Blah! What is so horribly wrong with Ubuntu's color?

[kaldor]

Why must everyone keep bashing Ubuntu's brown theme? Personally, I love it. I think it blends very well with Gnome.

"but i r h8 brown cuz brown r color of poo" comments get tiring after a while. It's also very immature.

Yellow's the color of ****.
Green's the color of snot/vomit.
Blue is the color your body turns when you are getting gagged.


If the color of Ubuntu bugs you so, soooo much... please change your theme/background.

Who else is tired of seeing topics saying that the official colors should be changed? What, should Ubuntu just join the bandwagon and make everything blue or chrome? What's wrong with being different?

Sorry, after seeing another topic elsewhere about this, I just had to make a rant.

<3 :)

[BGFG]

Huge +1!

Apparently System>>Preferences>>Appearance is just TOO much for some of them. But they all just ADORE the customizability of Linux.....

[TBOL3]

I sort of agree. I LOVE the brown theme, it's very easy on my eyes. However, I must say that it does look cheep. So, I say, keep the brown, but make things look nicer. For example, change the little waiting wheal (the one on your mouse courser), to be like Fedora's, but keep it in theme.

[speedwell68]

Huge +1!

Apparently System>>Preferences>>Appearance is just TOO much for some of them.

When setting up a new system, after I have everything installed and configured, that is the first place I visit. Ubuntu's default theme is truly awful, but I reckon they have done it that way to encourage customisation.:D

[simeon87]

They're working on a new design anyway for Karmic Koala :)

[Stavro]

I like Ubuntu’s brown colour scheme, there is nothing wrong with it. Anyone remember the “Desert” colour scheme on the Windows classic interface, it was one of the nicest there.

I think it’s important to have some level of contiguity between versions and an appearance distinctiveness associated with an operating system. It’s true, everyone else uses blue or chrome, this can get boring after a while. Brown signifies the Earth, soil, our home. I thought this Earthy thing is what Ubuntu was sort-of about. We all share the Earth, community etcetera.

[ivaarsen]

Of course it's nothing to complain or rant about. Simply change it. Like a previous poster mentioned, it's one of the first things I do. I happen to like the blue title bars, so that's what I change it to.

Just like in Windows XP, I always change it away from that cartoon-ish blue task bar with green start button to the classic windows theme. I won't even say it makes it look more professional, it's just how I like it. But I still don't complain about it!

[MikeTheC]

I don't particularly care for it, myself, but there's certainly been far, far worse out there.

Of course, I also don't care for the default font rendering, so that's one of the first things that gets tweaked when I customize a fresh install.

I think the overall look of any of the DEs (Gnome, KDE, XFCE, etc.) are all still a bit unrefined and kind of "toy"-ish. There's something about Apple's approach to icons (and, for that matter, the icons you generally see 3rd parties making for their Aqua apps) which just look more professional and, well... "grown up", for lack of a better term.

Hopefully Mark Shuttleworth's renewed interest and vigor for cleaning up and modernizing Ubuntu's visual appearance will extend into all the areas we're discussing in this thread. It would really be nice.

[OutOfReach]

I half agree. I think the color palette that Ubuntu uses is good but it's execution is a little cheap. If you know what I mean.

[Grant A.]

I half agree. I think the color palette that Ubuntu uses is good but it's execution is a little cheap. If you know what I mean.

+1

They could REALLY make something using the same color palette as the Ibex wallpaper.

[Onoskelis]

I'll disagree with you that Ubuntu's brown look is "pleasant". To me it looks cheap and childish.

First thing I did when I installed Ubuntu is applied an OS X Leapord themepack. I love it :P

[cmay]

I like Ubuntu’s brown colour scheme, there is nothing wrong with it. Anyone remember the “Desert” colour scheme on the Windows classic interface, it was one of the nicest there.

I think it’s important to have some level of contiguity between versions and an appearance distinctiveness associated with an operating system. It’s true, everyone else uses blue or chrome, this can get boring after a while. Brown signifies the Earth, soil, our home. I thought this Earthy thing is what Ubuntu was sort-of about. We all share the Earth, community etcetera.

i was just going to say someting like that. i love the brown color as it reminds me of nature. the default theme in ubuntu is very nice and pretty i think but i still replace it whit some background pictures i made myself just like my avatar and recently i am beginning to use a picture of a wolf instead. (the wolf gdm theme found on gnome art.org)

i think ubuntu should stay brown .

[maybeway36]

I like the brown theme. It's not really pretty or really ugly, it just lets me get work done.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

I just wish Ubuntu used more a coffee brown like Ubuntu was around Dapper and before, perhaps making more adventurous use of background colours in different widgets. Right now it's really more an orange colour scheme, and I think they're afraid to experiment with the tone because people are so vocal about their ridiculous distaste for one of the most prominent colours in nature.

You can find the official Ubuntu colour palette here, by the way:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Official

This thread made me throw together a rather decent Ubuntu Brown theme (with real brown, straight from the palette) using the Unity style. It feels pretty cool, so I've attached it :)

[Onoskelis]

I just wish Ubuntu used more a coffee brown like Ubuntu was around Dapper and before, perhaps making more adventurous use of background colours in different widgets. Right now it's really more an orange colour scheme, and I think they're afraid to experiment with the tone because people are so vocal about their ridiculous distaste for one of the most prominent colours in nature.

Between a lush green forest, clear blue sky, and a brown barren wasteland, which would people find more pleasant?

That's right. The forest and the clear blue sky. Brown is an unpleasant color.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

Between a lush green forest, clear blue sky, and a brown barren wasteland, which would people find more pleasant?

That's right. The forest and the clear blue sky. Brown is an unpleasant color.

You're missing the fact that a lot of forests, up close, are brown. As are people, many animals, wood sculptures, chocolate, books... Oh, and coffee. You're just being very selective in what you believe exists. Face it, that particular path of reasoning is completely flawed.

Come up with something a bit cleverer and maybe I'll start to understand.

[Onoskelis]

You're missing the fact that a lot of forests, up close, are brown. As are people, many animals, wood sculptures, chocolate, books... Oh, and coffee. You're just being very selective in what you believe exists. Face it, that particular path of reasoning is completely flawed.

Come up with something a bit cleverer and maybe I'll start to understand.

And after all that, Ubuntu's default theme is still unpleasant.

Seems like you're trying to hard to justify the brown.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

And after all that, Ubuntu's default theme is still unpleasant.

Seems like you're trying to hard to justify the brown.

Which is exactly what you are doing! Thus, you agree: Listing a few objects that happen to be a certain colour and expecting "because these objects happen to be hot pink coloured, people will like the colour on their desktop" will not get anyone anywhere. The end.

Now, what was this thread again? ... Oh right, the Ubuntu colour scheme appreciation thread.

[Rokurosv]

I think Ubuntu's default looks very cheap and plastic. The color is not that bothersome but another tone of brown would be nice.
Like I've said previously they should just make Dust the default look :P

[Dekkon]

Why must everyone keep bashing Ubuntu's brown theme? Personally, I love it. I think it blends very well with Gnome.

"but i r h8 brown cuz brown r color of poo" comments get tiring after a while. It's also very immature.

Yellow's the color of ****.
Green's the color of snot/vomit.
Blue is the color your body turns when you are getting gagged.


If the color of Ubuntu bugs you so, soooo much... please change your theme/background.

Who else is tired of seeing topics saying that the official colors should be changed? What, should Ubuntu just join the bandwagon and make everything blue or chrome? What's wrong with being different?

Sorry, after seeing another topic elsewhere about this, I just had to make a rant.

<3 :)

Everyone has there own opinion, I guess, but the ratio of people who find Blue/Green Or Brown a more pleasant color is about 1000:1. I guess it's improving though, there using lighter browns and getting more colors but brown isn't for most people.

Compare this
http://homepage.mac.com/dtgordon25/.Pictures/dggraphics_dt.jpg
to
http://techpark6.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/ubuntu804.jpg

your on your own opinion but I think most would agree that a blend of more brighter, vibrant, blues and greens make people just generally more happy and thrilled, and let's just not get started on that crap called tango.

[qamelian]

And after all that, Ubuntu's default theme is still unpleasant.

Seems like you're trying to hard to justify the brown.

You're entitled to your opinion, but some people, including myself, do like the brown theme. I do find them pleasant and very easy on the eyes. On the other hand, blue themes have been done to death and I find most of them very dull. As for green...well, I dislike the colour green the same way you dislike brown. I find absolutely nothing pleasant about the colour. Ubuntu's brown themes are, to me, visually striking and separate Ubuntu from the rest of the Linux "herd".

[Bart_D]

I don't care what it looks like. I DO care when it gives me trouble.

I hope they ignore the theme and focus on hardware compatibility instead.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

Everyone has there own opinion, I guess, but the ratio of people who find Blue/Green Or Brown a more pleasant color is about 1000:1. I guess it's improving though, there using lighter browns and getting more colors but brown isn't for most people.

Compare this
http://homepage.mac.com/dtgordon25/.Pictures/dggraphics_dt.jpg
to
http://techpark6.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/ubuntu804.jpg

your on your own opinion but I think most would agree that a blend of more brighter, vibrant, blues and greens make people just generally more happy and thrilled, and let's just not get started on that crap called tango.

What makes MacOS look awesome is less a matter of colour scheme (although I'm not big on the brown / orange wallpapers; I currently have the Ubuntu Studio Audio background set). MacOS looks awesome because of its use of space. They know how to arrange things so that they look tidy and consistent, whereas if you look at the GNOME panel the icons are often different sizes, and the bigger ones jam right up to the edges. It looks very harsh. Changing the colours does not make that look any less harsh. I can invert the colours of MacOS and it will still look nice.

The pending annihilation of the panel as we know it (just a matter of time) and the upcoming theming API (which will hopefully have very smart context-sensitive widgets!) may remedy those issues if they get enough love and attention.

[I-75]

I guess some feel that a premier first rate Linux distro like Ubuntu deserves to have something better than "poo" brown. I kind of agree, but then again in 5 seconds one could easily change the desktop background to something else.

But the best looking desktop background I have ever seen is in Knoppix 5.3... Check out my avatar.

[BGFG]

The panel is going ? crap. *#!@ docks.

Back to the thread, i agree with Mr. Picklesworth, it's not so much the colour as it is the structure of the system. No such this as a professional colour, but definitely a professional 'Look'.

I like Gnome, I find it very functional. If 3.0 throws in some polish, colour me happier with it.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

The panel is going ? crap. *#!@ docks.

Sorry, I should back that up. Docks aren't coming in; everyone loves the panel as a user interface idea so that isn't going anywhere. It's just that the existing gnome-panel is based on the completely deprecated Bonobo framework, and it kind of sucks to build applets for it.
Besides which, the concept of a panel applet has turned into a bizarre mess. While there are some sensible applets like choices of disk mounters and window switchers, the thing is mostly home to tiny applications like timers which are too simple to justify existing on the main menu. The distinction is absurd.

There is interesting work going toward a GNOME Shell which has some really interesting movement towards removing the distinction between a running process and a closed one. The shell (if / when it appears) will probably replace the existing panel with something a bit more rigid. (Thus more closely designed, allowing for that consistent use of space).

[BGFG]

Sorry, I should back that up. Docks aren't coming in; everyone loves the panel as a user interface idea so that isn't going anywhere. It's just that the existing gnome-panel is based on the completely deprecated Bonobo framework, and it kind of sucks to build applets for it.
Besides which, the concept of a panel applet has turned into a bizarre mess. While there are some sensible applets like choices of disk mounters and window switchers, the thing is mostly home to tiny applications like timers which are too simple to justify existing on the main menu. The distinction is absurd.

There is interesting work going toward a GNOME Shell which has some really interesting movement towards removing the distinction between a running process and a closed one. The shell (if / when it appears) will probably replace the existing panel with something a bit more rigid. (Thus more closely designed, allowing for that consistent use of space).

I like the idea. My main problem with docks is the fact that they are separate entities with individual memory requirements.
Prefer tighter shell integration with lower memory usage.

[Kopachris]

I personally like Ubuntu's color scheme. To me, it goes well with the whole idea of "ubuntu" and makes me think of coffee, which is a good way to wake up in the morning. I do prefer the older wallpapers, though. I wasn't too thrilled with Intrepid's wallpaper.

[73ckn797]

Why must everyone keep bashing Ubuntu's brown theme? Personally, I love it. I think it blends very well with Gnome.


There is where it all resides, in the personal preference. Some people think that all others should do things and think things their way or they are ........ (insert your own comment).

[JoshuaRL]

Brown can be wonderful. The UPS commercials tell us that. But then why not use color schemes that bring to mind brown things that make us happy: chocolate, caramel, and coffee. And real oranges are delicious, zesty, and energizing. But the orange color scheme used by Ubuntu is flat and sleepy. Kind of like an old crayon. Something brighter and more citrisy would be a welcome change. If the default brown reminds people of poop, don't make the colors drab and uninviting. Appealing to subconscious visual cues works. If it didn't, all of advertising would be worthless.

[bodhi.zazen]

moved to recurring discussions.

Personally I thing the brown is a nice alternate to Blue, which is boring, kind of like blue suit, white shirt, red tie.

At any rate, if you do not like the defaults, change them. Most people customize their OS anyway, so it hardly matters really.

If you do not like the artwork perhaps you would like to submit some yourself. Otherwise it is rude to criticize those who have done this for you.

[blueshiftoverwatch]

Green's the color of snot/vomit.
As for the vomit it really depends on what you've been eating beforehand.

[Simian Man]

I think the problem is that Ubuntu is generally good for users new to Linux. When I put a Live CD into their drive, I want them to see something nicer to look at than that brown mess. As it is I tell them "Don't judge Linux because this is so ugly, we can fix it."

[73ckn797]

As for the vomit it really depends on what you've been eating beforehand.
Excellent point!!

[DougieFresh4U]

Brown can be wonderful. The UPS commercials tell us that. But then why not use color schemes that bring to mind brown things that make us happy: chocolate, caramel, and coffee. And real oranges are delicious, zesty, and energizing. But the orange color scheme used by Ubuntu is flat and sleepy. Kind of like an old crayon. Something brighter and more citrisy would be a welcome change. If the default brown reminds people of poop, don't make the colors drab and uninviting. Appealing to subconscious visual cues works. If it didn't, all of advertising would be worthless.

+1
A refreshing thought you gave.

[73ckn797]

I think the problem is that Ubuntu is generally good for users new to Linux. When I put a Live CD into their drive, I want them to see something nicer to look at than that brown mess. As it is I tell them "Don't judge Linux because this is so ugly, we can fix it."
Maybe the different color gives a new user the sense that this is something different. That would be a possible first impression.

[kaldor]

Maybe the different color gives a new user the sense that this is something different. That would be a possible first impression.

That is exactly what happened to me when I first tried Linux :)

[Kopachris]

That is exactly what happened to me when I first tried Linux :)
Ditto. And to this day, I still have fond memories of when I first booted an Ubuntu LiveCD, saw the nice brown/orange colors and heard the African drum login sound. It was something different, something warm and comforting. It wasn't the same old blue plastic or Windows XP or the grey plastic/blue crystal of Mac OS X. I think the warm, comforting colors captured the spirit of ubuntu quite well. Of course, not everyone associates colors the same way. I do think that the colors should be kept as the default, though.

[JoshuaRL]

Sorry, I should back that up. Docks aren't coming in; everyone loves the panel as a user interface idea so that isn't going anywhere. It's just that the existing gnome-panel is based on the completely deprecated Bonobo framework, and it kind of sucks to build applets for it.
Besides which, the concept of a panel applet has turned into a bizarre mess. While there are some sensible applets like choices of disk mounters and window switchers, the thing is mostly home to tiny applications like timers which are too simple to justify existing on the main menu. The distinction is absurd.

There is interesting work going toward a GNOME Shell which has some really interesting movement towards removing the distinction between a running process and a closed one. The shell (if / when it appears) will probably replace the existing panel with something a bit more rigid. (Thus more closely designed, allowing for that consistent use of space).

That's really awesome. Do you have any links that detail some the choices being made? I read an Ars Technica article (http://arstechnica.com/software/news/2009/01/dock-and-windows-7-taskbar.ars) that detailed the application icon differences between OSX and Windows. (i.e. running versus non-running apps and windows versus applications) And while reading that, I realized that Linux suffers from the same kind of feature-creep related problems deciding how things should run.

The problem for Linux is that different DEs have different application standards. So it's gonna be hard to reconcile if you start mandating the way all GUI applications should run and interact. But Ubuntu and Mark Shuttleworth have never been the kind to shy away from taking a stand. Should be interesting.

[qamelian]

I think the problem is that Ubuntu is generally good for users new to Linux. When I put a Live CD into their drive, I want them to see something nicer to look at than that brown mess. As it is I tell them "Don't judge Linux because this is so ugly, we can fix it."

This is funny, because the Ubuntu colour scheme is one of the things that immediately appealed to me and made me think "These guys are thinking different". I find the brown / orange themes very attractive, and even if I occasionally use a different theme for the sake of some variety, I always come back to my old favourite: Human.

[WatchingThePain]

Brown is the colour of most Anoraks lol.
Gotta go spot some trains..

[lykwydchykyn]

I gotta admit I'm not a big fan of the brown theme. But I respect Ubuntu for doing something different. Before Ubuntu, pretty much every OS's default color scheme was some kind of blue/grey/teal/silver combination. Vista has added black to the reperatoire, but even so brown is pretty far off the beaten path from traditional default desktop colors.

I think that's good. Back in my music business days, people always said it's not as important to have amazing technical abilities as it is to have a well-defined and developed sound of your own. It sets you apart. That doesn't mean you can get away with sloppy execution (that would be the "well-developed" part), but it gives you somewhere to focus your energies.

So the earth-tone thing definitely sets Ubuntu apart; they ought to develop and refine that look rather than jumping ship and doing the usual blue/black/silver/grey thing.

[WatchingThePain]

This guy likes earthy stuff too..

[73ckn797]

I always come back to my old favourite: Human.

Just cannot get away from what you are (GRIN)!!:cool:

[NintendoTogepi]

I don't like the brown. I would like a nice orange/yellow/cream theme. I remember seeing a nice one a while back but can't remember the name.

[kaldor]

I always come back to my old favourite: Human.

Same with me, except I have my own Ubuntuish theme. I use the gutsy wallpaper, change the icons to "Tangerine" and change the window border to clearlooks. I love it :)

[tsali]

I used to think the default theme was ugly...but I really couldn't find a theme set that was as well put together as "human", so it has been what I've been using for months.

Here's what gets weird; now that I'm used to it, when I try a MacOS X or Vista theme, it just looks wrong.

So, my conclusion is that it becomes a matter of what you get used to.

That said, I do like photo-realistic icons...

[ikisham]

As for the people saying 'it's just customizing', i say: only now (after a couple of months of use) I'm noticing that pretty much can be customizable in respect to themes and colours. And besides not caring much for that what made me take so long to discover it?
Go to 'themes' and you find dark blue, light blue, purple etc. then go to 'background' and there's even that plain brown/ocre colour as an option (!!) but no 'oficial' wallpaper to match the themes offered, just brown ones. So ubuntu makes a choice and that's why people rebel. Ok, brown is the default colour, but give people alternative backgrounds to match the themes. Simple, it wont be so imposing.
Btw, I think the default theme is discrete and ok (Hardy's heron is a beautiful artwork).