What does it tell us?

[leafhound]

:( When 7 out of the first 12 most downloaded content from Gnome-look is either Microsoft or Mac related, the top 3 are exclusively Mac themes that make Gnome look Macish, followed by a plethora of Vista and Xp mods.

i know what it says to me, and it is'nt good for Linux GUI fans

[Lord Illidan]

What does it say to you? It doesn't say anything much to me. People have a right to like the looks of Vista or the Mac. I know that I have tried to emulate the Mac on my system with baghira, although I've lately developed a liking for the aero theme.

Also, many users may be looking to increase their comfort level by making their new OS look familiar.

[shad0w_walker]

It says that the majority of the people that downloaded them are stuck in their tiny little boxes. It tells me that once again people show just how stuck in their brainwashed ways they are.

[aysiu]

It says that some people like the look of Mac and Windows, even if they do not like the functionality of Mac and Windows. That's all it says.

People use Mac and Windows themes for a variety of reasons: To demonstrate the flexibility of Linux (it can look like anything--even other operating systems) To fool formerly Windows-using friends and relatives into thinking Linux is Windows (I don't approve of this practice, but it seems to happen). To gain the best of both worlds if one likes the appearance of Windows or Mac but everything else about Linux. Read more here:
Why We Use Mac/Vista Themes (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=476242)
Why does 'everyone' want their theme to look like other OS's? (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=644971)

[billgoldberg]

That tells that gnome is very good.

It does something microsoft and mac can't do. Support both "themes".

The vista and mac themes are the ones that are the most polished and updated.

I used the wii-black theme for a while and some others.

Then I used some vista themes and now I'm using the mac4lin theme.

That's whats linux is all about, the choice.

[aysiu]

It says that the majority of the people that downloaded them are stuck in their tiny little boxes. It tells me that once again people show just how stuck in their brainwashed ways they are.
I guess I must be brainwashed then for using Mac-imitation themes. What should I be using then, if I like the way Linux works, the way it handles software, the way it handles application windows, but like the look of Aqua? Should I be using a Mac? I don't think so.

[LaRoza]

Most downloaded doesn't mean most used.

[Lord Illidan]

That tells that gnome is very good.

It does something microsoft and mac can't do. Support both "themes".

The vista and mac themes are the ones that are the most polished and updated.

I used the wii-black theme for a while and some others.

Then I used some vista themes and now I'm using the mac4lin theme.

That's whats linux is all about, the choice.

To be fair, you could theme XP and make it look like a Mac or like Vista or even like Ubuntu for that matter.

[Gigamo]

Or to make them feel more comfortable sitting on linux, when they've been used to mac/windows for a long time.

[~LoKe]

I was really surprised when I looked at the most downloaded themes on gnome-look. They're mostly hideous.

[aysiu]

To be fair, you could theme XP and make it look like a Mac or like Vista or even like Ubuntu for that matter.
But to be fair, you have to hack XP to theme it. You can't just install a new theme.

[rune0077]

What's wrong with making my desktop look the way I want it to look? Isn't that one of the selling points of Linux? My Ubuntu doesn't look like Leopard or Vista (namely because I picked a more or less random colour and has since customized everything to blend it with that one colour), but I mean, has anyone looked at Leopard or Vista desktops? They look great, both of them, certainly better than what my desktop currently looks like. If you're into the whole eye-candy experience, frankly I can't see who wouldn't want their desktops to look like that.

[Lord Illidan]

But to be fair, you have to hack XP to theme it. You can't just install a new theme.

I just downloaded an exe for XP to make it look like a Mac, and double clicked it. To most people, this is the "natural" thing to do.

[p_quarles]

The fact that something is popular doesn't really correlate with its quality, and it doesn't strike me as "bad news" for those who prefer something less popular. Case in point: MacDonald's.

Please note that I am not comparing Windows and Mac themes to junk food, but just attempting to reject the popular = good notion.

[aysiu]

I just downloaded an exe for XP to make it look like a Mac, and double clicked it. To most people, this is the "natural" thing to do.
But it still hacks the registry, and I believe it even modifies the NT kernel... it just automates the hacking process. It also changes the theme for all users, I believe--not just the one who installed it.

[Lord Illidan]

But it still hacks the registry, and I believe it even modifies the NT kernel... it just automates the hacking process. It also changes the theme for all users, I believe--not just the one who installed it.

Yes, that's true. Now convince the windows users that this is bad, when it did what they set out to do in the first place!

Obviously, I prefer Gnome's approach, as it is truly themeable, and with the use of engines can be made to look quite different from the original.

[aysiu]

Yes, that's true. Now convince the windows users that this is bad, when it did what they set out to do in the first place!

Obviously, I prefer Gnome's approach, as it is truly themeable, and with the use of engines can be made to look quite different from the original.
Well, even if they don't understand the underlying mechanics of it, they might see that it makes their XP unstable or unbootable (which happened to me once when I tried to install FlyaKiteOS on my Dell Inspiron) or that they have to go through a several-minute-long-process to uninstall it and change back to the regular XP theme.

[alwiap]

I think it's great you can make linux look like XP, Vista, or a Mac. Why not? If you don't want your linux box to look like Windows or a Mac, you have all the freedoms to make it look/perform like exactly what you want. It's only natural, (obviously as we can see), that people want to emulate other environments.

:)

[karellen]

It says that the majority of the people that downloaded them are stuck in their tiny little boxes. It tells me that once again people show just how stuck in their brainwashed ways they are.

yes, everyone who doesn't share your tastes is brainshawed, except you and your perfect choices and marvelous ways of thinking and doing things. keep up the good work
;)

[aysiu]

yes, everyone who doesn't share your tastes is brainshawed, except you and your perfect choices and marvelous ways of thinking and doing things. keep up the good work
;)
Oddly enough, in another thread, shad0w_walker said this:
Beauty is a personal thing and varies from person to person. It is not about numbers or votes or any other crap metric.

Every single person has a different definition of a good GUI and if you don't understand that then you are in no position to complain about gnome/KDE as you have a completely closed minded view on things and just want to push your own agenda. So I guess if it's Gnome or KDE you like, then it's a personal thing, but if you like Vista or Mac, you must be brainwashed.

[Mateo]

Ubuntu has to drop the brown theme. It's beyond ugly. It's probably the first thing most people change when they install. If you look at the desktop screenshot threads; everyone has their own personal tastes. But practically no one keeps the brown theme. Why stay with something that absolutely no one likes, except perhaps Shuttleworth?

It's also a problem that Ubuntu doesn't have any good (meaning non-brown) GDM themes. I temporarily switched to Fedora just because it is beautiful, but it's horrible package managing situation brought me back here. If ubuntu really insists on sticking with the ugly themes almost no one likes, they should at least create alternatives as well.

[aysiu]

Ubuntu has to drop the brown theme. It's beyond ugly. It's probably the first thing most people change when they install. If you look at the desktop screenshot threads; everyone has their own personal tastes. But practically no one keeps the brown theme While I agree with your conclusion that the brown theme does not appeal to most people, your logic in reaching that conclusion is a bit flawed, for two reasons: The screenshot thread is to show off how people have customized their Ubuntus. Those who go with the default have nothing to show off. I, for example, when I use Gnome, keep the brown theme, but I don't feel the need to post in the screenshot thread the default Human theme, because everyone knows what that looks like. Right now, with Windows preinstalled on almost 99% of non-Mac home computers, Ubuntu is far more likely to attract users who like to tweak their systems and theme their computers. Because they are tweakers, they will almost never go with the default theme, no matter how pretty it may be.

[Mateo]

While I agree with your conclusion that the brown theme does not appeal to most people, your logic in reaching that conclusion is a bit flawed, for two reasons: The screenshot thread is to show off how people have customized their Ubuntus. Those who go with the default have nothing to show off. I, for example, when I use Gnome, keep the brown theme, but I don't feel the need to post in the screenshot thread the default Human theme, because everyone knows what that looks like. Right now, with Windows preinstalled on almost 99% of non-Mac home computers, Ubuntu is far more likely to attract users who like to tweak their systems and theme their computers. Because they are tweakers, they will almost never go with the default theme, no matter how pretty it may be.

It's not as black and white as "tweaked" or "not tweaked". Of course no one posts a picture of the default Ubuntu as freshly installed. But they don't all customize it to become completely unrecognizeable as a linux computer either. For example, the "default" Ubuntu (or gnome in general) is to have 2 panels, one at the top and one at the bottom. Go to the screenshot thread and you'll see that a whole lot of them keep it that way. Then again, a whole like of them go with only 1 panel at the top too. Then go look at how many people are still using clearlooks (default in Ubuntu eventhough it's renamed "human"). A whole bunch of them.

My point is that people are specifically removing the brownness from their computers. Where are the people using brown borders ("human"). Where are the brown backgrounds. There aren't many who do.

[inversekinetix]

It says that some people like the look of Mac and Windows, even if they do not like the functionality of Mac and Windows. That's all it says.






I think it says that a LOT of people like the look of mac and windows, i don't see how it pertains to their like or dislike of the functionality of Mac and Windows. Just because one chooses to make part of A look like part of B it doesnt follow that they dislike the functionality of anything.

[barbedsaber]

I keep the original theme because it is so uniquie. it means that if i am on the bus or somthing, and a linux user happens to see my screen, he (or she) can instantly identify my os as ubuntu, it also means that windows (and mac) users are more likely to say what os is that, giving me the perfect oppertunuty to hand out a live cd. because I think the more cds handed out, the more users, and therefore more hardware support.

[tuebinger]

I used both Windows and Mac for years . I personally don't like either Windows Vista or Mac themes. I stil lhave to use Windows at work and the last thing I want to do when I come home is be reminded of it