Pros of simple-icons

• Broader scope: Includes icons for various brands and technologies, not limited to browsers
• Larger collection: Offers over 2,000 icons compared to browser-logos' focus on browser logos
• SVG format: Provides scalable vector graphics for all icons

Cons of simple-icons

• Less specialized: May not have as detailed or specific browser logos as browser-logos
• Limited color options: Icons are typically monochrome, whereas browser-logos offers full-color versions
• Potentially overwhelming: Large collection may make it harder to find specific icons quickly

Code comparison

browser-logos:

<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/alrra/browser-logos/master/src/chrome/chrome.svg" width="48" height="48" alt="Chrome logo">

simple-icons:

<svg role="img" viewBox="0 0 24 24" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">
  <title>Google Chrome</title>
  <path d="M12 0C8.21 0 4.831 1.757 2.632 4.501l3.953 6.848A5.454 5.454 0 0 1 12 6.545h10.691A12 12 0 0 0 12 0zM1.931 5.47A11.943 11.943 0 0 0 0 12c0 6.012 4.42 10.991 10.189 11.864l3.953-6.847a5.45 5.45 0 0 1-6.865-2.29zm13.342 2.166a5.446 5.446 0 0 1 1.45 7.09l.002.001h-.002l-5.344 9.257c.206.01.413.016.621.016 6.627 0 12-5.373 12-12 0-1.54-.29-3.011-.818-4.364zM12 16.364a4.364 4.364 0 1 1 0-8.728 4.364 4.364 0 0 1 0 8.728Z"/>
</svg>

Pros of SuperTinyIcons

• Broader scope: Includes icons for various brands, not just browsers
• Extremely small file sizes: SVGs optimized for minimal size
• Consistent style across all icons

Cons of SuperTinyIcons

• Less detailed: Simplified designs may lack some visual elements
• Fewer browser-specific icons compared to browser-logos
• May not be suitable for applications requiring high-resolution images

Code Comparison

SuperTinyIcons (SVG example):

<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 512 512">
<path fill="#3DDC84" d="M380 ..."/>
</svg>

browser-logos (PNG usage example):

<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/alrra/browser-logos/main/src/chrome/chrome.png" width="64" height="64" alt="Chrome logo">

Summary

SuperTinyIcons offers a wide range of minimalist icons optimized for small file sizes, making it ideal for projects prioritizing performance and consistency across various brands. However, it may lack the detail and specific focus on browsers that browser-logos provides. browser-logos excels in offering high-quality, detailed browser icons but is limited to that specific category. The choice between the two depends on the project's requirements for icon variety, detail level, and file size constraints.

Pros of flag-icons

• Offers a wider variety of icons (flags for countries, states, and organizations)
• Provides multiple file formats (SVG, PNG, CSS sprites)
• Includes a convenient CSS framework for easy implementation

Cons of flag-icons

• Less focused on a specific niche (browser logos)
• May require more maintenance due to the larger number of icons
• Potentially larger file size when using the entire set

Code Comparison

flag-icons usage:

<span class="fi fi-gr"></span>
<i class="flag-icon flag-icon-gr"></i>

browser-logos usage:

<img src="chrome.svg" alt="Chrome logo">

Summary

While browser-logos focuses specifically on providing high-quality logos for web browsers, flag-icons offers a more extensive collection of flag icons for various purposes. flag-icons provides more flexibility in terms of file formats and implementation options, but this comes at the cost of a larger overall package and potentially more complex maintenance. The choice between the two repositories depends on the specific needs of the project, with browser-logos being more suitable for projects requiring browser-specific icons, and flag-icons offering a broader range of flag-related iconography.

Pros of devicons

• Broader scope, covering various developer tools and technologies beyond browsers
• Includes both icon fonts and SVG formats for flexibility
• Offers a wider variety of icons, making it suitable for more diverse projects

Cons of devicons

• Less frequently updated compared to browser-logos
• May have inconsistent styling across icons due to the broader scope
• Some icons might be less recognizable or standardized than browser logos

Code Comparison

browser-logos:

<img src="path/to/chrome.svg" alt="Chrome logo" width="32" height="32">

devicons:

<i class="devicon-chrome-plain"></i>

Key Differences

1. Focus: browser-logos concentrates specifically on browser logos, while devicons covers a wider range of developer-related icons.

2. Format: browser-logos primarily provides high-quality SVG and PNG files, whereas devicons offers both icon fonts and SVG formats.

3. Usage: browser-logos is typically used by directly referencing image files, while devicons can be implemented using CSS classes or SVG files.

4. Maintenance: browser-logos tends to be more frequently updated with the latest browser logos, while devicons has a broader scope but may have less frequent updates for individual icons.

5. Consistency: browser-logos maintains a high level of consistency in style and quality across its collection, while devicons may have some variations due to its diverse range of icons.