Ubuntu SHIPPED more polished ??

[ddastoor]

ubuntu is my fav. distro and looks like it will remain so for a long time.. ok, having said that, please read on..

I'm sure there are pretty good reasons for this and I just want to know what they possibly are ...

Why can't the folks at cannonical ship ubuntu with an extremely POLISHED theme and look and feel to begin with ? Specially for a company like Cannolical that I believe does pay attention to a good user experience ?

I'm pretty sure that many users spend significant amounts of time jazzing up their look and feel just after they first install Ubuntu... as there are a lot of folks out there who would, say be sublimely happy if the shipped version of ubuntu looked like (ok don't kill me here) vista ... ???


Here are possible philosophy options/reasons/rationales:
1) This is Linux. We make it work well. you then can go an make it fancy
2) That's not our department... that's gnome's.. it's flexible, go play with it yourself ...
3) If you want REALLY fancy, use kde.
4) Diff people want diff look and feels, so we just provide a vanilla version anyway..
5) Tacit understanding with the guys at gnome-look ?
6) hey, if we did everything for you, then where's the fun left, huhn ? this is linux, the programmer's sandbox, the customizer's playground...


Do you believe that any reasons are in 1 - 6 ? or u don't care either way or any other reason..

i'd be happy to hear what u guys think ...

[3Miro]

Define "Polished".

[beew]

I like the purple -orange theme. I would like to have a replacement for emerald (I can still install it but the project is dead)

I think for some people, "polished" is just an excuse to look like WIndows, with the dull light blue background with clouds and something stupid like that, I wouldn't go for that.

[Timmer1240]

I get a lot of fun out of making it look like I want it its just fun to install new themes Icons and wallpapers to get your own look!Anyways Im running mint debian right now and it looks nothing like Mint anymore!Polished is what YOU want!

[coolglobal]

The points listed seem ok. It amazes me the amount of theming done to ape windows rather than break new ground. Dude, if you like Vista, just use it.

[XubuRoxMySox]

Yessir! Polish it yourself - your way - here's all the tools, a paintbrush, an icon set (and access to lots more), go play!

My Xubuntu doesn't look anything like the already-nicely-polished (IMO) out of the box Xubu. In fact I changed all the icons just for grins, pushed my Xpanel to one side (a salute to Unity on Xfce, lol) and gave it "dock-like" functionality (screenshot).

-Robin

[Bandit]

Does this look polished enough?

New version will be released in a few days or so. Got 2 Finals and 2 other test this week.. Have patience..

Current Gnome Legacy 2.0 theme info can be found here.. (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=10992808#post10992808)

[sffvba[e0rt]

The default look of Ubuntu does seem to be striking enough for most non-linux users to take notice of how nice and polished it looks...

And with the ability to install all the required codecs etc. for music, video and flash at install time it safeguards Canonical and still makes it easy for users...

I think Ubuntu deserves a :KS...


404

[Legendary_Bibo]

Ubuntu default theme looks like vomit to me, and the orange icons bug my eyes. There's color schemes that work great for computers, and yet Canonical chooses purple and orange. Awesome.

[Famicube64]

Ubuntu's theme looks great. Well, it did in 2008.

[cgroza]

Ubuntu's theme looks great. Well, it did in 2008.
You just reminded me of the cool Hardy Heron wallpaper. I am going to find it. I miss it already.

[ddastoor]

polished as in it looks like Vista, or say, gnome-look's "Slickness Black" with the bugs ironed out.... ??

[ddastoor]

Dude, if you like Vista, just use it.
i hate vista and will continue to use ubuntu...
just talking about the look and feel...

[ddastoor]

It amazes me the amount of theming done to ape windows


that's my point.. maybe it's this human need for slick and polished looking things..

ubuntu's kind of like getting an ordinary looking car with a ferrari engine and awesome interiors, and a do-it-yourself kit for the exteriors..

all im asking is why can't they ship it with one version of slickness ?

[Legendary_Bibo]

that's my point.. maybe it's this human need for slick and polished looking things..

ubuntu's kind of like getting an ordinary looking car with a ferrari engine and awesome interiors, and a do-it-yourself kit for the exteriors..

all im asking is why can't they ship it with one version of slickness ?

And it's missing a wheel and windows.

[Bandit]

that's my point.. maybe it's this human need for slick and polished looking things..

ubuntu's kind of like getting an ordinary looking car with a ferrari engine and awesome interiors, and a do-it-yourself kit for the exteriors..

all im asking is why can't they ship it with one version of slickness ?

The default theme isnt bad. Its actually quite good. But it doesnt fit everyone. Same with the crazy mac position buttons.. They dont fit everyone.. Ubuntu should ship with at least 5 of the top best themes submitted by the members of this forum community. Not just 1 or 2 and a bunch of old ones no one really uses much.

[wolfen69]

Ubuntu seems polished enough to me. If you need it to be different, just do it yourself.

[beew]

Ubuntu default theme looks like vomit to me, and the orange icons bug my eyes. There's color schemes that work great for computers, and yet Canonical chooses purple and orange. Awesome.

It works great for me, love it, I actually went out of my way to install the purple-orange Ubuntu theme in my test Xubuntu install, the default themes just too Windowzy for me. It is not that the orange-purple doesn't work for computers, just doesn't work for you so get over it.

[beew]

that's my point.. maybe it's this human need for slick and polished looking things..


No, just some people have a need for familiar looking things.

[Legendary_Bibo]

It works great for me, love it, I actually went out of my way to install the purple-orange Ubuntu theme in my test Xubuntu install, the default themes just too Windowzy for me. It is not that the orange-purple doesn't work for computers, just doesn't work for you so get over it.

Light shades of blue and gray are actually easier on the eyes (which is why monitors are set 6500k+ for office settings to help with eye strain). Green even works. Unless you stare at the sun or orange groves, orange isn't a natural color to look at all the time. The purple and black works fine though. Not the best, but decent.

[Bandit]

Light shades of blue and gray are actually easier on the eyes (which is why monitors are set 6500k+ for office settings to help with eye strain). Green even works. Unless you stare at the sun or orange groves, orange isn't a natural color to look at all the time. The purple and black works fine though. Not the best, but decent.

Very very true..

[wolfen69]

The default theme isnt bad. Its actually quite good. But it doesnt fit everyone.

What theme would? They could change it to any number of things, but it could never make everyone happy. It is what it is, and is easy enough to change.

[beew]

Light shades of blue and gray are actually easier on the eyes (which is why monitors are set 6500k+ for office settings to help with eye strain). Green even works. Unless you stare at the sun or orange groves, orange isn't a natural color to look at all the time. The purple and black works fine though. Not the best, but decent.

Light shades of blue just because it is Windows' trademark colour and people are used to it, I never like it. I even used wall paper with different colours when I was using Windows.

Green is like Mint, never like it, it is just plain ugly for me.

I don't know when you will see orange except for buttons, some icons and progress bars when say you are installing something. I like the contrast so that you are not looking at a big haze (yes folder icons are orange but chances are you will be looking at what are inside instead of staring at the icon for prolong period)

P.S. I am also not sure why you would be staring at a blank desktop for a very very long period enough for the small amount of orange highlight to burn your eyes.

[wolfen69]

P.S. I am also not sure why you would be staring at a blank desktop for a very very long period enough for the small amount of orange highlight to burn your eyes.

That's a great point. It makes you wonder if people actually get anything done on their computer, as opposed to staring at the default layout for hours. ;)

[NightwishFan]

Ubuntu's theme looks great. Well, it did in 2008.
People can say what they want but I loved the human look. :) It suited it and make it apparent what system it was.

[Legendary_Bibo]

Light shades of blue just because it is Windows' trademark colour and people are used to it, I never like it. I even used wall paper with different colours when I was using Windows.

](*,)

[Thewhistlingwind]

Green is like Mint, never like it, it is just plain ugly for me.


The green on mint's homepage (Not sure if it's still the same, it probably is.) was so beautiful I went ahead and learned it's hex value in case I ever needed a pretty green.

While one shouldn't make the mistake of treating all art as equal. (There IS a such thing as good and bad taste!) It's just as much an error to believe that all people interpret it the same.

[ddastoor]

@dixiedancer, your screenshot looks pretty impressive ... ;) ...

[ddastoor]

.... Ubuntu should ship with at least 5 of the top best themes submitted by the members of this forum community. Not just 1 or 2 and a bunch of old ones no one really uses much.


i coudn'dt agree more .. kind of getting to the spirit of my original post..

[lucazade]

If more polished means osx or win7 themes, no thanks. We don't need those kind of interfaces.

For sure a new complete and consistent iconset is needed for the next LTS (no humanity/elementary, faenza or awoken, these are only amateurish iconsets)

[ninjaaron]

I re-theme stuff pretty often, so it's not a big deal for me... However, at the very least, Faenza icons should be in the official repos, if not installed by default (not as the default icon set, but as an option right off the bat). They are easily the most polished icon set for the Linux desktop. They come default on Mint, and they are in the repos for most other distros.

[Linuxratty]

The points listed seem ok. It amazes me the amount of theming done to ape windows rather than break new ground. Dude, if you like Vista, just use it.


Well said.
Why in the world would I want it to look like Vista? One of the reasons I use Linus is cause it does not look like Windows.
If I want a Windows look,I'd just use Windows and be done with it.
As to themes,part of the fun a distro provides for me is to create my own themes and change them as I wish..And no,I don't choose Windows look alike themes. I used Windows for years and I really don't want to see it again.

[IWantFroyo]

that's my point.. maybe it's this human need for slick and polished looking things..

ubuntu's kind of like getting an ordinary looking car with a ferrari engine and awesome interiors, and a do-it-yourself kit for the exteriors..

all im asking is why can't they ship it with one version of slickness ?

That's what Unity was supposed to be. If you have the regular installation of Ubuntu and a good graphics card, you probably are browsing from it right now (are there a bunch of square icons on the side of your screen).

1) It isn't the most customizable.

2) It uses a lot of developer effort that could be squashing bugs and making Ubuntu faster

3) A lot of people can't run it (poor graphics card)

4) Canonical doesn't actually do any development. This is a community distro.

[ddastoor]

Well said.
Why in the world would I want it to look like Vista? One of the reasons I use Linus is cause it does not look like Windows.
.....
.....


I cited vista only as an example of a polished look and feel, i might as well have said OS X or gnome-look.org's "Slickness black" (but it kind of renders LibreOffice unusable, but that's a different story)

[ddastoor]

... you probably are browsing from it right now ...
....
....



no, i moved to classic gnome already...

[Bandit]

What theme would?
Nothing will. The old saying goes, you cant make everyone happy, but you can sure **** everyone off.. :D

The default is good theme, I think we just need more themes that are equally of quality for everyone to choose from. Not one or two that are good and a pile of outdated ones no one really uses. Lets ditch the old ones that ships with Ubuntu (like redmond!!) and replace it with top themes contributed by the community here that are please to the eyes, compatible as possible and over all very usable for everyday work. I originally said top 5 themes, but 10 to 12 of the top themes would take up very very little space and would be a great way to get the community involved and make more people feel more appreciated for their contributions.

[3Miro]

+1 on more theme support.

Unfortunately with the new GTK3, 11.10 would have hardly any themes other than the default one.

[Bandit]

+1 on more theme support.

Unfortunately with the new GTK3, 11.10 would have hardly any themes other than the default one.

Isnt GTK3 Libs backwards compatible with existing GTK2 themes?
I am not for sure becuz its been a long time but I think GTK1 is with GTK2 Libs. Thats why I ask.

[beew]

I cited vista only as an example of a polished look and feel


How is Vista an example of "polished look"?? It is butt ugly.

That just shows that your point is entirely subjective, just because your aesthetics is conditioned by MS it doesn't make it an objective fact.

[Bandit]

How is Vista an example of "polished look"?? It is butt ugly.
....

Your point is subjective also. Vista was very nice looking not by opinion as much as it was easy to read the fonts and very easy to see the buttons on applications as well as the launcher and taskbar. They so screwed the pooch on this with Win7. I have a hard time seeing buttons and the menu isnt as clear on Win7. I really wished they would have included the Vista theme with Win7.

The point is something can be extremely beautiful and hideous for everyday usage at the same time.

[beew]

Your point is subjective also.

Yes of course my point is subjective, but I didn't start a thread in MS forum and say Vista is butt ugly and that they must do a, b and c as if it is an established fact.

I don't share your enthusiasm with Vista's look at all, I have worked with it enough even though I never use it myself because I trouble shoot for other people. i hate the whole MS trade mark look. Some people like cliche' soulless commercial art and called it "polished", I prefer the authenticity of indie style mural and graffiti.

[Bandit]

Yes of course my point is subjective, but I didn't start a thread in MS forum and say Vista is butt ugly and that they must do a, b and c as if it is an established fact.

I don't share your enthusiasm with Vista's look at all, I have worked with it enough even though I never use it myself because I trouble shoot for other people. i hate the whole MS trade mark look. Some people like cliche' soulless commercial art and called it "polished", I prefer the authenticity of indie style mural and graffiti.

There are many things I look for in theme design, but these 3 are most important.
- Clarity
- Easy of use
- Effects on the eyes and body
Vistas Aero theme meets those categories. It was very clear to see, easy to use and its good use of contrast and color made it easy on the body and eyes after many hours of usage. Win7 on the other hand, its buttons and dialog backgrounds dont contrast well together at all.

I am not familiar with the indie style you speak of, or at least I dont think I am. But if those themes meet the 3 categories list above, then I am sure there are many good themes as well. But just the same we can visit gnome-look.org and 98% of the themes there dont meet the 3 categories listed, but fools there think most of them are great looking.

These two screenshots are what I consider Polished looking and they are still work in progress. Eh.. its my theme btw.. hehe :KS

[Legendary_Bibo]

Yes of course my point is subjective, but I didn't start a thread in MS forum and say Vista is butt ugly and that they must do a, b and c as if it is an established fact.

I don't share your enthusiasm with Vista's look at all, I have worked with it enough even though I never use it myself because I trouble shoot for other people. i hate the whole MS trade mark look. Some people like cliche' soulless commercial art and called it "polished", I prefer the authenticity of indie style mural and graffiti.

http://www.collegeflavor.com/ProductImages/girls_dwight137.jpg

What is an "indie" style type theme. That's not even a description. The "mural and graffiti" description you gave only makes sense as far as wallpapers.

[ddastoor]

How is Vista an example of "polished look"?? It is butt ugly.

That just shows that your point is entirely subjective, just because your aesthetics is conditioned by MS it doesn't make it an objective fact.

Well, maybe but there are degrees to everything... Within a loosely defined band, there IS such a thing as "absolute beauty" and "absolute ugliness", if you will, for example if u take an opinion poll (barring a few exceptions in minority), u'll see what i mean:

1) Which is more sleek and polished? box-car.jpg or lambo.jpg (see attachments)

2) I bet my last few bucks that if kde were as fast as gnome, there'll be many switch overs...

3) There are sights like: polishlinux.org/

Subjectivty, then, within the bands of this basic-ugly and basic-good-looking "absoluteness", is then a question of one's personal leeway ...

[Legendary_Bibo]

Yes of course my point is subjective, but I didn't start a thread in MS forum and say Vista is butt ugly and that they must do a, b and c as if it is an established fact.

I don't share your enthusiasm with Vista's look at all, I have worked with it enough even though I never use it myself because I trouble shoot for other people. i hate the whole MS trade mark look. Some people like cliche' soulless commercial art and called it "polished", I prefer the authenticity of indie style mural and graffiti.

It seriously sounds like you hate Vista/Win 7's theme just because it's something that Microsoft designed.

It's practical and it works, and is consistent and isn't bad on the eyes.

[Brandel Valico]

Bandit I would appreciate knowing how you achieved that theme. It's darn near perfect as far as I can see.

[Copper Bezel]

I was really, genuinely shocked how much I warmed to the Unity interface when I saw it with the Elementary theme applied. Ambiance and Radiance seem dark, brooding, and overwrought to me. I'm in love with Orta, but I use it with a lot of settings tweaks and Elementary-style window control buttons.

I do think it's odd that the default themes included with Ubuntu are so antiquated, although that will change with the jump to GTK3 in Oneiric. It would have been nice to have Elementary and Orta, particularly, available in the repos or installed by default (with the corresponding icon themes.)

I feel like Microsoft's themes have traditionally been attractive at a glance but too busy and loud for extended use, and it starts to feel like a perpetual marketing pitch. OSX's Aqua is much better at conveying information simply and without fuss, and I don't think it's coincidental that it comes from a company that makes simplicity itself the brand.

Ambiance is more after Microsoft's model; just a bit too much going on. The subtler, understated, readable themes seem more "professional" or "polished" to me. There are themes that sway too far in the opposite direction - eschewing clear separations between sections of a form, reducing everything to outlines on black, using monochrome icons that are hard to read at a glance, and so on - and those do seem amateurish to me, even if they're starting from the right idea.

I used to change themes quite a bit, but there are a couple I've stuck on for ages, and I haven't switched from Orta since I tried it. It's all about the details that make the readability really work. Orta's all grays, but the shading and curves that indicate, for instance, the edges of input areas really make the whole thing work.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17749392/Screenshots/110728/details-thumb.png (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17749392/Screenshots/110728/details.png)

To me, it's the same with, say, the window decorator: shadows and even anti-aliasing on the curves are more important than transparency, because they're things that contribute to a finished-looking product and actually aid readability.

Edit: And ddastoor, I actually prefer the truck, if I'm honest. = )

[el_koraco]

Anybody see the mockup for Advaita in Gnome 3.2? Transparent window decorations and stuff. They just need to make some rounded corners, and it's gonna rock.

Win7 Aero is cool because of the programming interface. It's helpful for applications like Chrome or Firefox to be able to ditch the window title bar, and fuse with the glass. Saves space, and looks way better than anything you can do in Linux or OSX.

[BeRoot ReBoot]

Ubuntu doesn't "ship", it slips from the clutch of the release team, always seemingly prematurely released into the crowd of rabid fanboys and haters who'll argue over the tiniest detail of what went disastrously wrong / absolutely perfect with the latest release.

[qamelian]

Well, maybe but there are degrees to everything... Within a loosely defined band, there IS such a thing as "absolute beauty" and "absolute ugliness",
There is no such absolute. Even in the pictures you post to back up you claim, you appear to expect us all to prefer the shiny black sports car. Personally, I don't. I've always preferred the classic lines of older cars, even if they were in less than perfect condition. You will never find anything that everyone will agree is either beautiful or ugly. You're being completely unrealistic if you think otherwise.

[Copper Bezel]

Win7 Aero is cool because of the programming interface. It's helpful for applications like Chrome or Firefox to be able to ditch the window title bar, and fuse with the glass. Saves space, and looks way better than anything you can do in Linux or OSX.

OSX seems to be opening up to skinned apps; Lion uses a "leather" theme for the new calendar app, for instance. Personally, I despise them, and I wouldn't be using Chrome now if it didn't support standard system theming as an option. I don't understand why browsers are held to be a special case, as if every other application still needs a title bar but browsers don't for some obvious, commonsense reason that I'm apparently missing.

I want my windows work, both aesthetically and functionally, with the rest of my desktop. I don't really give a damn what some individual developer feels like ought to be the desktop metaphor instead of the one every other application on my system uses. If title bars are old hat, then that's for the Gnome devs to suss out, not the Chromium team.

[ddastoor]

There is no such absolute. Even in the pictures you post to back up you claim, you appear to expect us all to prefer the shiny black sports car. Personally, I don't. I've always preferred the classic lines of older cars, even if they were in less than perfect condition. You will never find anything that everyone will agree is either beautiful or ugly. You're being completely unrealistic if you think otherwise.

well, then lets respectfully agree to disagree and move on ...
i DID say barring exceptions, for the box-car versus the sports car, didn't i ?

of course there are no absolutes in that sense, but (and here's the rub), the zeitgeist of the age slides "forward" and humanity's (AGAIN barring exceptions) general sense of what is beautiful changes too..
example..

so there are broad loosely bound "bands" , if u will, (for the nth time, barring exceptions !!!!) of what generally is sleek or not, and in that band are all the variations...

that's all.

[Bandit]

Bandit I would appreciate knowing how you achieved that theme. It's darn near perfect as far as I can see.

I been making GTK/Metacity themes since around 2002. I dont make that many, but when I do I work really hard to make them the best I can. Biggest thing is since I have no ego to bruise or boaster, if it takes me a month or 6 months. I release it when its ready and dont throw something half baked out to get recognition. Also many of them I never post. They are for me, I just share them when people like them. In other words, just patience. :)

BTW, thank you for the compliment.

[ddastoor]

Ubuntu doesn't "ship", it slips from the clutch of the release team, always seemingly prematurely released into the crowd of rabid fanboys and haters who'll argue over the tiniest detail of what went disastrously wrong / absolutely perfect with the latest release.

ok "slips" ...

[el_koraco]

I want my windows work, both aesthetically and functionally, with the rest of my desktop. I don't really give a damn what some individual developer feels like ought to be the desktop metaphor instead of the one every other application on my system uses. If title bars are old hat, then that's for the Gnome devs to suss out, not the Chromium team.

Dunno, I never really saw the point of the title bar for browsers, since you're always in tabs, which have their own title. The sweet thing about Aero, as far as I see it, is that you can loose the title bar, and still have the window "belong" with the rest of the theme. In Linux, if you use the "compact borders", you get some three horrible looking buttons. I dread to look in the upper right :D

[Copper Bezel]

Dunno, I never really saw the point of the title bar for browsers, since you're always in tabs, which have their own title. The sweet thing about Aero, as far as I see it, is that you can loose the title bar, and still have the window "belong" with the rest of the theme. In Linux, if you use the "compact borders", you get some three horrible looking buttons. I dread to look in the upper right :D

Well, they're generic GTK-ish buttons in place of the generic Windows-ish buttons, and I appreciate the gesture. (But yes, they're quite ugly.)

I can see the argument that browser tabs perform the function of a title bar in a sense, but even Chrome with compact borders still has a title bar when it isn't maximized, just narrow and without a title in. What I don't really see is what purpose a title bar on a maximized ever serves other than an aesthetic one. (And I don't buy that the aesthetic reason isn't worth the pixels, either.)

I also really dislike how turning off decorations makes windows only shakily compatible with Compiz effects - but of course, you're in cairocompmgr-land now. = )

[Brandel Valico]

Bandit Is there any chance that one is available to be shared or is it one just for you?

If you are willing to share it could I ask you to post a link where I might be allowed to download it for my own use?

If it is a personal use one then no problem I'll just be envious :D

[Bandit]

Bandit Is there any chance that one is available to be shared or is it one just for you?

If you are willing to share it could I ask you to post a link where I might be allowed to download it for my own use?

If it is a personal use one then no problem I'll just be envious :D

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=10992808#post10992808

The link has a slightly older version, but currently the only changes are to the Background color slightly brightend to #DEDEDA and selection color changed to #21629D. The progress bar was changed to original Clearlooks style, just open the GTKRC file and under style "progressbar" just comment out with a # the part that says style = GLOSSY.
I still have to edit my metacity boarder to reflect the change from Orange to blue, in which I a just going to re-draw two of the button types to be Yellow and Amber since one is already Red. This will follow a stop light patter and be more universal.

The firefox theme is Bloomind FT DeepDark 2.2.3, and the media player I use most is UMPlayer UI for mplayer.
Theme also compliments a black bg terminal and Hulu desktop.

Currently 100% compatible with Libre Office, Abiword, GCalc, Inkscape, GIMP and every other program out there that have been known to give themes hell.

This theme is 100% all clearlooks and Metacity. I normally blend Clearlooks with Pixmap themes, but in this case I didnt for compatibility reasons and to lighten the system resources.

I will work on my changes this weekend and update gnomelook with them this weekend. Today is my final FINAL exam and I will be off for 3 weeks, well off for 3 to study for my linux+ anyway.. hehe :)

[el_koraco]

I also really dislike how turning off decorations makes windows only shakily compatible with Compiz effects - but of course, you're in cairocompmgr-land now. = )

Lol, yeah, disabling the GTK title bar helps now. Instead of an animation of the title bar minimizing and maximizing to the panel, Chrome kinda slides into view.

As for the Windows style "compact borders", I think we're mostly talking about aesthetics, and I kinda see it as adhering to the general style of Chrome aesthetics. The fact that the style is incompatible with GTK, QT and Aqua is a shame, though.

[BrokenKingpin]

The problem is everyone does not have the same tastes. I personally do not like the theme of Ubuntu at all (better than the brown though). I do find the Xubuntu theme quite nice though. Either way it is easy to change, so I do not care what it ships with. The first thing I do after install is switch the wallpaper and theme to shiki-brave... takes about 3 minutes.

[ScionicSpectre]

As I'm sure has been pointed out, Ambiance (and the Ayatana team's improvements/DE) are Ubuntu's aim at a polished theme. As GTK 3's features are explored and better ARGB support comes for Unity/GNOME Shell, I don't think it will be unlikely that we'll have themes every bit as gorgeous as our competitors.

If you're a designer, I think you'd probably argue that most of the themes Linux users show off are better than Aero. In other words, making your title bar see through isn't the only important part of making a beautiful and readable window theme. I will say that Aero is pretty good compared to some of our older themes (from 2003 or so).

No matter how good our defaults become, we need to accept and embrace that open software is about individuality, and everyone will have a different idea of what a polished theme looks like, based on their prior experiences and UX expertise.

Needless to say, KDE, GNOME, and Ayatana have many highly trained designers who take more into account than simply how shiny a theme is. Font sizes, placement, consistency, all these things are essential to making it easier to use your computer while observing a beautiful theme.

I think Ambiance, Oxygen, and Adwaita all take care of the basic needs of a theme pretty well (Ambiance will also have some improvements in 11.10 that take the lack of a menubar in windows into account).

There are good reasons not to use popular themes like Faenza and Elementary in a theme that's trying to be balanced for the sake of usability and accessibility. For instance, Faenza's arrows don't work well on a desaturated background like in Ambiance, and Faenza's square icons are harder to identify immediately, especially for those with sight issues.

Elementary is a nice theme, and there are certainly some nice Emerald/GTK combinations, but Ubuntu already has its branding decided for the most part, and it doesn't seem like there's a need to reinvent it much, especially after a huge sea-change like Unity.

So I'd say that if you have a different idea of how a desktop should be designed, talk to the elementary guys or encourage upstream developers to have good goals in their design/themes, like GNOME and KDE, so it trickles down to influence the decisions themers make.

TL|DR There is a very measured approach behind the design of most modern software stacks in open source, and making suggestions without considering the reasoning of UX designers isn't helpful. If you disagree with the design ethos, there are projects that you will probably agree with elsewhere in the community.

[Bandit]

@SS,
I do have full plans to work on GTK3 based themes after the next release to have them ready for the LTS. I just hope that they will be considered and included with the LTS.

I like Aero, perferable the Vista Aero, but even Win7s isnt bad. I just have issues with the contrast of the buttons and the background with each other.

Now in regards to Faenza, its a excellent icon theme that is very consistent, clean, easy to read and over all compatible with many color schemes. IMHO it would be the default theme of my OS if I wasnt so lazy.

[Brandel Valico]

Bandit

Thank you very much for the link. Installed with a bit of tweaking to the colors but a great theme.

[ScionicSpectre]

Oh, don't get me wrong- I love Faenza. It's hard not to use it, honestly. But for those with poor eyesight, it wouldn't be as effective since you can't make out individual shapes as easily (they're all rounded cubes). However, color differentiations would make it easier, but it's always easier to recognize an icon in a larger space with defined edges than to embed the same image into a cube. This, of course, is why we have high-contrast themes, and the disabled should most likely use them, but Faenza as default in a wide-sweeping distribution still has those negative consequences. I think the icons for arrows and the such could be refined a bit, but compared to a few years ago we're doing a really good job.

But yeah, sorry if that was a bit repetitive, but that's the reason that I've got from contributors as to the default icon theme choices. It makes sense to allow programs to ship their own branding, too, of course.

P.S. Not to mention, if you use Unity it'd be a bit odd to have the round icon on top of a round area to hold the icon in the Dash. But of course, if Faenza were default they could work around this.

[ddastoor]

The problem is everyone does not have the same tastes. I personally do not like the theme of Ubuntu at all (better than the brown though). I do find the Xubuntu theme quite nice though. Either way it is easy to change, so I do not care what it ships with. The first thing I do after install is switch the wallpaper and theme to shiki-brave... takes about 3 minutes.

shiki-brave ? is this on gnome-look ?

[NightwishFan]

shiki-brave ? is this on gnome-look ?
On Debian or Ubuntu:

sudo apt-get install shiki-colors

[Bandit]

Bandit

Thank you very much for the link. Installed with a bit of tweaking to the colors but a great theme.

Many thanks :)

[ddastoor]

On Debian or Ubuntu:

cool thanks..