Why is Kubuntu blue?

[fanoodlehey]

I use Kubuntu rather than Ubuntu. I prefer KDE. But I like the brown theme of Ubuntu. Why was the decision that made Gnome brown on Ubuntu not carried over to making KDE brown on Kubuntu? Shouldn't all the Ubuntus have a common theme? One of the things that makes Ubuntu stand out from other distros is the brown theme. But using Kubuntu nobody can look at my desktop and instantly say, "Oh, you're using an Ubuntu".

Just to be clear, I'm not asking how I can make my Kubuntu brown. I'm asking why Kubuntu isn't brown by default.

[slimdog360]

because its sad :cry:

[fanoodlehey]

My goodness, I think I've wet myself. :rolleyes:

[Lord Illidan]

I agree with you. Look at Suse 10.1 for example. It's gnome and suse desktop environments resemble eachother as close as possible.

You can make your KDE look brownish, however. I know you didn't ask for it, but this site contains a good theme..
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=39402

[Buffalo Soldier]

I have not used Kubuntu before so just out of curiosity, is there an Orange/Brown theme in Kubuntu? Perhaps people might object it being the default theme, but I don't think people would object if it's offered as an alternative.

[fanoodlehey]

Not as far as I know. I'm not at my kubuntu pc right now so can't be sure but I don't think there is.

Otherwise there would be no reason for themes like Lord Illian mentioned.
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=39402

[sophtpaw]

I use Kubuntu rather than Ubuntu. I prefer KDE. But I like the brown theme of Ubuntu. Why was the decision that made Gnome brown on Ubuntu not carried over to making KDE brown on Kubuntu? Shouldn't all the Ubuntus have a common theme? One of the things that makes Ubuntu stand out from other distros is the brown theme. But using Kubuntu nobody can look at my desktop and instantly say, "Oh, you're using an Ubuntu".

Just to be clear, I'm not asking how I can make my Kubuntu brown. I'm asking why Kubuntu isn't brown by default.

if you like kde, you might consider Kanotix or Mepis as better alternatives to Kubuntu

[fanoodlehey]

I haven't tried any other linux distros and to be honest I don't have any plans to any time soon. I'm still getting my head around linux even though I've used kubuntu since the warty release. A change in distro may only be confusing while 'm still learning. Anyway, I like kubuntu and I like the ubuntu community in general.

This topic is more about why there isn't a cohesive theme across the different desktop environments within the ubuntu variants.

[ComplexNumber]

does it really matter what the default screen looks like. it only takes a few(erm, ok, several) clicks to change the colour and theme. people that use kde like kde because they say its uber-configurable, so i don't see what the fuss is to merely change the default colour.

[Lord Illidan]

IMHO, there should be a common theme. It is easy enough to revert to blue afterwards if you want in GNOME, and the same accounts for KDE.

[fanoodlehey]

Edit:Oh missed Lord Illian's post.

As I said before, I'm not looking for a way to change my desktop theme. Nor am I complaining about any difficulty in changing how things look.

There has to be a default theme, and obviously at some stage a decision was made to go with a brown theme for ubuntu. To me it makes sense for that decision to be carried across all of the variants, independent of desktop environment. Quite a lot of work goes into how ubuntu(all variants) look. So the obvious question to me is, as the title says, "Why is kubuntu blue?".

[curuxz]

if you like kde, you might consider Kanotix or Mepis as better alternatives to Kubuntu

Yuck, As a kubuntu user who has tried those other distros i can tell you stay well clear users!!!

The best combo is Kubuntu installed AFTER ubuntu. Then you get the best of both worlds with only a slight 2-5% speed drop from the library overheads. Its well worth it in my mind.

and while we are on the topic of Kubuntu, who the %$£%£$%$£ thought aptitude was better than synaptic, its the worst packagemanger EVER. Please get synaptic as the default in Kubuntu its such a waste of time installing it the second i install kubuntu, it may as well be included.

[Lord Illidan]

Yuck, As a kubuntu user who has tried those other distros i can tell you stay well clear users!!!

The best combo is Kubuntu installed AFTER ubuntu. Then you get the best of both worlds with only a slight 2-5% speed drop from the library overheads. Its well worth it in my mind.

and while we are on the topic of Kubuntu, who the %$£%£$%$£ thought aptitude was better than synaptic, its the worst packagemanger EVER. Please get synaptic as the default in Kubuntu its such a waste of time installing it the second i install kubuntu, it may as well be included.

I agree. Synaptic is 100% better.

[curuxz]

I agree. Synaptic is 100% better.


Thank you :), but I still dont get whole authorised Aptitude to be default, its so bad at repository management and well....package selection.

Does anyone know why it was chosen? It cant be because its KDE native because synaptic is a nutral app, its not like its a gnome specific program it could have been used on both, which personaly i think would have been better for new users to have the same package management.

[ComplexNumber]

It cant be because its KDE native because synaptic is a nutral app,its not quite neutral. synaptic is built using gtk.

[fanoodlehey]

I know this is a place for general chat and discussion so I'll say that I'm using adept without any problems but I did like synaptic when that was supplied with kubuntu.

I would like to stay on topic though.

[Hanj]

I have to say I agree with the OP, it's quite a strange decision to make Kubuntu blue. I read somewhere that the art team are trying to make the default Ubuntu theme 'stand out', so that you only have to take a quick glance at an Ubuntu box to immediately see it's running Ubuntu. While they have certainly succeeded in this with the brown human theme, there don't seem to be any similar efforts on the Kubuntu side. Kubuntu looks just like any other distro.

Not that this is a big deal, it's easy to change, but I wonder why this decision was made in the first place.

[curuxz]

I would like to stay on topic though.

Well I agree, but the topic is about why does Kubuntu not look (and I guess feel) like Ubuntu. I think that having the same package managers is a big part of that.

Its like why is one blue and one brown/orange. why is one aptitude and another synaptic.

I know synaptic uses GTK, which is a valid point i did not consider, since my point about nutrality was based on library usage not interface framework, my bad, but I still think GTK apps in KDE is OK, and would like to see synaptic at least provided if not default since it is so much more effecient.

[Terracotta]

Well I agree, but the topic is about why does Kubuntu not look (and I guess feel) like Ubuntu. I think that having the same package managers is a big part of that.

Its like why is one blue and one brown/orange. why is one aptitude and another synaptic.

I know synaptic uses GTK, which is a valid point i did not consider, since my point about nutrality was based on library usage not interface framework, my bad, but I still think GTK apps in KDE is OK, and would like to see synaptic at least provided if not default since it is so much more effecient.
I absolutely disagree, I find adept to be faster and more usefull than Synaptic. What does synaptic provide adept doesn't do? If I recall correctly, the update and "gnome-app-install"-counterpart are part of adept, where in ubuntu this is different(as in synaptic and gonme-app-install are two different programs). (PS aptitude != adept, adept is the frontend, aptitude is the packagemanager like apt-get, but more advanced, aptitude is used in the konsole just like apt-get, to install something with aptitude for example do: sudo aptitude install packagename...).
The only thing I dislike about Adept is the Gnome-alike-icons (as in BIIIIIIIG icons), luckily that can be changed.

To stay on-topic, I'm all for at least the provision of an ubuntu-theme in Kubuntu (as in brown-orange), I like them, but I dislike the gnome-apps, so I always end up installing kde-apps. But the overal layout of Ubuntu is better than the standard Kubuntu layout.
I'd go even further, why not providing something like applications, places, systems in kubuntu I'd love that, but I suppose that's not gonna happen.

[fanoodlehey]

I hear you curuxz. It's the same type of discussion but I think it leaves the topic too open to moving off on a tangent, like which is better synaptic or adept.

There may be valid reasons why gtk apps are not delivered with kubuntu, like trying to keep the install down to just one cd. I'm not sure if that is a reason but it's just an example.

I would prefer to first address why the variants look different. Surely having them share destop wallpaper, icons, and theme in general could only reduce the work involved.

[Lord Illidan]

To stay on-topic, I'm all for at least the provision of an ubuntu-theme in Kubuntu (as in brown-orange), I like them, but I dislike the gnome-apps, so I always end up installing kde-apps. But the overal layout of Ubuntu is better than the standard Kubuntu layout.
I'd go even further, why not providing something like applications, places, systems in kubuntu I'd love that, but I suppose that's not gonna happen.


I don't think that will happen, nope.
But the work needed to make an ubuntu-theme in Kubuntu is very easy..it should be the default.

[fanoodlehey]

the work needed to make an ubuntu-theme in Kubuntu is very easy..it should be the default.

This is my point exactly. It seems like there must have been an intentional decision to make kubuntu blue when kde was introduced on ubuntu. That just seems odd since the brown theme is what identifies ubuntu quickly to an average user.

I've also just read this.
https://wiki.kubuntu.org/KubuntuFutureIdeas
Search for blue.
Here's the interesting bit.


Create a custom icon theme for Kubuntu. Maybe a Blue Human theme. I think the Crystal theme is starting to look a bit dated. How about Nuvola?

Also to be considered, if we could have different colour schemes... say Kubuntu-Blue Kubuntu-Human(Ubuntu like orange scheme) XKubuntu(XFCE like grey-blue scheme) etc... and the same for icon themes.

[mips]

I would like to see a move away from brown to a olive earthy green.

[Jucato]

Why is Kubuntu blue? Because KDE itself is blue.
AFAIK, only Novell and Red Hat have diverged from this "trend".

I could also ask, why is GNOME "earthy"? Ubuntu is predominantly brown (even with orange windo borders), and almost all other GNOME distros follow suit. In fact, Novell and Red Hat has adopted an earthy color (except for Fedora Core's wallpapers).

My suggestion? Ubuntu has always been one of the leaders in Linux distro innovations, both in principle and in practice. So I say, let Ubuntu innovate once more! Create a theme that is neither dominantly GNOME or dominantly KDE, but still keep the unique identity of each desktop environment. A theme that will be used on Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and Edubuntu. And when I mean theme, I'm not just talking about wallpapers and icons (you can leave the icons the way they are since it's harder to make icon sets). I'm talking about controls/widget styles, window borders, fonts (themes), images, splash screens, etc.

[carl13]

I think the brown / blue issue with Ubuntu/Kubuntu is interesting. It seems to be a dividing fork with people and sparks a lot of debate. It reminds me of political and religious debates (e.g., Christian-Muslim, Democrat-Republican). It's not that people get angry about opposing views but people seem to either like brown and dislike t blue or like blue and dislike brown.

I still think that Ubuntu should come with two defaults (brown and blue, even though it would be a contradiction of terms) designed by the people who do the brown theme and give people a choice of brown or blue.

[Jucato]

I still think that Ubuntu should come with two defaults (brown and blue, even though it would be a contradiction of terms) designed by the people who do the brown theme and give people a choice of brown or blue.

Or they could make a set of "themes":
- Unified default
- GNOME
- KDE
- Xfce
- Edubuntu

The icons would not be changed (Ubuntu will still use Human, Kubuntu will still use Crystal SVG, etc.)

Btw, the analogy to Christian-Muslin/Democrats-Republican is a bit inadequate. Christians/Muslimsa and Democrats/Republicans are not part of the same brand, so they don't need to have a unified look. On the other hand, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, etc. are all part of the Ubuntu brand. Quite a big difference there.

Anyway, just my suggestions. The ravings of a lunatic probably. :p

[jimrz]

Btw, the analogy to Christian-Muslin/Democrats-Republican is a bit inadequate. Christians/Muslimsa and Democrats/Republicans are not part of the same brand, so they don't need to have a unified look. On the other hand, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, etc. are all part of the Ubuntu brand. Quite a big difference there.

Thought all of these were members of the "Human" brand. Wish that the extremist factions of each could accept that...'twould be a far better world.

Back on topic...Blue is, and has been for as long as I can remember, my favorite color. However, I find that I much prefer the ubuntu human theme to any other I have used. I also feel that a distinctive unified theme across the various flavors of ubuntu would be a good idea.

[Jucato]

Thought all of these were members of the "Human" brand. Wish that the extremist factions of each could accept that...'twould be a far better world.

Ah yes... but I'm talking here about brand in the strictest sense, that of marketing/corporate brands. Otherwise, I would have put "brand" instead.

Oh, and I also love blue. But the need for unified Ubuntu brand (again, no quotes) look is far beyond my own personal need. Besides, it's quite easy to change to a different color scheme. But defaults, like first impressions, last.

Btw, aside from the icons and the K Menu, it's quite possible to "mimic" Ubuntu's human theme. The Crystal window decoration is very similar to the Human window border, all you need is to change the color scheme and change the widget Style into something more GTK-like. You could probably also look for a Tango-like theme. :D

[carl13]

Btw, the analogy to Christian-Muslin/Democrats-Republican is a bit inadequate. Christians/Muslimsa and Democrats/Republicans are not part of the same brand, so they don't need to have a unified look. On the other hand, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, etc. are all part of the Ubuntu brand. Quite a big difference there.


I agree, its not a great anaology and I started not to use it. The only thing that I think the two have in common is that many people seem to gravitate heavily to one side or the other. So it was more people's reactions/views of them than the subjects themselves.

[bobbybobington]

This whole color debate is useless, if you dont like it you can change, and its sooooo easy....I miss linux, im stuck in ugly windows land.:cry: at least untill next summer :-) :-) :D

[graabein]

Yes it is easy to change themes, we all know this. What we're discussing -- yet again -- is whether to have a unified default (colour) theme and if this should be "Human" brown/orange.

IMO I think we should try to make the Ubuntu derivates look more alike and use Human as default. I hate marketing words but it's about branding and recognition. Dapper includes some themes I can't remember all of them but at least a brown/orange default, a blue edition of that theme, and a more grey looking one called "Silicon"?

I think all derivates should have 3-4 well rounded themes included with Human set as default. The themes should be accompanied by some matching wallpapers, GDM's and splash screens for each theme.

Icon sets should be more seperate because they are harder to do. I like both the orange default and the Tango set. Very nice work. There certainly are several sets with a lot of promise but I don't know how close to completion they are...

Anyway, that's just my opinion.

[fanoodlehey]

Yes graabein. You have hit the nail on the head as have a few others. There are still people who think we are arguing over what is the best colour to use. This is not the case. What we are discussing is branding. I think Ubuntu should look like Ubuntu no matter what desktop environment is being used.

The vast majority of normal PC users do not change the default theme that comes with whatever OS they are using. Linux users may be more likely to than Windows users simply because we are probably a little more willing to fiddle with settings. But the majority will use the default theme and from a branding point of view I think Ubuntu should be instantly recognisable as Ubuntu. Sure, throw in whatever other cool themes us fiddlers might like to use on the different DEs but first get a common default theme across the variants.

[zugu]

As far as I know, the brown/orange theme in Ubuntu was chosen because of some philosophical reasons. Earth, humanity, community etc. Though I dislike the outcome, I agree that the reasons were well defined.
Because there were users who thought Ubuntu should have KDE installed by default, Kubuntu appeared. First as an unofficial project, then to be endorsed by Canonical.

Now let me speculate: I thing blue was chosen by the Kubuntu team in the beginning (don't really know, never used Kubuntu before 6.06). After the project officially entered the Ubuntu family, the developers and/or users might have insisted that the blue theme should be kept. And then everything froze: Canonical wanted to improve their branding strategy by also choosing brown for Kubuntu - the Kubuntu community did not allow this as they feel KDE is/integrates better if blue.

Personally, I think a Kubuntu would be horrible, and a blue Kubuntu disrupts the branding strategy of Canonical. Maybe a blue GNOME? This would be nice looking, but then what about the Earth/Humanity thing?

It was a marketing mistake to make Ubuntu brown: one of the less appealing colours, and now it's the integration with other "official" derivatives that is causing inconsistency problems.

[asimon]

Now let me speculate: [...] Canonical wanted to improve their branding strategy by also choosing brown for Kubuntu - the Kubuntu community did not allow this as they feel KDE is/integrates better if blue.
I think this wasn't what happened. AFAIK Canonical never tried to dictate how Kubuntu's default desktop should look. I am sure we would see some pretty flame wars if such a thing happens in the various mailing lists and blogs. The people who decide what color and theme Kubuntu has by default are probably Kubuntu's art team, and AFAIK none of them is payed by Canonical. So far the only Kubuntu developer payed by Canonical is Jonathan Riddell. Besides from this it's the community who builds and shapes Kubuntu.

[Jucato]

I'm sure asimon is correct. Kubuntu was originally just a community project, similar to what Xubuntu was before. It wasn't an "official" part of the Ubuntu brand. Probably when they made it, it was only natural/logical for them to use a blue theme because it was the color of KDE itself. When Kubuntu became an official member of the Ubuntu family, it probably didn't seem that important to change the color scheme any more.

Kubuntu, as far as "looks" go, presents a very unique situation, different from almost all other Linux distros. AFAIK, there are only 4 Linux distros that offer multiple versions of the distro depending on the desktop environment: Fedora Core/Red Hat, Novell/openSUSE, Debian, and Ubuntu/Kubuntu. I'm not sure about Debian, but Last I checked Fedora Core and SUSE have a more or less unified over all look, even if they still follow most of the DE's defaults (GNOME has 2 panels, KDE has 1, etc). This "divergence" between Ubuntu and Kubuntu could probably also be attributed to Kubuntu being more of an afterthought rather than part of the original plan.

Nonetheless, I think it's time that Ubuntu/Canonical at least talk about unifying the appearances. I think that a unified general look will make sure that people will readily identify Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and Edubuntu as all part of one big family. There's no need to make all of them look exactly alike. In fact, I don't agree with what they did to Xubuntu's default panels. Unified color schemes, unified widget/control styles, unified window decorations, unified wallpapers. But probably separate icons, separate panel defaults (KDE would still have 1 panel), etc.

[fanoodlehey]

I agree with Fenyx. There is no need or point in trying to make the different variants behave the same. That negates the benefits of having a choice. However I'm sure the art people could come up with plenty of ways to create a unified look across all ubuntus while maintaining the essence of the different environments.

[electrosoccertux]

It could be brown. If it wants to be something different, however, it should not be blue. Blue is getting old. Blue is the "WooOOoOOOooOo look at me I'm a high-tech-millenium-computer" color. Its been that way for years.

If Kubuntu wants to be something besides blue, it should be green. Green is the next-most-brain-pacifying-color, second to blue. A high-contrast but dark earthy-forest-green would fit in well. It would feel organic like Ubuntu's brown theme but would still be inevitably "KDE".

[Jucato]

It could be brown. If it wants to be something different, however, it should not be blue. Blue is getting old. Blue is the "WooOOoOOOooOo look at me I'm a high-tech-millenium-computer" color. Its been that way for years.

If Kubuntu wants to be something besides blue, it should be green. Green is the next-most-brain-pacifying-color, second to blue. A high-contrast but dark earthy-forest-green would fit in well. It would feel organic like Ubuntu's brown theme but would still be inevitably "KDE".

Well, the point is not changing Kubuntu's color only. It's about changing colors of all 4 into a unified color scheme. So if it will be green, then everything will be green. I like blue very much as it can be calming, and I don't usually associate it with high-tech stuff. But I won't let my personal preference interfere with Ubuntu's unification. If they decide on something other than brown and blue, I'm all for it.

[asimon]

Kubuntu Edgy has just become ... purple!


kubuntu-default-settings (1:6.10-2)
* Add default shortcuts for Amarok and Konqueror for kubuntu-laptop-buttons
* Don't warn when submitting data to a non-SSL site
* New wallpaper from Ken Wimer
* New purple colour scheme from Ken Wimer
* Update copyright file
The new wallpaper is also purple.

[Jucato]

Blue -> Purple (Blue+Red) -> Red -> Orange... ????

I'm excited for Edgy, if just for the new USplash capabilities. :D

I still say "yes" to unified visual appearance (except for panels and icons).