articleJanuary 5, 2026
It's Hard to Justify Tahoe Icons
Adding icons to every menu item defeats their purpose—differentiation requires scarcity, and when everything has an icon, nothing stands out.
Summary
Prokopov critiques Apple's decision to add icons to every menu item in macOS Tahoe. The core argument: icons exist to differentiate, and adding them universally eliminates that benefit. He backs this up with the 1992 Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines, which state icons should "identify dissimilar concepts."
Key Points
- Differentiation requires scarcity: When every menu item has an icon, none stand out. The visual marker loses its purpose.
- Inconsistency undermines recognition: Different icons represent identical operations across apps (multiple "New" variants), while identical icons mean different things.
- Size kills detail: Icons render at 12×12 pixels. Apple uses vector fonts instead of pixel-perfect bitmaps, resulting in blurry, illegible details.
- Weak metaphors confuse rather than clarify: Many icons use imagery that doesn't help users understand the action—violating HIG principles about metaphor clarity.
- Scale makes perfection impossible: There aren't enough good metaphors for every conceivable action. The ambition was flawed from the start.
Connections
No directly related notes in the knowledge base yet—this is the first entry on icon design and Apple's HIG.