<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google&#8217;s Favicon Redesigned</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tylersticka.com/2009/01/googles-favicon/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tylersticka.com/2009/01/googles-favicon/</link>
	<description>Portfolio and journal of the award-winning designer, artist, speaker and educator specializing in web, icon and logo design, particularly in new media.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 10:41:45 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: John Brown</title>
		<link>http://tylersticka.com/2009/01/googles-favicon/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>John Brown</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 05:30:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tylersticka.com/?p=521#comment-13</guid>
		<description>Yes, the new icon is clunky to me and doesn&#039;t read at all as the Google brand I have grown to love over the years. So much so that I kept getting frustrated by my web browser because I kept glancing over the tabs and thinking I had closed the Google search tab again and again. Then, I stopped and observed, and realized what they had done.

I don&#039;t like it, not one bit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, the new icon is clunky to me and doesn&#8217;t read at all as the Google brand I have grown to love over the years. So much so that I kept getting frustrated by my web browser because I kept glancing over the tabs and thinking I had closed the Google search tab again and again. Then, I stopped and observed, and realized what they had done.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t like it, not one bit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tyler Sticka</title>
		<link>http://tylersticka.com/2009/01/googles-favicon/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>Tyler Sticka</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:14:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tylersticka.com/?p=521#comment-12</guid>
		<description>If you dig the old icon, you can use the Greasemonkey script on which mine is based, &lt;a href=&quot;http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/27548&quot; class=&quot;out&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Google&#039;s Old Favicon&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you dig the old icon, you can use the Greasemonkey script on which mine is based, <a href="http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/27548" class="out" rel="nofollow" class="out">Google&#8217;s Old Favicon</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matt lohkamp</title>
		<link>http://tylersticka.com/2009/01/googles-favicon/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>matt lohkamp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:03:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tylersticka.com/?p=521#comment-11</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re spot-on with the red-green thing - I hadn&#039;t realized it, but that&#039;s totally a factor in my dislik, along with a general &#039;don&#039;t fix it if it isn&#039;t broken&#039; mentality. I actually honestly liked the old capitol &#039;G&#039; - it was the first letter of their logo, plain and simple and recognizable. the lower-case &#039;g&#039; was a little more &#039;tech&#039; and &#039;2.0&#039;, but I didn&#039;t (and don&#039;t) think Google needed it - and the new one is just puzzlingly disappointing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re spot-on with the red-green thing &#8211; I hadn&#8217;t realized it, but that&#8217;s totally a factor in my dislik, along with a general &#8216;don&#8217;t fix it if it isn&#8217;t broken&#8217; mentality. I actually honestly liked the old capitol &#8216;G&#8217; &#8211; it was the first letter of their logo, plain and simple and recognizable. the lower-case &#8216;g&#8217; was a little more &#8216;tech&#8217; and &#8216;2.0&#8242;, but I didn&#8217;t (and don&#8217;t) think Google needed it &#8211; and the new one is just puzzlingly disappointing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
