I am looking forward to seeing them. The sizes should be good.

For me personally, Icons customization has been making a comeback with how I use them with Start 11. Super easy to change them as I have a whole folder now just for tiles / icons which I use for the windows 11 theme. I know there is still a demand for more traditional icon customization as well as everyone uses their pc differently. This is just how I am using them.

Thanks for your reply. I have found that on Windows 10 with an icon that only includes the 256x256 32 bit size scales automatically to fit all the views mentioned above. Is it really necessary to include all the different sizes in the icon? I do have a 4K monitor, so maybe that makes a difference?

Well that's open to opinion and whether your eyes can tell the difference. When you take a 256x256 image and rescale it to 16x16 it definitely affects the quality. All my lower res icons end up with blurred outlines - 32, 24 and 16 - and that's why the format of an icon allows you to include separate images in the file. I hated the rescaled versions of my 256 icons and redid them for all the other resolutions so that all the lines were good at all the resolutions.

 Here's how rescaled versions of the 256x256 icon (on the left) looked compared to the individually created versions (on the right)... These are 256 rescaled to 48, 32, 24 and 16px. 

Thank you for these comparisons. I agree that individual sizing is better on some icons, but OS scaled sizing is okay on others. Microsoft includes 256x256-32, 64x64-32, 48x48-32, 40x40-32, 32x32-32, 24x24-32, 20x20-32, and 16x16-32 sizes with their system icons. I recently updated the Text icon by replacing the white paper with canary and the gray ruled lines with blue. Allowing the OS to scale down from 256x256-32 results in unacceptable results. I had to go in and recreate the different sizes to get the ruled lines to look right. However, on your example of the This PC icon, I can't really see the difference on my 4K monitor.