On June 2, 2007, I received an e-mail requesting that I add 128×128 and 256×256 pixel icons to the .ICO resource Bradicon creates. I added them on Bradicon’s dev site, and replied that same day, but have yet to receive an email back. I didn’t end up publishing the changes to Bradicon.

That was a long time ago!

Luke brought it up again last night, and I started to think about it. The changes to the code would be super, super easy. I am a little worried that people may be upset if their icons are suddenly ~22 times as large in file size, which is a substantial increase. ~0.3 MB seems excessive for a favicon.

It really comes down to what people are using the icons for, and it looks like a lot of them are as custom shortcuts for their desktops. For many of these people, the additional sizes will be useful and the increased file size should not be an issue.

On the other hand, I use Bradicon to create favicons and, on rare occassions, application icons. I’m sure some percent of people use it for this same purpose, but (based on the sites that link to Bradicon) I suspect that percent is small.

One option is to add a checkbox that says something along the lines of Add large icons, and have it default to checked. While this offers more flexibility, it will also increase the complexity of the interface. I’ve always kind of felt that one of Bradicon’s strong points was its ease-of-use.

I’ve added a box to Bradicon asking people if they’d welcome the addition. Rather than find a poll system, I’ve added some javascript to the links which will send result page views to Google Analytics.

When users click the links, nothing happens. This is something I should probably change. I could perhaps, replace the links with a Thanks for your input-style message.

I probably won’t do this. If someone really wants their input taken, and clicks the link a bunch of times, I think I am cool with that. That seems like semi-useful information. Also, I am lazy.