't survive scaling and/or odd presentation scenarios.

#4 loses (in my opinion) since the contained graphic bleeds to the edge of the rectangle, weakening the rectangular element significantly.

#5 suffers from ambiguity. it's unique, but unfortunately doesn't read as anything recognisable (even with the other "radio broadcast" icons on this page, its "broadcast waves" are graphically weak). it rather reminds me of a head with a halo, or an unusual hat.

so that has it down to #1 and #3. of the two, I think I have a slight preference for #3, because it conveys the "broadcast" aspect somewhat better. the star icon has already been done to death as "favorite" (the five-pointed star, at least), and the gleam as "new". also, in extreme presentation scenarios, the eight-point star is likely to lose its identity.
# October 8, 2005 2:14 AM

kfarmer said:

Perhaps esoteric, but (3) with angle brackets:

<+>
or
<<+>> (potential for click animation)

I also like (5), which may potentially work better with The New Look.

I would avoid (4), because it's too close to the volume control iconography. (1) and (2) are both perhaps too abstract and don't really convey the idea of content being broadcast or posted.

Bob: If the W3C starts recommending *icons* -- something completely out of their scope -- they've lose any respectability. What would be next? W3C standards for layout and avoiding the use of plaid?

I've checked their site, and I (thankfully) don't see them sticking their noses there.
# October 8, 2005 2:16 AM

vincenzo cosenza said:

No. 5 is definitely the best one ! I hope it will be a multi-state icon to be more effective !
# October 8, 2005 3:26 AM

Greg said:

I also agree with option No.5. For me, No.2 looks really visually appealing (i.e., pretty), but doesn't do much to convey the broadcasting of information.

No.4 should be avoided. If I were to take a look at that icon and not already know that it was associated with RSS, I'd guess it had something to do with sound.

No.3 should also be avoided. It looks to similar to any "new object" icon (i.e., new tab, new email, etc.)
# October 8, 2005 3:46 AM

Ilya Birman said:

To me it's also number 5 which appears to be the best. They are very little informative, compared to usual [RSS] icons, so I judge only by graphical "niceness".

But come on, just use [RSS]! :-)
# October 8, 2005 3:55 AM

Kearns said:

#5 looks like a guy's head with a big turban on.

#3 and #4 win out for me, both certainly have the "broadcast" concept in a clear fashion, and could even have some sort of animation easily put into them, if an application desired such.
# October 8, 2005 6:02 AM

lippel said:

> But come on, just use [RSS]! :-)

That is not a good idea, as the author states correctly. First, it uses text, and second, it uses a technical term the average user should not care about (given that you also have RDF and Atom out there, and it's not even clearly defined what RSS stands for). The user should understand that this enables him to monitor a site for updates, and not how it is technically solved.

And yeah, icon 3 reminds me _slightly_ on the icon used in KDE's konqueror. So you might check that out if you like icon 3 :P
# October 8, 2005 6:21 AM

Stephane Rodriguez said:


If we are talking something that gets updated, then no static icon will represent it. Use an animated one.

IMHO you should not onlt define an animation, but also a special sound for it, for all those who will want to have those alerts in the systray. All configurable of course.

Also let power users pick the ones they want in their settings. A no brainer, and yet brings the feel of a customizable browser, and also ends the issue of choice.

# October 8, 2005 7:06 AM

Neil T. said:

Number 5 looks the best. The fact that it closely resembles the Firefox icon is good as then it can be standardised upon.
# October 8, 2005 7:35 AM

Gert Van Waelvelde said:

I like icons 3, 4 and 5.
Icon 4 is probably not a good choice though, because as some people have said, icon 4 looks as if it has something to do with sound.
Also, icon 4 make me think of alarm systems
(I know a company that sells alarm systems and has a logo somewhat similar to icon 4).

So, I think you should go with either icon 3 or icon 5!
# October 8, 2005 9:14 AM

Alijah said:

I think all the icon should be used or aleast the design concept that they represent. they could morph into the right concept design depending on the action being taken place. AJAX use it everywhere you go with ie7
# October 8, 2005 11:11 AM

Alijah said:

I think all the icon should be used or aleast the design concept that they represent. they could morph into the right concept design depending on the action being taken place. AJAX use it everywhere you go with ie7
# October 8, 2005 11:12 AM

Nick Davis said:

3, definitely.

Parenthesis or angle brackets are both OK
# October 8, 2005 1:35 PM

Michael Buckbee said:

I've shrunk the icons down to half size for a more realistic view of how they would look. Check it out:

http://www.buzzwordcompliant.net/?p=9
# October 8, 2005 1:43 PM

Christopher Hill said:

IMHO, 3 and 4 are the best. 5 is definately ambiguous and could be mistaken. Maybe 4 is best cos it is most like the FireFox icon.
# October 8, 2005 2:12 PM

Matt Gartzke said:

The 3rd and 4th ones are great. I like the 3rd one the most. Great job!
# October 8, 2005 2:27 PM

Riddle said:

Halo 2 is superb! In my opinion is far greater then fx's icon, which is, as few of you said, too similar to sound wave. 5th - broadcasting the content, news. Great, I like it.

I will edit my fx theme to switch its icon for 5th. Halo rox. :)
# October 8, 2005 3:29 PM

TomC22 said:

I like 4 & 5 but couldn't really pick between the two (I like both at a pretty much equal amount). Both convey “broadcast” which I think is the best analogy for “syndication beginners”.

That said, if I had to pick I'd go with 5, only because of the orientation. The signal seems to emanate up from the web page which seems like a user friendly way of indicating “this page broadcasts” to someone who is new to the whole concept.

I’m sure people could figure it out either way, but as with anything in UI design, every moment before comprehension counts.
# October 8, 2005 4:39 PM

Fred Zelders said:

Use the white on orange XML icon and stop re-inventing.
# October 8, 2005 4:40 PM

KJK::Hyperion said:

Fred, grow a clue. "XML" is text, it's a technicality and even as a technicality it may become obsolete. Some of the worst "qualities" a bad icon can have

Yay for icon 5, anyway
# October 8, 2005 5:08 PM

Les said:

Number 3 - spark.

I would prefer the orange rectangle with XML or RSS, but I understand the argument.
# October 8, 2005 5:09 PM

Mark Woods said:

I'd suggest sticking with the familiar white on orange XML icon.
# October 8, 2005 5:18 PM

Nick Swan said:

I suggest sticking with the orange and white xml lettering as well!
# October 8, 2005 5:19 PM

Aaron Hockley said:

Don't waste time reinventing and making someone learn something new. Use the orange rectangle with "XML", just like everyone in the community has been doing for years.
# October 8, 2005 5:26 PM

AnotherWin95 said:

I like #2 - ties in with loop around IE "E"
# October 8, 2005 5:35 PM

Judson said:

#5 is terrible, it looks like someone's head with a hat or halo. It's really alarmingly bad.
# October 8, 2005 5:35 PM

sutrostyle said:

Or you want to stick out, like Sony memory stick?
# October 8, 2005 5:39 PM

Stan Vassilev said:

(3) is the most slick one and conveys the idea behind the icon well.

(1) looks like Favorites sorta
(2) is ugly
(4) is Firefox clone :)?
(5) is ... uhmm what is it anyway?
# October 8, 2005 5:52 PM

TomC22 said:

Let me just say, to the idea of “stay with the XML icon” or “just use RSS”…

Please don’t.

Yahoo (am I allowed to mention them here :o ) just released a report saying that a painfully small number of web users even know what RSS is. I’d be willing to bet that a huge reason for that is because feeds are marked in a way that no layman understands. That orange icon is holding syndication down…

Second, RSS and the XML button have both become synonymous with RSS so if you’re going to support Atom as well you can’t really use those.

There will always be the “if they can’t figure it out they just shouldn’t use it” crowd but, in the end, IE is a mainstream product and it should appeal to mainstream users, an ability that the orange button has proven it lacks.
# October 8, 2005 5:58 PM

John said:

Use the blue RSS icon (or at least the orange xml icon). No need to fracture the market yet again.
# October 8, 2005 6:02 PM

BB said:

1. No. Looks too similar to a Favorites icon.
2. No.
3. Yes.
4. No. It reminds me of Firefox's.
5. No.

As an idea, how about a radar screen with a trailing sweep?

Something like this:

http://fxhome.com/alamdv2/plugins/info_cache/plugin866.html
# October 8, 2005 6:16 PM

Drew McLellan said:

The concept of 'broadcast' is fundamentally flawed. XML feeds are in *no way* broadcast. You have to go get them, they don't come to you.

This may seem like a petty detail now, but as the technology progresses this flawed analogy will become more and more obvious to the regular user and therefore become less intuitive and an interface hurdle.

Forget broadcast. Period.
# October 8, 2005 7:08 PM

Robin said:

3 or 4 seem best to me, as they're the ones that best show the transmission. If I had to choose I'd go for 4, but that's probably cos I'm used to Firefox's Livemark icon.
# October 8, 2005 7:10 PM

kosso said:

I posted my comments of #5 here a couple of weeks ago. http://blogs.opml.org/kossobeeb/2005/09/27#ie7BetaFeedsIcon


I think evolution is ok. but why not just keep it simple, and not get too arty farty?

marketeers and creatives could argue for each and every one of these choices and leave you thinking 'oh, yeah, now I see why we chose that one' but not everyone will get to hear that explanation.

so, keep it simple. an orange button with the word 'FEED' (rss or atom agnostic - the user shouldn't care) would do it.

maybe future colours of the button, bearing the word 'FEED' could denote what kind of 'feed' it is. or how about even 'feed' or 'list'(depending on the useage? gotta get those SLExtensions in there sooner or later, right? ;) )

Shapes etc look cool. I draw them all the time. But I bet different people associate different things to the same shape. You don't have that problem with words and using the good old alphabet, eh? ;)
# October 8, 2005 7:15 PM

William Lefkovics said:

Ooo... maybe we can get the <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/products/expression/en/default.aspx>Expression</a> team to make a dynamic button and export it to .swf with sound and then implement it in a layer to have it glide across the screen...

Do people really care about this? Fascinating. :o)

Why would I use IE for RSS feeds anyway?
# October 8, 2005 7:18 PM

Dody Gunawinata said:

Don't be unique.

Bazillions of websites and weblogs have already settled on the orange "rss" or "xml" icon.
# October 8, 2005 7:32 PM

James McNellis said:

I too agree that Halo 2 rocks more than any of these icons... but then again... there's very little that rocks as much as Halo 2 to begin with.

In any case, #1 looks like some kind of German war medal, and I'll agree that #5 looks like a man in a turban. #2 looks too empty. Left to choose between #3 and #4, I'd pick #3 because I like symmetrical icons, and that icon is.
# October 8, 2005 7:32 PM

Josh Bancroft said:

The W3C hasn't weighed in, so go to the next logical authority - Dave Winer. Seriously.

I HATE the idea of coming up with yet another icon/button for RSS feeds. The Yahoo whitepaper says a tiny fraction of people even know what it means.

I know, let's confuse them even more by introducing an icon with some vague image! That's WAY better than including the text (RSS/XML/FEED).

People don't know about RSS. The answer is to educate them, not come up with YET ANOTHER attempt at making an icon that will "click". "This time, the masses will get it, for sure!" is not the right way to go about this...

There's a real opportunity here with Vista and IE7, that the average RSS-clueless person will be using. Let's help EDUCATE about RSS! That's the ONLY way to make this better!
# October 8, 2005 7:44 PM

AndyC said:

5 is just bad, really, really bad. Took me ages in beta 1 to realise it was the RSS icon and I knew what I was looking for!

I'd go for either 1 or 3, of the two I think 3 has the edge somewhat.
# October 8, 2005 7:45 PM

Alex said:

Number 3 is by far the best.

It it the most obvious to me ...
# October 8, 2005 8:05 PM

charlie van pelt said:

Common usage is the orange rectangle - and XML has the advantage of being both current usage and graphically least parochially ''English'' - the letter ''X'' has a universal graphical recognition - one could learn that as easily as another cryptic semi-intuitive symbol.
# October 8, 2005 8:10 PM

kosso said:

in response to AndyC, EXACTLY!! :) I had that problem with finding where it was.

If it had been 1 or 3, I think we still would have had the same problem.

And to Alex too, 'FEED' is the most obvious to me. I would have hit that in a second. I would have SPOKEN to me, as opposed to given me a curious wink ;)
# October 8, 2005 8:11 PM

kosso said:

in response to AndyC, EXACTLY!! :) I had that problem with finding where it was.

If it had been 1 or 3, I think we still would have had the same problem.

And to Alex too, 'FEED' is the most obvious to me. I would have hit that in a second. It would have SPOKEN to me, as opposed to given me a curious wink ;)
# October 8, 2005 8:15 PM

John said:

If microsoft comes up with their own unique icon they get flamed for confusing users and making everything 'the microsoft way' - damn firefox already existing icon.

If they base their icon on the firefox one then they get flamed for copying.

In light of the lack of an official w3c recommendation, you should base the icon on the default industry standard - the orange rss text, or the firefox icon.

Admit it, you will get flamed no matter what choice you make ;-)

In my opion you should go with the rss text icon. Stop dumming it down to users! They will already have some subconcious association with that icon, and the net total of users who will have seen the rss icon will be greater than those who have seen the firefox one.


# October 8, 2005 8:22 PM

eric l said:

from best to worst:
#3. the spark also looks like a plus sign, which i kindof like, and the waves coming out from both sides imply a broadcast of some sort. i think it's an excellent graphic representation of all the things rss means to a user.

#5 looks like something sending a broadcast or signal out, i like it, but not as much as #3.

#1 is vague. it doesn't graphically mean anything.

#2 is WAY too close to the earthlink logo

#4 looks like it has to do with sound or volume and also that it looks like firefox's (which i also find confusing). it's a bad bad bad idea.

# October 8, 2005 8:28 PM

Trevor said:

#5 looks like a UFO
# October 8, 2005 8:28 PM

W. J. Brown said:

Why are you trying to reinvent what has become standardized.

Don't try to be cute or unique.

Go with the white on orange RSS or XML that everyone elsein the universe uses and associates with RSS. You're only going to confuse users and alienate all of us that were early adopters.
# October 8, 2005 8:50 PM

Scott said:

If you have to explain the icons, your icons aren't descriptive enough.

The localization argument against using text in an icon smells bad to me. It means you aren't preparing your app for localization enough. If you put "Web Feed" in the icon, you should be prepared to change it to whatever language the user has set. Not usings "RSS" or "XML" because it is too technical makes sense. But people are remarkably adaptable creatures. Eventually, they figure out that pressing the "RSS" or "XML" icon means they subscribe to the web site, even if they don't know what they stand for.
# October 8, 2005 8:50 PM

Adam Kinney said:

Just give me a plus and minus sign. The link behind my name leads to the my concept images posted on my blog.
# October 8, 2005 9:50 PM

Mike M said:

Please use the standard RSS/XML icon that everyone on the internet uses. Why reinvent something that has become an "unofficial" standard?
# October 8, 2005 9:56 PM

Anonymous said:

2 is overly complicated. 1 and 3 may seem to make sense, but they are actually ambiguous-- the "spark" doesn't necessarily have that "brand new" gleam when it's all white. 4 is the best you've designed.
# October 8, 2005 10:01 PM

Mark Allen said:

I guess this comes under Microsoft's famous "embrace and extend" philosophy. Of course, its "embrace and extend" the same way a Boa Constrictor does. "Obfuscate and confuse" would be more accurate. Please do yourself and your users a huge favor - stick with the standard orange and white icon that everyone already understands. Had Microsoft come to the party earlier, perhaps you could have been involved in developing an icon for everyone to agree on ... but you didn't. You're skiing along behind the boat ... quit trying to steer.
# October 8, 2005 10:02 PM

kevinpilch-bisson said:

I'd vote for number 4. The broadcasting is the clearest metaphor I can think of.
# October 8, 2005 10:17 PM

kosso said:

my last 2p:

they ALL look like warnings. like you could possibly get irradiated. or catch a disease! they all say 'stay away!!!' 'DANGER!! high voltage!!'

stick to 'FEED' - at least while people try to 'get' what they're all about.

# October 8, 2005 10:23 PM

Zach Inglis said:

Hmmm...

I disagree with everyone else. They're not trying to change the icon to be artsy fartsy... they're doing it to make IE7 user friendly.

<a href="http://www.molly.com/2005/04/02/where-is-your-feed/">Molly</a> said it best. Most web users aren't developers and don't know what this means. I mean if you walked into (insert a place completely foreign to you here) and saw a random 3 letter word, you'd have no clue. And when you clicked it, you'd be scared off. Quite a lot of the people i've taught over the years, didn't feel confident in pressing their back button (due to the alerts and what not, they felt they were going to break it).

My judgement:
1. Bit plain but works.
2. Nice, typical of MS graphics, won't look good scaled. and i have no idea what background its on and how it'll look on that.
3. The best, give it a go rotated too.
4. Nope, bleeds as said and just doesn't feel right.
5. Looks like a rastafarian.
# October 8, 2005 10:46 PM

Andrew Herron said:

I agree with dave winer and all the others saying leave it how it is. The white-on-orange xml icon is extremely prevalent already, and being an acronym it gets around the language barrier you're scared of for text on images.

I don't think a pretty little icon will make people any more happy with using RSS than the current semi-standard does.
# October 8, 2005 11:04 PM

sean said:

I have no idea what those icons mean. But an orage and white XML is common, understood, and established.
# October 8, 2005 11:43 PM

codemastr said:

Ignore the people who keep suggesting using words in images, it's clearly a terrible idea. You want to talk about confusion... I'm sure Chinese users would really appreciate it saying XML or whatever. I mean, imagine if MS suggested putting the Chinese word for RSS on it, do you think the English speaking users would be too thrilled? I think not.

Anyway, I suggest a slightly modified version of #5. I changed maybe 10 pixels and I think it looks much better. Basically, I disconnected the two "waves" and I also disconnected them from the center ball. That's what I'd suggest!
# October 8, 2005 11:56 PM

Jason Cox said:

1 - Users will see this and think 'ohh, click here!', but it has no meaning for RSS
2 - You might get some HALO fans clicking this one, but the ring doesnt seem to have any meaning toward RSS or syndicated feeds
3 - This is too similar to a wireless broadcast icon, lets not use similar icons to ones in use, it'll confuse users
4 - See #3
5 - Keep this design, maybe rotate it clockwise a bit
# October 8, 2005 11:57 PM

Sammy said:

Uhhhhh...didn't the guy above just point out the yahoo report which says that people don't understand the xml button and that people don't use rss because of it.

I mean, do I really have to point out the stupidity of someone saying "if you have to explain an icon it isn't good so use a button with XML on it"? Or "an orage and white XML is common, understood, and established"...by who, the 5% of people who use RSS right now?

stupid man, just stupid...

P.S. I like 4 but I use firefox so it could just be that I'm used to it.
# October 9, 2005 12:02 AM

kfarmer said:

So English-speaking geeks seem to think that everybody's grandmother (a) speaks english, (b) knows what the following terms are: XML, RDF, RSS, ATOM, etc. Just how many orange icons are there that are based on text? I've seen several on a single page.

These icons *are not for the geeks*. The icon selected with have the single task of conveying a concept, whose inner workings should be of no concern to the user.

So get over it. It's not a matter of "education" -- it's a matter of creating something reachable to the non-programmers in the audience, and something which won't have to be re-created when the implementation of a subscription service changes.

That said, consider "FF Redux" vs "Firefox". FF Redux has the problem of too many fine lines. I needs to have fewer, and thicker, waves before it becomes easily identifiable. That places it lower on my list.

Another suggestion, no listed, is to go back to the various prior icons used, such as the satellite dish, which is more closely associated with reception rather than transmission.
# October 9, 2005 12:12 AM

Robert said:

Reflex MS-bashers are commenting "Go with the white on orange RSS or XML" that "everyone" uses.

Don't they see that facts that current usage is split between "RSS" and "XML", and that users don't have a clue what either one might stand for? (Ah yes, before you subscribe to updates here, let me tell you about "syndication" and explain "markup languages" to you. It will only take a month or so to explain.)

Give MS credit for doing something really right here: retaining everything that can be retained (orange, rectangle, ...) and fixing the serious mistakes which have interfered with communicating this feature.

Sheeesh.

# October 9, 2005 12:23 AM

cori said:

Don't reinvent; use the RSS or XML "standard".

1) It's text, which is a *good* thing; it can be represented adequately in an accessible browser and can be styled in CSS to display as you'd like - both very good things IMHO. It can also be internationalized (no matter what the naysayers above indicate).
2) It's well on it's way to being established - much better for you all to join the community than to go off in your own direction in some vague and pointless branding effort.
3) To those who say that only 5% of people "get" RSS - so what? Not that long ago only 5% of computer users got "www" or "the web" or "http", and not everyone gets "HDTV" or "MP3". Technology leaders set the tone and the users will catch up; they always do. None of these icons are going to be understandable to the general user unless they learn what it means; what's the difference if they learn "RSS" as opposed to "little spaceship-looking icon". Just because RSS is an acronym for a technology doesn't mean that the user needs to care about the technology involved.
# October 9, 2005 12:37 AM

Sammy said:

Cori - (1) The post is about a toolbar icon (2) every browser uses a different toolbar icon, none use the xml button (so no standard) (3) Users set the tone, when technology leaders try to set the tone they fail (4) what say you try reading the post before replying next time?
# October 9, 2005 12:45 AM

Jon Abad said:

I'm a fan of #3 and #4.
I think that broadcast ripples are going to end up as the symbol of subscription.
# October 9, 2005 12:51 AM

George Girton said:

Microsoft can do whatever it wants, but most people won't change from the clear and unambigous orange text "RSS" or "XML", which has the substantial advantage it can be rendered in CSS, with virtually no bandwidth consumption. Text is better. You're reading this in text, right? Not some incoherent invented symbols?

On to feedback. Both icons 4 and 5 are quite inferior, seeing as how the pattern is basically already TAKEN. These are indistinguishable from tokens indicating WIFI connectivity, or connection BARS in a lot of different phone contexts. Number 3 is also kind of like that, too. Number 2 conflicts with the semantics of plus/minus signs indicating that a tree structure can be expandedl/collapsed, which leaves us with number 1. (_And why isn't RSS in text presented as a feedback option here? "oh, we can't have that, it's text" What a stupid argument)

Number 1 is nothing better than a non-text asterisk.

These are all just hieroglyphics. Put them in the Egyptian version of Windows and go on a long vacation down the Nile. Get back to me when you've solved the riddle of the Sphynx.

# October 9, 2005 1:41 AM

Patrick Grote said:

Why not use the orange XML icon? It's pretty common. You could gussie it up if you wanted.

You say it wouldn't be understood by all levels of users, but if you made it the same icon all around, people would get to know.

I see the printer icon and I know it's for printing documents. I see the orange XML and I know there is a feed.
# October 9, 2005 2:32 AM

War59312 said:

I like number 3 best. :)
# October 9, 2005 3:42 AM

Gunnar Langemark said:

You guys must be kiddin'!
There's a perfect white on orange icon out there. It's the de facto standard.
Are you new to RSS feeds by any chance?
Please don't redesign what works perfectly.....

Best
Gunnar
# October 9, 2005 4:13 AM

Simone said:

Probably most users doesn't know what 'RSS' is ... but also doesn't know what 'symbol that you have to choose' is, so let them to learn what is 'RSS', don't create something 'new'.

Thanks
# October 9, 2005 4:38 AM

Pieter Overbeeke said:

Use the white on orange XML icon and stop re-inventing.
# October 9, 2005 4:56 AM

Tollie said:

+FEED, and allow the colors to be changed via Syndication Options, or whatever you're calling it. Default to white on orange. That way, the button is associated with those options to 'check every few hours' and 'mark updates as new' etc.

For the non-english versions- is it that hard to localize an image?
# October 9, 2005 5:02 AM

Paul Wheeler said:

I like 3 and 4, they look simple, traditional, and have a clear broadcast connotation.

To the followers of David Winer chanting "stop reinventing" like good little zealots, why don't you stop shooting yourself and RSS in the foot!

Go up to 50 people on the street and ask them what RSS is. If you're lucky, two of them might have a clue ("uh, some internet thing"). Here's the thing, everybody knows "email" nobody knows POP, SMTP, IMAP, etc. Why? Because those acronymns are terms we use to refer to the plumming, and, how many times do I have to say it, end users don't see plumming! (unless they want to). Now, it sounds to me like the IE team is *not* trying to get bloggers to throw out their pretty little 36x14 pixel orange icons. For the techy people who want to get the URL of your RSS or ATOM quickly, you should absolutely have those icons (and near the top please). However, IE needs to have an icon in the toolbar. Something that is actual pretty, hi-fi, memorable, and end-user-non-acronym-o-phile friendly.
# October 9, 2005 5:36 AM

Erik Porter said:

I don't get it. Why should there be more than one (maybe two)? Is IE going to become an RSS Aggregator too? If not, I really don't get the need for all the icons! *confused*
# October 9, 2005 5:53 AM

Rajesh J Advani said:

I agree that XML and RSS with white on orange are too geek-oriented. I prefer "Feed". We don't _really_ need to educate people about RDF/RSS/Atom, but I believe "Feed" is as generic as "Web page", don't you think?
Erik's suggestion about localization is what I had on my mind too.

I mean if the user knows what "File", "Edit" and "View" mean, then chances are they'll know what "Feed" means, right? And if they have a localized browser, then they can also have a localized "Feed" image.

The tooltip can say "Subscribe" as you've said, which put together with "Feed" becomes "Subscribe to this feed".

No?

Of course, if that argument isn't valid - and I'm definitely no Usability-guru - then I prefer #4. It's similar to the Firefox icon, and would be easier to recognize for FF users. Of course, it might need some modification to fix the bleeding.
# October 9, 2005 6:09 AM

Rajesh J Advani said:

Oops. I meant Tollie's idea.
# October 9, 2005 6:10 AM

Alyssa Milburn said:

I think #3 gets the point across best. #4 is baaad because it doesn't stay inside the rectangle. The others don't make a lot of sense to me..
# October 9, 2005 6:11 AM

dazzle said:

How about none of the icons displayed but keep with the orange background and go for a picture of a newspaper or magazine.

A newspaper / magazine is updated daily, has current information, is up-to-date and subscribable, and most countries have newspapers and magazines and an understanding of what they mean. Combine the 'new' with the 'old'.

For me a broadcast symbol is too representative of television or radio and something more dynamic than just, predominantly, text, and while people may be hoping that syndication will eventually be 'just another broadcast medium' it isn't yet - even with the enclosure tag in RSS.
# October 9, 2005 6:17 AM

Daniel said:

Why is the original button not an option?

I am sorry, but, i hope the whole world flames you for this kind of behaviour, and you know you had a chance to do it right. Its so silly, even embarising, you get the best technologie since the internet whas created handed on a plate for free, and then you try to recreate the weel, and end up creating more confusion.
And in the meantime, your competitors embrace and extend, and you lose credibility.

You dont want to be messing with alfa geeks, cause their the decision makers, for the not so computer minded peeps and you dont want to be filling their heads with negative experiences/emotions cause you know who they will promote, and thats not gonna be you cause you.
Do not try to recreate the wheel, and put a leash on this technology. You dont get it, blogging is the voice of the customer, dont fight it. Youknow, fighting customers is really really bad. Your acting like a mamut, and youknow what happened to them. I wish you much wisdom.
# October 9, 2005 6:31 AM

Stef said:

Am I the only onewho actually prefers the Beta 1 icon? Using an orange background will probably stand out like a sore thumb among the other background-less icons on IE's toolbar.
That said, if I had to choose I'd pick #5, which might look better if the tips of the 'halo' were disconnected from the sphere (as in the beta 1 version).
# October 9, 2005 6:49 AM

Chris said:

The (3) 'avoid text' point may not be so relevant when something is already almost a web 'default' standard. However there is already a division, e.g. http://www.lemonde.fr/ has an orange XML icon, The BBC uses an orange RSS icon.

So the orange bit is agreed upon. Is it worth engaging the other browser developers (Firefox, Opera) and major websites (bbc etc) into agreeing upon a new icon that all the browsers will change to?
# October 9, 2005 7:13 AM

sbc said:

Isn't RSS a bit too specific and XML a bit vague. The feed might not be RSS for one thing, and XML is not just used for feeds. 'Feed' is more appropriate, but you would probably want to localise it for other languages, so using an icon without text is a better way. Some use Feedburner as well, which converts the feed into whatever format the aggregator supports (plus saves bandwidth for the publisher).

Not even those into feeds can agree, there are lots of people saying use XML or RSS, which to me means neither is appropriate.

#3 looks the best to me out of the choices. Perhaps if 4 was modified so it would be bottom left to top right it would look better.
# October 9, 2005 7:49 AM

www.geecar.com said:

so good
# October 9, 2005 7:58 AM

frankp said:

So far my favourite solution is <a href="http://www.adamkinney.com/note.aspx?id=76">Adam Kinneys</a>

It uses the familiar orange to signify a feed and uses a simple plus or minus to indicate an action.

It also includes the 'broadcast' detail. Now, I understand peoples reservations about broadcast, but in this case I think it works because it is used in conjunction with the plus or minus sign.
# October 9, 2005 8:26 AM

NAKA Hirotoshi.[MSMVP japan] said:

Good Icons!.

I like icon 2 or 4.

# October 9, 2005 9:00 AM

mai said:

i like 2, 3, and 5. 2 is lovely, but it is also somewhat reminiscent of Earthlink. don't get people confused. avoid that.

3 is good, because of the 'spark', although it could also be used to convey information about radio, etc.
also confusing.

and 5 is good, except that it seems to be something else. a whirlwind, perhaps.

4 is actually better. avoiding the use of text is a nice idea, but perhaps using the text, faded into the background somehow, would be best. people don't want to learn new things...
# October 9, 2005 10:20 AM

Srinivasan R said:

I would order the icons as follows.
4
5
3
1
2

But I think a simple XML would suffice..
# October 9, 2005 10:35 AM

Farooq said:

2 and 3 are the best...
# October 9, 2005 10:50 AM

phillip said:

Stick with what people know and what doesn't require digging through a help file to learn. At least [RSS] means RSS, and [XML] means XML. Someone can actually type them into a search engine to find out what they mean.

I understand Principle 3, but I think iconography on a concept so unnatural as "a link to a URL that gets updated as content is added" is not going to fit well into a tiny image. I don't know what these icons represent from looking at them or how they represent feeds, and the descriptions aren't helping (what does "movement around a feed" actually mean?). The meanings would have to be broadcast along with them "[ * ] (this a is an RSS feed (click here to find out what an RSS feed is))".

As noted in other comments, using icon X might be misinterpreted as being related to concept Y (icon 4, the most sensible to me, looks like a sound speaker icon). Icons are great for representing everyday concepts. RSS/XML/ATOM is not one of those concepts. I think the given icon choices are forced associations and will not work well compared to what people have seen already (RSS, XML) and can investigate outside of their browser's help file.
# October 9, 2005 11:03 AM

Rob D said:

I think people are misunderstanding what this is for. The icons are for the IE toolbar, not for the web page. When IE detects an RSS feed on the page, it will enable the toolbar icon. It would be completely inappropriate for a toolbar icon to have the text on it, e.g. RSS or XML.
# October 9, 2005 11:05 AM

William Stroud said:

I work and IBM and a half dozens memebers on my team seriously considered (privately and amongst ourselves) using podcast icons created by norm augustinus for our IBM Systems audio updates. Instead and we just went with the orange RSS icons and simple speaker with sound waves gif. Check out his podcast icon:
www.normaugustinus.com


# October 9, 2005 11:14 AM

Chris said:

I have a gut feeling that most of the people that keep on saying "just stick with the XML or RSS button" are either programmers that don't "get usability" or designers that think they "get usability".

A while back I used to think that as time progressed, the number of UI people that "got it" would increase exponentially. The comments I see here are yet another example to me that this is not the case. I actually believe the UI people that "get it" are decreasing as a proportion of total number of people doing UI work on the Web.

Even though people rip on Microsoft left and right, at least you and your company are showing concern for end users -- something most idiot Web people have no experience doing.

So IE team, thanks for at least trying to help with RSS button mess we've found ourselves in.

Overall I like button number 3 even though I don't really like any of them. (I wish I could come up with something better.) One suggestion: If a user clicks that button, they should see, in the dialog that opens up, examples of all the feed buttons they might encounter on the Web. This might help people put 2 and 2 together.
# October 9, 2005 11:38 AM

TQ White II said:

Stick with the current orange icon that says 'RSS' on it.

There is no benefit to abstracting the icon except to allow you to substitute different technologies to support it. But that means that I can't go to a site and know what I am subscribing to. That reduces my trust.

Further, I can now tell non-tech friends to look for the "orange RSS icon" and be sure they will be able to identify the right one. I don't believe that will be true with your more abstract designs.

tqii
# October 9, 2005 11:42 AM

Patrick Grote said:

I'm of the through the orange XML icon is fine.

I have read the comments since my intial post and am struck by how much of the decision process in this is forced on the user.

Usability, at the heart of things, is making a process easier to understand for a user.

How about tacking this route? Why not stick with the standard orange XML icon and make the software smart enough to know what to do with it?

Why the need to communicate in a new icon about the the purpose? For years the orange XML icon has been the standard and the software will know what to do with it.

If Microsoft took this step other vendors would as well based on the installed base of windows users.
# October 9, 2005 11:49 AM

Jimmy said:


#4, #3, #5 in that order. #4 looks like the podcasting logo that many are using right now, which I think is a good idea to try to move towards.

And I absolutely agree with some of the other posters -- the "XML" or "RSS" logo that Whiner thinks we should stick with is dense. No mainstream user knows what that means. Thank you Microsoft for trying to make something better (again).

# October 9, 2005 12:15 PM

Michael Martine said:

No. 4 most clearly conveys the idea of sending information to a receiver. All of the others are far too abstract. The fact that it resembles Firefox's icon is proof of concept, not a rip-off. Icons don't work if everybody's icon for the same thing is completely different.

Microsoft has an update icon used in MS Office for updating linked information and queries. Maybe that could include RSS as well.

W3C's recommendations are not holy writ. In case nobody's noticed, RSS and XML are only valid for English-speaking persons. So much for the global internet. Plus, the technology should "just work" without the user needing to understand it in the same way a computer nerd does.
# October 9, 2005 12:41 PM

Munro said:

#4 would be my pick. I think though that some icon that denotes "News" to users would be the best for feeds because that is generally what RSS feeds and blogs have brought to readers. #4 and #5 denote some sort of radio broadcasting or podcasting in my opinion. Maybe an orange rectangle with an easily distinguishable newspaper icon inside. Best for a small icon would probably be a rolled up newspaper, though an open newspaper could also work.
# October 9, 2005 12:44 PM

Greg said:

I vote for a variation on a theme - Take number 2 and put the "word" SUB in white on the button (under the swoosh). People might actually get that. The word "subscribe" can work and makes sense to end users.
# October 9, 2005 1:42 PM

Gregor Herdmann said:

Variant 4 looks definitely too much like broadcasting audio content. It looks similar to one of the icons you find on every sound card.
# October 9, 2005 1:50 PM

kamesh shukla said:

For a change, Microsoft's idea to redo RSS icon makes perfect sense to non-geeks like myself. It is "World Wide Web" and the icons need to adress the "global" requirements. Use of english words "RSS" is totally not acceptable.

Having said the above, Microsoft can reduce the number of icons so that users are not confused.
# October 9, 2005 3:03 PM

Katsu said:

What you are doing in terms of IE7 is a sheer copy of Mozilla Firefox, in my opinion. Even these orange icons, whichever chosen eventually, are complete resemblances of that of Firefox!
# October 9, 2005 3:15 PM

ss said:

Don't reinvent; use the RSS or XML "standard".

There was a standard for it,you guys appaernlt ripped of firefox in one design and on IE 7,all of them suck because it does not convey what it should.Damn
# October 9, 2005 4:29 PM

John Harnett said:

Just been to del.icio.us, and news.bbc.co.uk. RSS on orange is good enough for them. these new icons, and the above explaining text that accompanies, suggest RSS is about "Broadcasting" but it isn't. It's about broad catching. RSS has got as far as it has by cooperation, going with what's out there already. Scoble, winer et al have already had this conversation already. I think Scoble already pointed ok that the likes of CD, DVD, HDTV, TIVO, we're renamed to make them easier to swallow. Didn't someone already that dispite their names Google, Yahoo! and Flickr get used/consumed and worked with very nicely.
# October 9, 2005 4:34 PM

David Gong said:

I choose #4 b/c it looks most similar to what Firefox currently uses. We need to start standardizing icons in this industry.
# October 9, 2005 4:38 PM

Gemma said:

#4 it´s the best. RSS is just that: spreading information like a pulse, like a radio signal. Bip bip bip
# October 9, 2005 4:39 PM

Bill Brandon said:

I don't really think any of the five is great at communicating what RSS is about, but if these are the only five that are being/will be considered, I'd go with #3.

#1 says "splat!" to me. Good for pigeons and seagulls, but may communicate something other than intended.

#2 brings to mind some hand gestures that are considered obscene in many cultures.

#4 says "audio" to me. OK for podcasting, perhaps, but not for RSS in general.

#5 is just silly. Somebody called it "clown nose turban" which is certainly what it looks like.

I don't have a problem with the classic orange and white XML, but I do understand that it needs to be an icon, and it must mean something to people who are not geeks. According to the latest surveys, better than 80% of users don't know what RSS is (and will never care, either, if you ask me, although they love what it does).

Bill
# October 9, 2005 4:45 PM

Patricia said:

I also think that "RSS" is just fine... People around the world know lots of English words and initials; also, after all this time using RSS, learning a new icon could be weird.
# October 9, 2005 5:31 PM

Yannick Lejeune said:

Patricia > RSS doesn't work for ATOM feeds and be sure there could be other formats soon. I heard Microsoft will talk about "web feeds" so we could use feeds, but in France, we talk about "flux" and what about Chinese or Japanese. I say MS has strength to promote a new icon.

IE Team > You should go with #4 which looks like firefox one and is already known by many of us.
# October 9, 2005 7:34 PM

stark said:

I think no. 5 is good. The no. 4 has too much and too thin waves. The third seems to be good as well but maybe a point or a square instead of the spark would be better. Cheers
# October 9, 2005 7:46 PM

xiii said:

I vote #3.
# October 9, 2005 8:35 PM

Xepol said:

1,2,3 and 5 are meaningless to me. What is with the star???

I prefer 4, it definitely conveys the concept of a broadcast (what the f is with 5? I NEVER could figure out what that mangled bit of lines was suppose to be.)

Someone mentioned that it cuts the edges. Easily addressed with a border effect. Someone suggested it resembles volume iconography. Since IE doesn't have a volume control, and they are more pyramid in nature with no curves, I don't see it myself.

For the record, #2 REALLY sucks. It is a rectangle with a ring. Rings don't convey motion to me. In fact, to many people, they convey a stat