4 ms·
I suspect because they're trying to align to some type of grid. (Even spacing between icons would require 39px of separation, and the odd numbering probably th
by rkudeshi 15y ago
I suspect because they're trying to align to some type of grid.
(Even spacing between icons would require 39px of separation, and the odd numbering probably throws something off.)
- naz 15y agoRight, on iPhone 4 it would be 39 pixels but on iPhone 3GS and lower it would be 19.5 pixels, which would require the icons to be aliased and blurry.
- gcb 15y agoUh? Just normalize 35 on the borders and keep 38 on icons. What am I missing for this to be more complicated?
- buddydvd 15y agoYou mean 37 pixels? (640-(4*114))/5 = 36.8 pixels. I wonder why they didn't choose this instead: 38+36+36+36+38 That would be most evenly spaced, symmetrical, and compatible with non-retina displays.
- sirn 15y agoApp titles. You can have less margin on the edge since you don't have to considers the app title length from the other side.
- buddydvd 15y agoAh, that makes perfect sense. I guess, this would be pointless: 36+38+36+38+36 (18+19+18+19+18) since the 2nd and 3rd icon wouldn't get the benefit of the extra spacing. So the reasonable option would be: 34+38+40+38+34 (17+19+20+19+17)