PDA

View Full Version : Wallpaper and theme complaint megathread



Pages : [1] 2

wladston
October 25th, 2007, 05:42 PM
Guys,

I know there are some topics already concerning this issue, but there is none with a pool. I think we need to know - what is preferred - the default brownish colour scheme, or something else ?

I particularly can handle with the brownish look, but I was amazed when I saw how much better it can look using another colour scheme. I think the default could be blue, sliver, black-ish, green .... but not brown ..

When showing it to my friends, one of the most popular comments is - "eh, looks good, except for the Brown windows". And I'm not alone - I've seen lots of people make the same content on their blogs. Also, if you guys search on the internet, most of the people that are recommending others to use ubuntu also strongly recommend to get others themes...


So I wanna know what you think about it - stick with the brown-orange shades, or move to something else ?

Some folks say the the brown is the most "human" and "familiar" colour .... but I doubt that .. if it was true, I think brown would be the preferred colour to choose on cars, trains, etc. And I've never seen a brown car, or train, or tech-related product... (exepct for a dirty one) :-/

Another option that I thought is not sticking with a default - let the user try and choose from the most popular themes at start time. This would be awesome imo.
1
Please, note you can choose more than one option on the pool !!

CAD-MAN
October 25th, 2007, 05:53 PM
Guys,

I know there are some topics already concerning this issue, but there is none with a pool. I think we need to know - what is preferred - the default brownish colour scheme, or something else ?

I particularly can handle with the brownish look, but I was amazed when I saw how much better it can look using another colour scheme. I think the default could be blue, sliver, black-ish, green .... but not brown ..

Hardy's new colour scheme is rumored to be orange and black (although I think it should be slightly off-black, maybe with a tint of brown, or grey). Check this thread. (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=565685)





Some folks say the the brown is the most "human" and "familiar" colour .... but I doubt that .. if it was true, I think brown would be the preferred colour to choose on cars, trains, etc. And I've never seen a brown car, or train, or tech-related product... (exepct for a dirty one) :-/

Another option that I thought is not sticking with a default - let the user try and choose from the most popular themes at start time. This would be awesome imo.

Really?! I would have thought green would be the most 'familiar' colour (if there is one), or perhaps blue.

wladston
October 25th, 2007, 05:54 PM
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=591257

Please, give your vote to the pool! ;)

misfitpierce
October 25th, 2007, 05:57 PM
Big fan of the brown myself... Prob favorite color right there.

Perpetual
October 25th, 2007, 05:58 PM
I like it. I don't care a lot for the window decoration but it's easily modified. I don't want to see it changed much. Maybe updated but it's Ubuntu's 'look'...

And the black and orange rumor...i hope is just a rumor. It will be the first Ubuntu that I changed from it's default.

n3tfury
October 25th, 2007, 06:08 PM
it doesn't matter what the theme is by default, it's going to get changed whether, brown, blue, grey, or black, to what i want.

i voted to keep it brown since it's a nice and different scheme.

wladston
October 25th, 2007, 06:12 PM
@CAD-MAN
Wow!! Orange-black looks promising. I have an orange-black-wite keyboard that I love!

@ misfitpierce, Perpetual
I think there will never be a set of shade with more than 90% of approval. This is why I'm suggesting an option to let the user try and choose a theme at installation time .... this way, we could please everybody ... and brown can still be kept as default colour for the live-cd, to define the "identity" of ubuntu, as some folks say.

wladston
October 25th, 2007, 06:17 PM
n3tfury, I agree with you. I just think that we should make this procedure easier for the new user, by letting him choose at install time. Most ubuntu users (for example, my mom, and my girlfriend) don't know how to change the theme, or think it's too complicated/difficult.

vexorian
October 25th, 2007, 06:55 PM
I love gutsy's and feisty's default themes.

The poll is quite unfair given that it is brown vs. All the other colors!

If anything, if the user does not like the brown he will eventually get to the theme manager and be impressive by how easy it is to change the theme and how many awesome themes are included by default... (Clearlooks and Crux, quite nice) (AND SERIOUSLY, if preferences\Appearance and themes is not easy enough to change the theme, nothing would be)

On my desktop I am using a very nice green theme made by myself, I love it.

Perpetual
October 25th, 2007, 06:58 PM
I don't think Ubuntu's Appearance Settings are any more difficult than WinXP's. Actually, Windows are buried deeper than Ubuntu's (Gnome's).

Tobias Pistohl
October 25th, 2007, 07:03 PM
I am very certain, that the default color scheme of Ubuntu should NOT be changed. Please don't! Why, you ask?

1. Ubuntu has to keep being recognizable among the zoo of user interfaces. You have to recognize it on first sight. With Kubuntu, with it's blue theme, I'm afraid, this is not the case.
2. There can always be an evolution in the looks (I personally appreciated to move to lighter, more orange colors very much), but it should be done with a certain amount of consistency. A complete switch in the color scheme signifies something completely new - Windows can do that, because they bring out new versions only every couple of years, but Ubuntu is updated much more gradually, every 6 month.
3. What is - from a distance - recognized as a distinctly good design, normally does not look like what the great majority of people thinks (is made to think?) would be good looking. Example: Since the first iMacs they really had a sense for good design. Remember, when they introduced the first flat-panel iMacs, iBooks and iPods in that glossy white plastic look, everybody else thought (and some still do) that plastic housings had to be silver-colored in order to look like ... silver plastic? Now many other manufacturers try to imitate that (not always with huge success).
4. I tried other color schemes, but they always made me feel like I was using Windows, MacOS X or SuSE, and I don't want that - especially when I am NOT working with Windows, MacOS or SuSE. So I always came back.

So please, no hasty switches in the Ubuntu color scheme!

vexorian
October 25th, 2007, 07:10 PM
Actually, I've been thinking to post a blueprint about this:

Live cd starts, before anything else a dialog appears

It got 4 options in a 2x2 layout (with previos)

"Welcome to Ubuntu 8.04 please pick your prefered layoud"

The options are:

Human gnome . Blubuntu gnome
Human familiar . Blubuntu familiar

So, you pick blubuntu and you got a blue-theme, should have human's icons but with blue tones, etc.

Now the key is: You pick familiar and it will set the layout to be a single task bar with "ubuntu button" and clock in the right side plus a desktop picker and there will be Computer and trash icons in the desktop.


The problem is that there is an identity with ubuntu's current look and layout, something I am not sure is worth sacrificing for making things easier to users, but this has the potential of being a liked feature, since there will always be people complaining about the brown theme and who think that familiar is friendly (Ask the users that think a KDE distro is friendlier just because it initially looks closer to windows...)

Tobias Pistohl
October 25th, 2007, 07:22 PM
n3tfury, I agree with you. I just think that we should make this procedure easier for the new user, by letting him choose at install time. Most ubuntu users (for example, my mom, and my girlfriend) don't know how to change the theme, or think it's too complicated/difficult.

I disagree with making the theme an install option. People are worrying about other things, when installing a new operating system. And since Ubuntu is very much known for it's simplicity, every unnecessary install option should be avoided.

But perhaps some more unique, consistent and polished themes could be provided in the theme manager. The themes that can now be found there by default look more like some outdated default Gnome themes rather than some freaky eye-candy Ubuntu-optimized themes.

Rui Pais
October 25th, 2007, 07:49 PM
i love this topic! we have a 'i hate brown' every week or so :lol:

btw i have seen brown cars before, but never a blue background coca-cola logo, a green ferrari or brown heinz beans... why would that be ;)

wladston
October 25th, 2007, 08:00 PM
The ubuntu community (people using ubuntu for some time) tent to like the brown theme ... but I'm not alone, check out this search : http://www.google.com.br/search?q=ubuntu+ugly+brown+desktop

I'm not saying that we should change to colour X. I'm saying that we need to offer other hi-quality shades, and let the user know of them.


vexorian,

To say the truth, I like the human theme, expect the window decoration... I find it really unpleasant ...

I agree the pool may seen unfair, but I'm trying to put it on the new-comming user point of view. It IS easy to change the theme, but most users don't even know that the theme can be radically changed. The first impression counts much, and Ubuntu should try the best to ensure the first contact makes an impression.

The idea for the blueprint is what I'm thinking about - but maybe with a button - show me more themes - that let's you select green, blue, red, themes, all on the same Ubuntu standard, only changing the shades, and thus preserving the identity for the Ubuntu interface.

Tobias Pistohl,

Well, I think that it's not only the color that makes something distinct, but the design quality, style, and detail. I can VERY clearly differentiate a blue Mercedes from a blue Passat, even if they are on the EXACT same shade...

You should also note that as Ubuntu is going more and more mainstream, it's getting also known for it weird-brown colour scheme. Google can show this. It would take only a few clicks to choose the style that pleases you best, and imho, that would be a really added bonus for ubuntu users, making it look even more simple to use and smart, because the way the interface looks IS relevant to the most majority of users. Some seconds spend picking up the best shades compensates the "hassle" it causes for the user, if you think how happy he should be, thinking he has his very own personalized to his taste Ubuntu look.

Bruce M.
October 25th, 2007, 08:05 PM
I put my vote with: I prefer brown

But I think the choice is wrong. It should be "Do you like the brown theme" as per the title of the thread. I still would have choosen that. It's so UN-windows which gives it a 10 in my books.

Besdes, it can be changed if you don't care for it.

wladston
October 25th, 2007, 08:07 PM
Rui,

Nice you like the topic! :) I think the important is to discuss and try to implement what is best for the end users. I personally don't hate brown that much :D I just think that the way Ubuntu looks shouldn't prevent anyone (even a newcommer) from loving Ubuntu.

btw :
green feraris : http://www.flickr.com/photos/ijsselstein/66534102/
coca cola logo : I think logos should remain in the same color. Ubuntu logo looks great, I love it!
beans : In my country, there is a local food called green beans! :) They take the beans while they are still maturing....

Irony
October 25th, 2007, 08:12 PM
I like the brown, though it looks more orange to me.

Adding an option during install would simply add an irritating step to the install.

wladston
October 25th, 2007, 08:13 PM
Bruce M.
Sorry for not keeping up with the post title ... :) I just wanted to make it more attractive, and see if people like the idea of letting the user know the power of Gnome/Compiz themes while choosing his/her color of preference.

wladston
October 25th, 2007, 08:17 PM
Irony,
For you, who loves the brown theme, yeah ... but think about those who don't know about changing themes, and HATE the brown theme, and would be much happier with another shade ...
For you, it would be just one single "irritating" click, but for a lot of people, it would represent more possibility of choice, personalization, etc..

Bruce M.
October 25th, 2007, 08:25 PM
I checked out the google search that wladston mentioned and found:

shimon
March 3rd, 2005, 11:10 AM
But brown looks like poo...

Yes, but so does a chocolate bar in 35 (C) heat, but I'll still eat it. :)

DestroyMicroshaft
October 25th, 2007, 08:38 PM
Im not much for the brown, but no matter the color I wont leave it default anyway :)

http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/7933/screenshot1yz7.th.png (http://img505.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshot1yz7.png)

Baby Boy
October 25th, 2007, 08:49 PM
Yeah, I love the brown theme. I'd rather tweak it a bit and improve it than use another one.

svivian
October 25th, 2007, 09:03 PM
I like the brown theme too, though I'd call it "orange" not brown. The one thing I dislike is the shade used for the title bar. Seems a bit...I dunno, "dirty"? IMO it would be better either as a rich chocolate colour, or a brighter orange colour.

PS I also love the shading on the buttons and toolbars, it's like a softer version of the "web 2.0" shiny look. MUCH better that Vista's awful toolbar shading!

CAD-MAN
October 25th, 2007, 09:22 PM
I like the brown theme too, though I'd call it "orange" not brown. The one thing I dislike is the shade used for the title bar. Seems a bit...I dunno, "dirty"? IMO it would be better either as a rich chocolate colour, or a brighter orange colour.

PS I also love the shading on the buttons and toolbars, it's like a softer version of the "web 2.0" shiny look. MUCH better that Vista's awful toolbar shading!

I agree - the window title bar is disgusting. I think moving more towards orange, and keeping hints of *good* shades of brown would be better. At the end of the day, when people look at screenshots of an OS, they will usually be seeing the default appearance. If that appearance is ugly, the majority will be put off, regardless of how good the operating system is.

Number one design fact: NOBODY wants anything that is ugly.

If we have scores of people saying that the default theme looks like poo, then it is clear that we must rethink. The human theme as it is can still be kept as an option (much like *shock* *horror* Microsoft kept their Windows 95/98 'classic' theme as an option in XP and Vista), but we need a new default

Rui Pais
October 25th, 2007, 09:33 PM
I agree - the window title bar is disgusting. I think moving more towards orange, and keeping hints of *good* shades of brown would be better. At the end of the day, when people look at screenshots of an OS, they will usually be seeing the default appearance. If that appearance is ugly, the majority will be put off, regardless of how good the operating system is.

Number one design fact: NOBODY wants anything that is ugly.
Thats not a "fact" by the simple fact that "ugly" it's a personal subjective opinion.
What some found ugly there are always others who found beauty.


If we have scores of people saying that the default theme looks like poo, then it is clear that we must rethink. The human theme as it is can still be kept as an option (much like *shock* *horror* Microsoft kept their Windows 95/98 'classic' theme as an option in XP and Vista), but we need a new default

Scores of this threads on color default always go half/half.
Brown/orange is one of the brand mark of Ubuntu... change it would be a severe decision as change logo.

On what is brown. Land is brown, the great majority of human people have brown skin (white are a minority in the world), trees trunk are brown.
Generically speaking the brown is every where around us... if one can only see it in excrement ... well, what can we say?

CAD-MAN
October 25th, 2007, 09:43 PM
Thats not a "fact" by the simple fact that "ugly" it's a personal subjective opinion.
What some found ugly there are always others who found beauty.

Scores of this threads on color default always go half/half.

When things go half/half, this shows that a large amount of people find the theme ugly. Virtually no products ever sell well by being half good. We don't want to be half/half, but with the majority of people saying that they like the theme.




Brown/orange is one of the brand mark of Ubuntu... change it would be a severe decision as change logo.

On what is brown. Land is brown, the great majority of human people have brown skin (white are a minority in the world), trees trunk are brown.
Generically speaking the brown is every where around us... if one can only see it in excrement ... well, what can we say?

Exactly - the theme is brown/orange. I think we should lean more towards the orange - it would fit with the logo, and wouldn't remind some people of excrement. This is the plan for Hardy - and I must say, I agree.

CAD-MAN
October 25th, 2007, 10:11 PM
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=583336

That's a link to a thread in the Hardy forum about the theme. The poll indicates that changes are needed...

P.S. I think there should have been an option in this thread's poll for 'a slight deviation from the brown', or similar.

sugarland2k
October 25th, 2007, 10:58 PM
Not totally but remember where Ubuntu comes from. Ubuntu is changing the world of computing and it's all free! The best O/S on the planet and the best community.

Brown is an earth tone and I can live with it. Not my favorite default color but I usually hang out in blue Kubuntu or green OpenSUSE.

Screen colors can be changed!

vexorian
October 26th, 2007, 12:30 AM
I love the title bar.


http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=583336

That's a link to a thread in the Hardy forum about the theme. The poll indicates that changes are needed...

The poll indicates that everybody wants their own favorite theme to be default.

vexorian
October 26th, 2007, 12:34 AM
Irony,
For you, who loves the brown theme, yeah ... but think about those who don't know about changing themes, and HATE the brown theme, and would be much happier with another shade ...
For you, it would be just one single "irritating" click, but for a lot of people, it would represent more possibility of choice, personalization, etc..
But if we changed the brown to blue we'll have to think about the 'poor' people that can't change the theme and despise the blue, as well.


http://www.google.com.br/search?q=ub...+brown+desktop

The day canonical begins to listen to those guys that are quick at dismissing something for just the color is the day I'll ditch ubuntu.

To be fair most of those hits are old, the theme has improved. I'd rather have an "ugly brown" than a "copycat blue". And seriously, pick any color but blue and you'll always get complaints, people tend to believe their tastes are some kind of standard in color quality and it is worse when they think that blue is an standard as well...

jayson.rowe
October 26th, 2007, 12:38 AM
I guess I'm just a "Default" kinda guy - I change my background depending on mood, but everytime I change "themes" from human, I end up putting it back in 10min or less...

Nymphadora
October 26th, 2007, 02:24 AM
Personally, I've liked the brown color scheme ever since I really started looking into using the OS. Brown is a warm, friendly color and, I guess because of that, that's the impression I have of Ubuntu.

That said, I'm actually planning to change it myself at some point once I can learn how to create my own theme and express myself through it. But I'd still like to see the brown as the default theme just because it's very defining.

-grubby
October 26th, 2007, 02:27 AM
the default theme makes me want to puke..but lots of people like it, and I don't see why we need to get rid of it when it's so easy to change. Also, you're telling me you've never seen a brown car?!?!

crimesaucer
October 26th, 2007, 02:44 AM
I Love the Ubuntu Brown... but we need to lose the Gray Panels, Gray Apps...

We should actually have it install with Brown, but also include a theme in Blue, Green, Red, Orange, Yellow, White, and Black... have the matching gtk clearlooks Glossy themes, and the matching metacity theme.

Also include a choice of different color human icon packs, and a few different choices of a glossy panel image.


Then nobody complains, Ubuntu stays true to what it's always been... and people that don't know how to install themes can at least have an easy choice of a few good ones.


P.S.- I've owned two Brown cars. One was a metallic brown, and they other was a light tan, like this forum's color. both had a brown colored interior.

wladston
October 26th, 2007, 03:13 AM
Looks like people agree on something :

* Orange/Brown are Ubuntu colour set identity, and should be kept as a default
* Different people have different colour tastes - a big % of people dislike the brown on Ubuntu's default theme, specially on the title bar
*It's desirable to have everyone to love their system colour

So - what do you guys think about my suggestion - provide the human theme on lots of shades (blue, red, green, silver, black, etc.), and give the user the final decision of how is the system colour suposed to be ?
The brown/yellow can still be the "pre-selected" one, what makes it still be the default theme.

Also, remember to think about the "new" ubuntu users - they don't have the technical skils to go arround the internet, search blue/red/green/black/etc. themes and install it. Most of the "new" users don't even know what is a theme, and that it can be changed .... the portion of then that doesn't like blue just looks at it and sees it as "boring" and "dusty" ...

Imagine people commenting how great the new Ubuntu system is - it can be configured to the colour the user chooses, at install time! Generally when companies do it (for example, ship a product in many colours for you to choose, or gives you more cases when you buy your cellphone, so you can switch them), it becomes a major success...

por100pre1
October 26th, 2007, 12:23 PM
The same old recurring discussion! Human is fine, with nice colors. Just pimp the panels a little bit; maybe other orange icons and would be just perfect. We don't need another Luna theme!
:guitar:

Dreamy1
October 26th, 2007, 12:28 PM
Yes and no, although a much darker would actually suit better I think. :)

jespdj
October 26th, 2007, 12:33 PM
I am not a fan of the default brown theme, but customizing the colours and the look and feel is very easy.

Ubuntu works great on my computer, but there are ofcourse bugs, and fixing those is infinitely more important than having the default colors changed...

CAD-MAN
October 26th, 2007, 02:41 PM
We don't have to lose the brown/orange entirely - just go more towards the orange than the brown (but still keep hints of brown).

This is the plan for Hardy (along with blackish panels).

wladston
October 26th, 2007, 03:49 PM
Guys,

I'm not here to propose the default color to be changed. I'm here to propose that the user is given a choice to see what colour he likes best on his own desktop .... some of you guys, ubuntu lovers, think that the human theme as it is is fine, but I can guarantee that you are not the majority..... Many people, mostly the people that don't love ubutu yet, people that don't use this forum, find the colour scheme and the title bar really boring and ugly compared to windows, and they think, in consequence, that it's less powerfull than other operating systems. As people said earlier - the first impression counts a lot, and people DO give a lot of importance to the design.


If you want to see it as a bug, the bug would be - "Ubuntu look is a barrier to the new user"

or - "most new users aren't satisfied with Ubuntu theme"

when convincing my girlfriend, that mainly uses the computer for internet and writing papers, to use linux, the most difficult part for her was the brown title bars ...

crimesaucer
October 26th, 2007, 05:42 PM
Guys,

I'm not here to propose the default color to be changed. I'm here to propose that the user is given a choice to see what colour he likes best on his own desktop .... some of you guys, ubuntu lovers, think that the human theme as it is is fine, but I can guarantee that you are not the majority..... Many people, mostly the people that don't love ubutu yet, people that don't use this forum, find the colour scheme and the title bar really boring and ugly compared to windows, and they think, in consequence, that it's less powerfull than other operating systems. As people said earlier - the first impression counts a lot, and people DO give a lot of importance to the design.


If you want to see it as a bug, the bug would be - "Ubuntu look is a barrier to the new user"

or - "most new users aren't satisfied with Ubuntu theme"

when convincing my girlfriend, that mainly uses the computer for internet and writing papers, to use linux, the most difficult part for her was the brown title bars ...


I understand your point, but at the same time disagree. Ubuntu is pretty easy to customize and change, easier than windows and most people know how to do that. A beginner also feels accomplished after changing a theme to exactly how they want it, which is a nice feeling after being on Windows Xp.


Your girlfriend could of easily chose a different window theme like clearlooks, glossy, industrial... and they come pre-installed with the human theme... just like we are suggesting with different color human themes.


She could of easily gone to System-->Preferences-->--Appearance ...and then... just clicked the easily scene, "Customize.." button, to choose the "Colors" tab, which can change everything. She could even choose the "Window Border" tab to just change the human brown windows...


While there in the "Customize.." section, you can mix and match your icons, pointers, and gtk themes as well.


The whole "theme" issue used to be more of a problem back in 6.06, and in distros like xubuntu... Where changing themes as a beginner was still easy, but not customizable like it is now in ubuntu 7.10... installing Beryl was more complicated, and the way to really enjoy unique custom themes was to download a gtk-2.0.tar.gz, unpack it and place it in the correct area... with the correct theme engine installed... now that was difficult for a beginner.


But don't get me wrong, I agree that there should be at least 5 new gtk themes added to the pre-installed themes. In those 5 new themes, they should all basically be the same theme, with maybe a few differences in the widgets... and they should each have a matching ubuntu wallpaper theme, a matching ubuntu humna icon pack, and a matching glossy panel theme...


I would suggest that we go with the Orange for default since it's had already been chosen by the developers, then have a Brown, Blue, Green, and Black ubuntu wallpaper with matching human gtk theme available.


The reason why I suggest that is that when people blog about Ubuntu, and they do all those screenshots that end up on digg and lifehacker, now they can show the screenshots of all the new ubuntu looks and everyone can shut up about the brown wallpaper because it will be one of the five choices shown.

wladston
October 26th, 2007, 05:58 PM
crimesaucer,

I get your point. But the fact is that most people don't know about themes, and that they can be changed. Ubuntu has no "Features tour", and on windows, changing the theme isn't an easy/common task.

My gf was amazed when I told her that the colours, tiles, title bars and icons could easily be changed. She looked at me and said - "oh, really" ?

My mother, who isn't really familiar with a computer, should have a similar vision. The idea is getting the people to know the powerness of Gnome, letting then know how easy it is to change themes.

A more concrete example - a computer case colour/style can be changed, but if the seller doesn't propose the alternatives at the sell time, most of the guys will stick with the "default" option the seller offer, because they won't know that there are other options.

When you are with a seller, you can ask "hum... are there other colours available ?" With an oprating system that can't understand the human speech, things can be more difficult, specially for those that don't have experience with computers.

crimesaucer
October 26th, 2007, 08:44 PM
crimesaucer,

I get your point. But the fact is that most people don't know about themes, and that they can be changed. Ubuntu has no "Features tour", and on windows, changing the theme isn't an easy/common task.

My gf was amazed when I told her that the colours, tiles, title bars and icons could easily be changed. She looked at me and said - "oh, really" ?

My mother, who isn't really familiar with a computer, should have a similar vision. The idea is getting the people to know the powerness of Gnome, letting then know how easy it is to change themes.

A more concrete example - a computer case colour/style can be changed, but if the seller doesn't propose the alternatives at the sell time, most of the guys will stick with the "default" option the seller offer, because they won't know that there are other options.

When you are with a seller, you can ask "hum... are there other colours available ?" With an oprating system that can't understand the human speech, things can be more difficult, specially for those that don't have experience with computers.

We really are both in agreement on the issue of having more choices, in a way that beginners know about.


And like I said, ubuntu is easier than windows when it comes to changing themes, a total beginner just needs to see how to do it and then they'll realize how simple it is.


But you are correct when you say there is no "Features Tour", and maybe there should be something about theme change after the first install, or maybe a selector in the install process...


Maybe just have the Appearances app open right after the install with a note about how to change the themes/wallpapers/icons... showing them the various choices, while teaching them how to do it their selves.


... or have a sticky in the Absolute Beginner section of the Ubuntu Forums with instructions and pictures for theme modification.

cank1090
October 26th, 2007, 08:46 PM
Just take a look at Apple's Mac OS X. Hell, they just know how to do it! Imho they have the best artwork around all OS: simple, elegant and yet so stylish! I don't want Ubuntu (Linux) to copy any design from any OS, but the ideas of simplicity, elegance and a modern look and feel should become elementary parts of Ubuntus artwork! Therefore, the default brown scheme is way to boring and looks like 1996 or so. This is the totally opposite to the stylish "bling" effects by Compiz Fusion :). My choice of color scheme would definately be something about black/silver, with some nice but discrete milky, glossy and shiny look.

LuisAugusto
October 27th, 2007, 06:31 AM
It's true that beauty is subjective.

However, there are things that people find nice by default.
I'm studing photo, and you can bet that there are a lot of things people like in common, they may like it less, or more, but they find it enjoyable.

How do you find those things? There is something called Visual Art Disignerr, which stuided a lot of human expression in a subject called History of Art.

How many people did you find saying:

-Mac OS X look sucks and it looks like poo
-Windows Vista look makes me wanna puke

Hmm, I bet they won't be many.

Why? They have nice grpahical designers, while Ubu doesn't. It's that plain simple.

DjBones
October 27th, 2007, 07:42 AM
I don't mind the color as much, its different than the other hundreds of linux distro's out there lol..

but i kinda get the impression that with OS X's blue icons and Vista's fancy ones.. the cartoonish icons of default ubuntu seem somewhat behind.
they should make the white-glass mouse default.. its pretty sleek lol
most of this could probably be resolved by packaging ubuntu with more default themes besides clearlooks and some other .. 'meh' themes haha

Rui Pais
October 27th, 2007, 11:01 AM
It's true that beauty is subjective.

However, there are things that people find nice by default.
I'm studing photo, and you can bet that there are a lot of things people like in common, they may like it less, or more, but they find it enjoyable.

How do you find those things? There is something called Visual Art Disignerr, which stuided a lot of human expression in a subject called History of Art.

How many people did you find saying:

-Mac OS X look sucks and it looks like poo
-Windows Vista look makes me wanna puke

Hmm, I bet they won't be many.

Why? They have nice grpahical designers, while Ubu doesn't. It's that plain simple.

Can you count me?

MacOS mixed blue crystal with polished metal, is what in my mind should be the decoration of prostitution houses specialized in sado-masochism, frequented by over painted women and over perfumed men wearing too much jewelery buy it and cheap shops of shopping centers.

Windows Vista looks like a bad and limited compiz theme, altough better then the previous XP, that looked like a retarted tele-tubies show that even children wanna puke.


Taste is cultivated. Beauty is subjective.
Graphical designers are not engineers, don't make some calculus with precision, right or wrong. They are just specialized artists with they own taste (the great majority of the ones i know not very good, btw).
Thats why there are always schools, movements, theories... Try mix Mariscal with Aalto, or put a picture of Cameron in the middle of a Mapplethorpe exhibition... not really good, ah? Are those bad artist? No, they will be only out of context.
Blue, grey, silver is out of context on an Ubuntu color scheme. Thats all.

oomingmak
October 27th, 2007, 12:16 PM
I think the brown is fine. It's certainly distinctive.

What I would absolutely hate is if the theme was changed to blue or black. I am sick to death of OS themes using those colours.

Blue OS themes in particular are so tired and unimaginative.

oomingmak
October 27th, 2007, 12:17 PM
How many people did you find saying:

-Mac OS X look sucks and it looks like poo
Me, for one.

I hate the look of Mac OS X.

Perpetual
October 27th, 2007, 02:05 PM
I think the brown is fine. It's certainly distinctive.

What I would absolutely hate is if the theme was changed to blue or black. I am sick to death of OS themes using those colours.

Blue OS themes in particular are so tired and unimaginative.

/me agrees

LuisAugusto
October 27th, 2007, 08:57 PM
Dah, here they could come one hundred saying they dislike Windows Vista and OS X look, however, why you don't take a screenshot to each one, and then go to the street and ask people which is one is the better and worst.

You are just blind because of fanaticsm.

cank1090
October 28th, 2007, 12:08 AM
Dah, here they could come one hundred saying they dislike Windows Vista and OS X look, however, why you don't take a screenshot to each one, and then go to the street and ask people which is one is the better and worst.

You are just blind because of fanaticsm.

There is some serious truth in what you say. I hear many people saying that Vista or OS X look is great/fantastic/stunning, whatsoever. But I dind't heard anyone saying this about Ubuntu's default look. Not one single person! The only positive comments about Ubuntu's look that I hear is something like "Ohh yeah, it's nice" or "Hmm yes it kinda represents the humanity of Ubuntu". But thats out of date. Ubuntu is not a painting, it's an OS! If it really wants to compete with the two major Desktop OS succesfully, it has to improve its default theme, because that's what makes the "look and feel" of an OS. And due to the fact that we don't live in the ages of commando based OS any more, the "look and feel" is a major part of a graphical user interface. Considering this, Ubuntu is far behind Vista and OS X.

Perpetual
October 28th, 2007, 04:14 AM
I personally have never decided on an OS because of it's appearance. If so, I wouldn't choose Ubuntu and I would guess that most people wouldn't. With that said, choosing an OS by it's appearance is sorta like buying a book because it has a cool cover, regardless of how bad the story sucks.

I feel this is getting blown out of proportion a bit...

Crafty Kisses
October 28th, 2007, 05:08 AM
Guys,

I know there are some topics already concerning this issue, but there is none with a pool. I think we need to know - what is preferred - the default brownish colour scheme, or something else ?

I particularly can handle with the brownish look, but I was amazed when I saw how much better it can look using another colour scheme. I think the default could be blue, sliver, black-ish, green .... but not brown ..

When showing it to my friends, one of the most popular comments is - "eh, looks good, except for the Brown windows". And I'm not alone - I've seen lots of people make the same content on their blogs. Also, if you guys search on the internet, most of the people that are recommending others to use ubuntu also strongly recommend to get others themes...


So I wanna know what you think about it - stick with the brown-orange shades, or move to something else ?

Some folks say the the brown is the most "human" and "familiar" colour .... but I doubt that .. if it was true, I think brown would be the preferred colour to choose on cars, trains, etc. And I've never seen a brown car, or train, or tech-related product... (exepct for a dirty one) :-/

Another option that I thought is not sticking with a default - let the user try and choose from the most popular themes at start time. This would be awesome imo.
1
Please, note you can choose more than one option on the pool !!

I personally like it!

LuisAugusto
October 28th, 2007, 05:40 AM
I personally have never decided on an OS because of it's appearance. If so, I wouldn't choose Ubuntu and I would guess that most people wouldn't. With that said, choosing an OS by it's appearance is sorta like buying a book because it has a cool cover, regardless of how bad the story sucks.

I feel this is getting blown out of proportion a bit...

Pretty is a feature. And for end-users, it's quite and important feature.

Like in women, there a lot of things that are more important than external beauty, but, if she is pretty, it's even better, isn't it?

Perpetual
October 28th, 2007, 05:52 AM
Pretty is a feature. And for end-users, it's quite and important feature.

Like in women, there a lot of things that are more important than external beauty, but, if she is pretty, it's even better, isn't it?

Can't live years with pretty alone :)

But indeed, it helps!

Crafty Kisses
October 28th, 2007, 06:07 AM
Can't live years with pretty alone :)

But indeed, it helps!

:)

Rui Pais
October 28th, 2007, 10:17 AM
Uauu...
what's this?
going to the streets showing pics of OS? are we talk of some weird religion? Accusations of fanaticism in fanatical tones?

sexist comparisons? What looks of women (and why women specifically) had to do with default look of a desktop environment?
I didn't even understand why people mention gf's dislikes. What this have to do with the subject?

This topic has lost any seriousness that it may have at start. I'm unsubscribe from it.

Irony
October 28th, 2007, 06:30 PM
Irony,
For you, who loves the brown theme, yeah ... but think about those who don't know about changing themes, and HATE the brown theme, and would be much happier with another shade ...
For you, it would be just one single "irritating" click, but for a lot of people, it would represent more possibility of choice, personalization, etc..

Yes I'm sure that a person who is smart enough to install an operating system would be too stupid to figure out how to alter the colour themes afterwards - far better to add it in as an irritating and delaying measure during the actual install.

LuisAugusto
October 28th, 2007, 07:16 PM
Uauu...
what's this?
going to the streets showing pics of OS? are we talk of some weird religion? Accusations of fanaticism in fanatical tones?

Didn't you understand the point? And,anyway, Why does it is bad? Don't you know something, how they are called, mmm, Market studies?


sexist comparisons? What looks of women (and why women specifically) had to do with default look of a desktop environment?
I didn't even understand why people mention gf's dislikes. What this have to do with the subject?

If you can't see the analogy then you're quite slow O_o I could use men, dogs, or whatever. I just used women because I'm a man and most people here are, so it's something most of us have in common ;)


This topic has lost any seriousness that it may have at start. I'm unsubscribe from it.

Why in the world I bother answering you? :P

rfurman24
November 1st, 2007, 07:03 PM
My biggest concern with the default themes has less to do with the color and more to do with the ugly gray of the two bars and the menus and the window colors. I personally feel that the vistaish themes on gnome-look are awesome. I really do not want them to copy Vista but get rid of the plain flat boring colors. Gloss it up a little.

Perpetual
November 1st, 2007, 08:03 PM
My biggest concern with the default themes has less to do with the color and more to do with the ugly gray of the two bars and the menus and the window colors. I personally feel that the vistaish themes on gnome-look are awesome. I really do not want them to copy Vista but get rid of the plain flat boring colors. Gloss it up a little.

PERSONALLY, in my opinion, I can't stand glossy and prefer a matte/flat window border, panel, etcetera. Everyone is doing glossy and I think it's on it's downhill slide now.

mech7
November 1st, 2007, 08:44 PM
i prefer grey or black.. or blue but not brown

rfurman24
November 7th, 2007, 08:40 PM
PERSONALLY, in my opinion, I can't stand glossy and prefer a matte/flat window border, panel, etcetera. Everyone is doing glossy and I think it's on it's downhill slide now.

I totally respect your opinion but we have been looking at boring flat colors since computers came about. In the end I guess the default does not matter much to me as I would probably change it no matter what.

wladston
November 7th, 2007, 08:45 PM
rfurman, see ? Everybody has a unique taste, and THAT shall be taken in consideration...

Changing the themes are easy, if they are pre-installed, and the end-ser knows that they exist ... else ...

Gremlinzzz
November 7th, 2007, 09:32 PM
Theres no real need too change default theme most Linux users like to tweak there own theme.

por100pre1
November 7th, 2007, 11:35 PM
Theres no real need too change default theme most Linux users like to tweak there own theme.

Yes, there's no need to change it. BTW, that desktop looks great! :)

smartboyathome
November 7th, 2007, 11:37 PM
Yes, there's no need to change it. BTW, that desktop looks great! :)

It is what people SEE when they first see Ubuntu, though.

Linuxratty
November 8th, 2007, 12:34 AM
I like the brown, though it looks more orange to me.

Adding an option during install would simply add an irritating step to the install.

I like the brown theme for in the fall. It goes well with a desktop of trees changing colors...Other colors should be provided for other times of the year and they are there already...A little poking around and the theme is easy to change in both Gnome and KDE.

doppis
November 8th, 2007, 06:44 AM
What's wrong with brown? :(

LuisAugusto
November 8th, 2007, 07:21 AM
What's wrong with brown? :(

Brown is bad color for any product wanting a nice image, because, by it's own nature, it tends to be boring, too simple, it reminds of death, and it gives an "old" product feeling.

Orange, it's a more living/vivid color ("Colores Vivos" it's an Spanish expression, and I'm not sure if is it used on English) and black, well, it doesn't need presentation.

kvonb
November 8th, 2007, 07:29 AM
Surely it's not important if you like/dislike it, the main thing is that it is a rolling standard.

It certainly sets Ubuntu apart from all the other "blue" O/Ss, as soon as you see the brown desktop, you know it's Ubuntu!

I mean, who in their right mind would go out of their way to create a brown desktop?

The main thing is that you can do whatever you want with it, you can have yellow and green flouro spots all over your screen if you so desire!

It's a trademark, love it or loathe it, you recognise it straight away!

tashmooclam
November 8th, 2007, 07:36 AM
I like the brown on one of my laptops, it's displayed a bit differently on each computer. On another, the color of an empty field is pinkish not a brown shade, which looks pretty ugly.
I have a lighter brown desktop, I found a couple of them at gnome-look.org.
One I like is "suede"
Another is a girl and a brown background "vector".
I only dislike that orange colored progress bar in the default Ubuntu human theme.
I like the "human" icons the best also.

khurrum1990
November 8th, 2007, 07:36 AM
I think Ubuntu Linux is quite popular already. I don't care about the color of the theme by default but it should look good and currently all pre-installed themes suck.

shae
November 8th, 2007, 07:45 AM
The default look of Ubuntu is excellent as a marketing tool. Anytime you see it, you know it is Ubuntu. I even do not mind it too much, but my preferences are blue or green. I do not think it should be default. Installing themes is easy and anyone should customize their theme as they like.
My look: Ubuntu 7.10, Gnome with xfwm4 and kiba-dock Screenshot Here (http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/4940/screenshotpy0.png)

eragon100
September 30th, 2008, 07:10 PM
As we feared, phoronix confirms that his abomination is actually the intrepid default wallpaper:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Njc1NA

hessiess
September 30th, 2008, 07:16 PM
if you dont like it, cxhange it. thats the beauty of linux;)

RiceMonster
September 30th, 2008, 07:19 PM
I don't understand why anyone would care about the default look; especially the wallpaper. That's the easiest part to change (and changing the rest is pretty easy as well).

lukjad007
September 30th, 2008, 07:20 PM
Ewww! I really don't like it. I mean, it's okay... but not great or even really good. I know it is easy to change, but I really like the Hardy Heron wallpaper, it just was a pleasent start off point for the new user. It at least looked like something.

regomodo
September 30th, 2008, 07:25 PM
#

Dr Small
September 30th, 2008, 07:59 PM
The wallpaper looks, hmm, choppy, I guess the word is. I don't like it, but I never kept the default wallpapers on anyhow, so it's not a real big deal.

Dragonbite
September 30th, 2008, 08:04 PM
I propose we should petition to make this (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=930865)the default theme!

Gutt
September 30th, 2008, 08:05 PM
It's not a big deal, but it's still doesn't look any good :-P .

Dr Small
September 30th, 2008, 08:14 PM
I propose we should petition to make this (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=930865)the default theme!
I say... let's not.

Barrucadu
September 30th, 2008, 08:21 PM
It's ok, but not as good as the Hardy wallpaper.

Gutt
September 30th, 2008, 08:23 PM
I say... let's not.

Why not? It's more original :D !

artir
September 30th, 2008, 08:32 PM
Canonical will change it. I'm sure.
Get the attached wallpapah! (Made by Rico Sta. Cruz )
Other versions: http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/5184/ibexvz6.png
In HiRes http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/3098/ibex1920x1440nc9.jpg

Fixman
September 30th, 2008, 08:37 PM
It was gonna be on Hardy...it wasn't.
It was gonna be on Intrepid...it wasn't (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Njc1NA).

Why must I change that ugly theme each time I install Ubuntu?

b3n87
September 30th, 2008, 08:37 PM
I was kind of hoping for a complete head to toe revamp, which was suppose to happen in Hardy, but got pushed to Ibex. But apparently not?

bobbocanfly
September 30th, 2008, 08:40 PM
@People who dont like it: Change it when it is released, or if you are cool, go help the Art team

@People wanting a complete redesign: Please talk to the art team about helping out in any way you can.

@People who like it/are sensible enough not too care because they will just change it anyway: Good on you!

cardinals_fan
September 30th, 2008, 08:44 PM
Why must I change that ugly theme each time I install Ubuntu?
Oh dear. Those ten seconds really hurt, don't they? ;)

Fixman
September 30th, 2008, 08:46 PM
Oh dear. Those ten seconds really hurt, don't they? ;)

I'm not so good with Ubuntu, I take 15 seconds to do it. That is a pain.
And, otherwise, Ubuntu is shown everywhere with that theme.

b3n87
September 30th, 2008, 08:48 PM
Its not the point on how quick it is to change it, nor that we have the CHOICE to change it. (and not that we are owed the RIGHT to have it changed) it is just gonna be really nice to see what the Art team really have up their sleeve thats all. There was a lot of hype when it was announced that hardy was gonna have a revamp

Swarms
September 30th, 2008, 08:49 PM
@People who dont like it: Change it when it is released, or if you are cool, go help the Art team

We are perfectly aware that you are able to change the desktop wallpaper, but it is about making a good first impression is it not? Like someone posted, there is a beautiful wallpaper roaming the Art team maillist that most have said they preferred. So it is not choices that is the problem. God knows what it is.

Swarms
September 30th, 2008, 08:50 PM
Normal people pick from the looks, wouldn't we like to appeal to them? ;)

bobbocanfly
September 30th, 2008, 08:51 PM
We are perfectly aware that you are able to change the desktop wallpaper, but it is about making a good first impression is it not? Like someone posted, there is a beautiful wallpaper roaming the Art team maillist that most have said they preferred. So it is not choices that is the problem. God knows what it is.

Then take the second part of my quote into account. Go and tell the art team mailing list you prefer it. The more people do that, the more it is likely to change.

(Sorry if im sounding like a d*ck, just as an Ubuntu developer it can get pretty annoying reading people whinging about things not working, but not actually even trying to help get them fixed)

Swarms
September 30th, 2008, 08:54 PM
Then take the second part of my quote into account. Go and tell the art team mailing list you prefer it. The more people do that, the more it is likely to change.

(Sorry if im sounding like a d*ck, just as an Ubuntu developer it can get pretty annoying reading people whinging about things not working, but not actually even trying to help get them fixed)

Are the devs not reading the forums like you? Its quite thick with threads in here with opinions about the new wallpaper.

bobbocanfly
September 30th, 2008, 08:58 PM
Are the devs not reading the forums like you? Its quite thick with threads in here with opinions about the new wallpaper.

No, most devs just idle on IRC and read mailing lists. Most of them are too busy with real life + ubuntu + any other oss stuff they do to browse the forums. It would be much handier if a lot more of the devs browsed here to get the general feeling of the masses, but other than appoint someone to ferry information between the forums and the core developers, there isnt a great deal we can do.

Im sure if more devs + desktop team + art team browsed here, the wallpaper would be changed extremely quickly!

Swarms
September 30th, 2008, 08:59 PM
No, most devs just idle on IRC and read mailing lists. Most of them are too busy with real life + ubuntu + any other oss stuff they do to browse the forums. It would be much handier if a lot more of the devs browsed here to get the general feeling of the masses, but other than appoint someone to ferry information between the forums and the core developers, there isnt a great deal we can do.

Ah, didn't know that. Thanks for sharing.

Therion
September 30th, 2008, 09:00 PM
As if ANY dev-team could EVER come up with a single design that would please everyone.

Bungo Pony
September 30th, 2008, 09:07 PM
Well that tears it. I'm officially avoiding Ibex! :D

Swarms
September 30th, 2008, 09:08 PM
As if ANY dev-team could EVER come up with a single design that would please everyone.

We are maybe talking like 80% instead of 10%.

Therion
September 30th, 2008, 09:11 PM
As if ANY dev-team could EVER come up with a single design that would please everyone.
We are maybe talking like 80% instead of 10%.
As if ANY dev-team could EVER come up with a single design that would please "like 80%" of everyone.






/pipe dream

cardinals_fan
September 30th, 2008, 09:14 PM
Normal people pick from the looks, wouldn't we like to appeal to them? ;)
If the default wallpaper plays a major role in someone's choice of OS, I seriously doubt if they are capable of installing/configuring any OS.

Dr Small
September 30th, 2008, 09:20 PM
Maybe Intrepid's wallpaper should be "bliss".

mikewhatever
September 30th, 2008, 09:21 PM
I propose we should petition to make this (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=930865)the default theme!

Awesome!:lolflag:

boobuntu
September 30th, 2008, 09:24 PM
I'm not so good with Ubuntu, I take 15 seconds to do it. That is a pain.
And, otherwise, Ubuntu is shown everywhere with that theme.

Hey! Some people like poop brown :P

smoker
September 30th, 2008, 09:30 PM
maybe they don't want to attract 'too many' new users :-)

earthpigg
September 30th, 2008, 09:30 PM
If the default wallpaper plays a major role in someone's choice of OS, I seriously doubt if they are capable of installing/configuring any OS.

~plenty~ of grandmothers go out and buy brand new computers and leave everything about the computer in the default setup. generally, this results in a crap ton of (windows) malware and viruses that grandson has to come and fix.... but grandma still picks the entire computer she buys based off of what the OS looks like at the in-store display.

or am i the only one that has noticed that Dell's default mini 9 UI has a different colored taskbar and background? lord knows, dell knows more about marketing than most of us...

olskar
September 30th, 2008, 09:30 PM
If the default wallpaper plays a major role in someone's choice of OS, I seriously doubt if they are capable of installing/configuring any OS.


We are not talking about wallpapers, we are talking about a complete redesign and all that comes with that. Simply a better user experience, and yes user experience plays a role when choosing OS :)

Fixman
September 30th, 2008, 09:31 PM
Hey! Some people like poop brown :P

You are right, only these (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scatophilia) people like Ubuntu's main theme.

olskar
September 30th, 2008, 09:31 PM
maybe they don't want to attract 'too many' new users :-)

Ah, we have a conspiracy theory? ;)

olskar
September 30th, 2008, 09:32 PM
You are right, only these (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scatophilia) people like Ubuntu's main theme.

Haha, +1

Dr Small
September 30th, 2008, 09:35 PM
Ah, we have a conspiracy theory? ;)
There is nothing wrong with a conspiracy. I am a conspirator myself ;)

jespdj
September 30th, 2008, 09:45 PM
The new wallpaper and no change at all in the rest of the default theme in Intrepid is disappointing.


@People who dont like it: Change it when it is released, or if you are cool, go help the Art team

@People wanting a complete redesign: Please talk to the art team about helping out in any way you can.
Ok, but I can't imagine that the Art team did not produce anything but a new, simple, boring wallpaper with some circles since the release of 8.04.

Where have all the proposals of the Art team gone? Why wasn't a better wallpaper and theme selected for Intrepid?

master5o1
September 30th, 2008, 09:46 PM
It was gonna be on Hardy...it wasn't.
It was gonna be on Intrepid...is wasn't (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Njc1NA).

Why must I change that ugly theme each time I install Ubuntu?

Ugly? I don't like any other theme BUT Human.

Swarms
September 30th, 2008, 09:48 PM
As if ANY dev-team could EVER come up with a single design that would please "like 80%" of everyone.






/pipe dream

There is a difference between so good that you won't switch it and just visually pleasing. I think the Hardy wallpaper was the last one. People liked it even if they had another they would change it into.

techmarks
September 30th, 2008, 09:48 PM
Usually you get retorts like that,

it takes a few seconds to change it,
it should not matter to people,

well you can just turn that around to the designers could you not??

it takes a few seconds to change it,
it should not matter so much to the developers to make the change,

why?

because alot of people do find the default Ubuntu theme displeasing, unimaginative, lacking sense, and downright ugly.

semitone36
September 30th, 2008, 09:57 PM
No, most devs just idle on IRC and read mailing lists. Most of them are too busy with real life + ubuntu + any other oss stuff they do to browse the forums.

Then you are one of a kind. Thank you for taking the time to come here:)

cardinals_fan
September 30th, 2008, 10:08 PM
~plenty~ of grandmothers go out and buy brand new computers and leave everything about the computer in the default setup. generally, this results in a crap ton of (windows) malware and viruses that grandson has to come and fix.... but grandma still picks the entire computer she buys based off of what the OS looks like at the in-store display.

or am i the only one that has noticed that Dell's default mini 9 UI has a different colored taskbar and background? lord knows, dell knows more about marketing than most of us...
OEMs can (and do) change the wallpaper before selling any OS. The default is irrelevant in those cases.

We are not talking about wallpapers, we are talking about a complete redesign and all that comes with that. Simply a better user experience, and yes user experience plays a role when choosing OS :)
I never heard about any plans to completely redesign GNOME. A new theme is not a complete redesign.

plun
September 30th, 2008, 10:08 PM
(Sorry if im sounding like a d*ck, just as an Ubuntu developer it can get pretty annoying reading people whinging about things not working, but not actually even trying to help get them fixed)

Well... now this wallpaper is horrible.

gnome-wallpapers for ver 2.24 includes some alive wallpapers.

Just my opinion...

porchrat
September 30th, 2008, 10:13 PM
Oh dear. Those ten seconds really hurt, don't they? ;)

With that horrible theme...10 seconds is an ETERNITY!!!

FuturePilot
September 30th, 2008, 10:15 PM
meh I really don't care. If someone is going to not use Ubuntu because they say it looks ugly, then that's a pretty poor reason to not use Ubuntu. Especially considering how easy it is to change the theme and wallpaper and icons compared to other OSes.

The new Gnome wallpapers are awesome though.

bruce89
September 30th, 2008, 10:16 PM
I never heard about any plans to completely redesign GNOME. A new theme is not a complete redesign.

Even GNOME 3.0 is going to be evolutionary, not revolutionary.

Icehuck
September 30th, 2008, 10:16 PM
No, most devs just idle on IRC and read mailing lists. Most of them are too busy with real life + ubuntu + any other oss stuff they do to browse the forums. It would be much handier if a lot more of the devs browsed here to get the general feeling of the masses, but other than appoint someone to ferry information between the forums and the core developers, there isnt a great deal we can do.

Im sure if more devs + desktop team + art team browsed here, the wallpaper would be changed extremely quickly!

I'm not trying to put anyone down, but if the community resides mostly on the forums and not the mailing list aren't they isolating themselves from the community? If Ubuntu is for the people then it would behoove the developers to go where the people are, not vice versa?

smoker
September 30th, 2008, 10:17 PM
i don't know if any polls have been done, but i'll bet a good percentage of users change the theme within a matter of hours! it's no great chore, though, part of the post-install process for me.

pp.
September 30th, 2008, 10:17 PM
alot of people do find the default Ubuntu theme displeasing, unimaginative, lacking sense, and downright ugly.

Alotof people do not find so, or find it utterly irrelevant.

Mazza558
September 30th, 2008, 10:19 PM
As much as people here don't want to admit it, the theme Ubuntu uses will influence people's very first impressions of it. The more professional the default setup looks, the more confident new users will be. This is not about the fact that experienced users can change the theme - experienced users will not care.

RiceMonster
September 30th, 2008, 10:20 PM
Well that tears it. I'm officially avoiding Ibex! :D

What a goofy reason to avoid a new release.

Swarms
September 30th, 2008, 10:21 PM
Alotof people do not find so, or find it utterly irrelevant.

i don't know if any polls have been done, but i'll bet a good percentage of users change the theme within a matter of hours! it's no great chore, though, part of the post-install process for me.

Though I agree with the first one, I would like to find out what the majority thinks.

Swarms
September 30th, 2008, 10:21 PM
What a goofy reason to avoid a new release.

I think you didn't catch his sarcasm.

RiceMonster
September 30th, 2008, 10:22 PM
D'oh ](*,)

uberdonkey5
September 30th, 2008, 10:24 PM
ok, I hate moving 3d cubes and all the other wastes of processing power...

however, ubuntu as it is LOOKS CHEAP

it looks second rate. Out of the box windows looks much better.

I think we can get a unique, pretty, clean look (like my desktop) without copying windows.

HOWEVER, I suggested in another post (since the themes are already available on ubuntu) that there is a winbuntu version, which looks like windows, has codecs, has best equivalent software to windows, but is ubuntu. This would help people adjust to ubuntu, and before you know it they will be wasting their time with rotating compiz cubes.

Swarms
September 30th, 2008, 10:27 PM
ok, I hate moving 3d cubes and all the other wastes of processing power...

however, ubuntu as it is LOOKS CHEAP

it looks second rate. Out of the box windows looks much better.

I think we can get a unique, pretty, clean look (like my desktop) without copying windows.

HOWEVER, I suggested in another post (since the themes are already available on ubuntu) that there is a winbuntu version, which looks like windows, has codecs, has best equivalent software to windows, but is ubuntu. This would help people adjust to ubuntu, and before you know it they will be wasting their time with rotating compiz cubes.

I think you are right about Ubuntu looking cheap. But a winbuntu would just confuse people let's continue steering our own way but still focus on improving the visual situation.

plun
September 30th, 2008, 10:27 PM
meh I really don't care. If someone is going to not use Ubuntu because they say it looks ugly, then that's a pretty poor reason to not use Ubuntu. Especially considering how easy it is to change the theme and wallpaper and icons compared to other OSes.


Well... Ubuntu is "main stream" now and magazines all over the world publish news about Ubuntu.

Why ruin those news with a terrible desktop..:confused:

"Its brown and the most horrible wallpaper we ever seen..." just sad...

RiceMonster
September 30th, 2008, 10:30 PM
To all the people talking about attracting new users: why does it mater so much for you? Isn't Ubuntu/Linux working great for you already?


~plenty~ of grandmothers go out and buy brand new computers and leave everything about the computer in the default setup. generally, this results in a crap ton of (windows) malware and viruses that grandson has to come and fix.... but grandma still picks the entire computer she buys based off of what the OS looks like at the in-store display.

or am i the only one that has noticed that Dell's default mini 9 UI has a different colored taskbar and background? lord knows, dell knows more about marketing than most of us...

The only seniors I know who have computers either an older computer someone gave for them, or have someone else (such as a son or daughter) pick it out for them.

techmarks
September 30th, 2008, 10:32 PM
Trying to look like windows is also a bad idea.

I consider Ubuntu to be a cutting edge modern OS.

But indeed it does look just cheap.

No default theme is going to please everyone.

But one that looks dark and depressing, and cheap, is not
presenting a good image.

After all Ubuntu has situated itself
as a graphical desktop, well they should put more care into the
default graphics.

olskar
September 30th, 2008, 10:44 PM
Brown is not a very happy colour..

http://www.creativebehavior.com/index.php?PID=42

m10
September 30th, 2008, 10:45 PM
i agree that they definitely *should* put a better wallpaper as default..
and then the promised theme change, where is it?
i wouldn't have mind if they didn't tell us that it would happen (theme change)
and didn't mark say that they want to mimic more the Macs? with their policed interfaces? well..

anyway we are still in beta and everything may change.. let's hope for the best..

cardinals_fan
September 30th, 2008, 10:52 PM
Brown is not a very happy colour..

http://www.creativebehavior.com/index.php?PID=42
Brown isn't on that list. Nice.

pp.
September 30th, 2008, 10:52 PM
Brown is not a very happy colour..

That's why chocolate is sold in every conceivable colour except brown. Also, food stores traditionally refuse to sell nuts or dates of every description because their brownish colour evokes disgust in customers wanting to buy clean foodstuff.

olskar
September 30th, 2008, 10:54 PM
Brown isn't on that list. Nice.

No. It is not, but how do you feel about brown?

cardinals_fan
September 30th, 2008, 10:55 PM
No. It is not, but how do you feel about brown?
Brown is calming and natural.

olskar
September 30th, 2008, 11:04 PM
Brown is calming and natural.

Yeah, I tend to forget that taste and themes are almost impossible to discuss since every person has his/her own favorites :)

chris4585
September 30th, 2008, 11:08 PM
I personally love the brown colors, if I had it my way.. We'd still use the (feisty?) wallpaper dawn of ubuntu... I love that one, even though its not brown, but my favorite is Gutsy's default wallpaper

wolfen69
September 30th, 2008, 11:09 PM
Out of the box windows looks much better.



says you.

klange
September 30th, 2008, 11:18 PM
Brown is calming and natural.

Just like that massive s*** I just took...

IMO: Pastels are the way to go.

zekopeko
September 30th, 2008, 11:18 PM
i thought they would start making wallpapers of the animal that's in the name of the distro. that would be cool especially when you mix different drawing styles. now that would rock.

keiichidono
September 30th, 2008, 11:21 PM
I personally think the wallpaper is lackluster and even though we could change it later on, first appearances are important too. People say that there are better choices out there then suggest them to the Art Team, don't know how? Ask people how. I personally know of two better choices of wallpaper that have an Ibex in them and should be released under a compatible license that were made for Intrepid. I also hope to see a new and amazing theme in this week's beta.

graabein
September 30th, 2008, 11:22 PM
Incredible... Is this some kind of joke?

klange
September 30th, 2008, 11:24 PM
As if ANY dev-team could EVER come up with a single design that would please everyone.

I can.
Just use this SVG:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<svg xmlns:svg="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" version="1.0" width="1920" height="1080" id="svg2">
<rect width="1920" height="1080" x="0" y="0" id="rect0" style="opacity:1;fill:#888888;fill-opacity:1;" />
</svg>

Mulenmar
October 1st, 2008, 12:04 AM
You are right, only these (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scatophilia) people like Ubuntu's main theme.

Talk about getting the real poop on the situation. :roll:

How about giving a CHOICE during setup of:
"Would you like to choose a wallpaper or theme?"

with a preview function?

Ozor Mox
October 1st, 2008, 12:38 AM
OK firstly I am someone who normally likes the Ubuntu default look. I particularly liked the 8.04 wallpaper, very artistic and different while using Ubuntu's colours well.

This though... It's not that it's any trouble to change. Everyone here knows you can change the whole look with just a few clicks. What is so disappointing here is firstly that this is such a step back from 8.04, and secondly that the community has produced wallpapers that are so much better it is untrue. Just take a look in this thread or the other one about the Ibex wallpaper. Really, what are they thinking going with this over the beautiful alternatives that could be chosen?

This has nothing to do with how easy it is to change, it has to do with why this thing has been chosen over much nicer looking alternatives.

And really, I don't usually have a problem with stuff like this :)

sicofante
October 1st, 2008, 12:46 AM
I guess Mr. Shuttleworth hasn't hired that professional art team yet, huh?

Awful background. Awful first impression. I cross my fingers this is just beta and won't make it through the final release.

SomeGuyDude
October 1st, 2008, 01:07 AM
I don't understand why anyone would care about the default look; especially the wallpaper. That's the easiest part to change (and changing the rest is pretty easy as well).

Because the default look is key in getting people to convert from Windows. Yeah you can customize it, but people shouldn't feel like "well if I get that it's going to look like *** unless I work at it." Think about how many Windows users don't change a thing, even the wallpaper. If it looks bad, they're going to feel apprehensive.

cardinals_fan
October 1st, 2008, 01:14 AM
Because the default look is key in getting people to convert from Windows. Yeah you can customize it, but people shouldn't feel like "well if I get that it's going to look like *** unless I work at it." Think about how many Windows users don't change a thing, even the wallpaper. If it looks bad, they're going to feel apprehensive.
As I've said before, being willing to change the wallpaper is a prerequisite to installing Ubuntu. If someone don't have that much initiative, they certainly don't have enough to handle installing an OS.

Dr Small
October 1st, 2008, 01:17 AM
As I've said before, being willing to change the wallpaper is a prerequisite to installing Ubuntu. If someone don't have that much initiative, they certainly don't have enough to handle installing an OS.
Lucky me. I don't have to worry about wallpapers when installing :)

Fixman
October 1st, 2008, 01:20 AM
Added poll.

cardinals_fan
October 1st, 2008, 01:31 AM
Lucky me. I don't have to worry about wallpapers when installing :)
Indeed. A key advantage of minimal systems such as Arch and NetBSD :)

chris4585
October 1st, 2008, 01:40 AM
You know what I'd like?

Something brown, and not the current default for the wallpaper, and something new would be nice... I suggest this (http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/OrangeLiNstaBlackPlastic?content=62434) for a theme, I know nothing like it would be a default though, nor ever included in the desktop

Vadi
October 1st, 2008, 01:45 AM
I am disappointed. Not because I can't change it - but because of the impressions others.

its_jon
October 1st, 2008, 01:45 AM
That circle wallpaper looks very hammy to me.


As 8.04 is my first Linux.... The Heron paper probably intrigued me enough to make the choice to fully install ...

Of course it was quickly changed..... but that circle paper is anything but intriguing ... its unadventurous ... And setting up a brand new OS is VERY much an adventure.

Think on..... don't use this wallpaper in the distro.

K.Mandla
October 1st, 2008, 01:46 AM
As we feared, phoronix confirms that his abomination is actually the intrepid default wallpaper:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Njc1NA

Omigosh! You mean that's the wallpaper and you can't change it?! That is a tragedy! :shock:

Oh wait, you mean you can change it? Oh. Well then. Crisis averted.

bruce89
October 1st, 2008, 01:47 AM
That circle wallpaper looks very hammy to me.

Doesn't look much like a hamster to me.

SSVegito888
October 1st, 2008, 01:47 AM
I don't really like the Ubuntu wallapaers either.


Check this site out for some pretty sweet wallpapers.

Once on the page click your monitor resolution.

If your resolution is not listed try one close to it.

Remember, you can always resize it using gimp.



http://www.williamshottsphotography.com/Wallpapers (http://www.williamshottsphotography.com/Wallpapers)



PS: I don't own these wallpapers.

cardinals_fan
October 1st, 2008, 01:48 AM
How about giving a CHOICE during setup of:
"Would you like to choose a wallpaper or theme?"

with a preview function?
Pardus has something like this.

You know what I'd like?

Something brown, and not the current default for the wallpaper, and something new would be nice... I suggest this (http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/OrangeLiNstaBlackPlastic?content=62434) for a theme, I know nothing like it would be a default though, nor ever included in the desktop
That theme makes my eyes bleed...

RiceMonster
October 1st, 2008, 01:49 AM
Because the default look is key in getting people to convert from Windows. Yeah you can customize it, but people shouldn't feel like "well if I get that it's going to look like *** unless I work at it." Think about how many Windows users don't change a thing, even the wallpaper. If it looks bad, they're going to feel apprehensive.

So? I don't really care if they don't want to switch or not. It doesn't gain me anything, and if they're happy with Windows, then that's great for them.

doorknob60
October 1st, 2008, 02:08 AM
I'm fine with brown and the GTK theme, but Intrepid's wallpaper?!? Eew...I liked Hardy's wallpaper though, it was nice.

SomeGuyDude
October 1st, 2008, 02:21 AM
As I've said before, being willing to change the wallpaper is a prerequisite to installing Ubuntu. If someone don't have that much initiative, they certainly don't have enough to handle installing an OS.

What about preloaded machines? Aren't you telling people who might be enticed into buying a Dell with Ubuntu on it that they should cram it because they don't pass the entrance exam? People don't generally install Windows either; it's just there. Unless you think Ubuntu (and, by extension, all the others) should never come preloaded.

Also, what's wrong with making a good first impression? If it didn't matter at all, there wouldn't be a new wallpaper or theme, they'd just have a plain brown image on the back and a boring GTK theme with block icons. There's a good reason default themes are a big part of each new version.

Fact: the world is not going to drift toward the Linux mentality of "get in there and do it". Ubuntu is more popular than Arch because a lot of people want to have things running with a minimum of effort on their end. We can't assume that in order to get into things they "must" be willing to do something or other.

Think about this: when you show off what Ubuntu is capable of, someone is going to want it, and will want it to look like that when they buy it. Telling someone "yeah it's awesome isn't it? All you gotta do is install Compiz Fusion, and then do this in the settings, and then install Conky and make this big configuration file, then you gotta install this other thing and do this to it..." is going to go over like a lead balloon.

Initial impressions are huge when it comes to pushing your way into a market, and "big 'n' brown" isn't going to cut it. Blue is unpopular because people associate it with Windows, but psychologically it's a calming color. At least Canonical put in different sounds. "Jungle drums" wasn't working.

SomeGuyDude
October 1st, 2008, 02:27 AM
So? I don't really care if they don't want to switch or not. It doesn't gain me anything, and if they're happy with Windows, then that's great for them.

Yes. Yes it does.

If Ubuntu smashed its way into the preloaded machine world and Dell/HP/Toshiba had huge sales with Ubuntu on 'em, you can bet that the project would benefit greatly. One of the reasons Ubuntu is great as it stands is the gigantic community around it, it'll only get better the more is added.

One reason, for example, I love Ubuntu is the repos. While it's not too hard to compile, you have to find it, make sure you've got dependencies taken care of, and it doesn't update for you. Something's in the repos and bam, updates and effortless installation/removal. Without the massive support behind the project, would those resources be available? Of course not, the devs would have no reason.

TheSlipstream
October 1st, 2008, 02:27 AM
I'm just annoyed because soon the default screenshot is going to be on every computer website and magazine in the world, and choosing a nicer theme and wallpaper would make it that much more appealing to the thousands who will soon consider changing to Linux.

It takes us a matter of seconds to change. Everything the art team needs is theirs, they have a better 'Ibex on Wood' wallpaper, they have the Kin theme, they could spend those seconds. The difference between us doing that and them doing that is that many possible Linux users will see their handy work, but not ours.

Keep your promise, Canonical.

cardinals_fan
October 1st, 2008, 02:39 AM
What about preloaded machines? Aren't you telling people who might be enticed into buying a Dell with Ubuntu on it that they should cram it because they don't pass the entrance exam? People don't generally install Windows either; it's just there. Unless you think Ubuntu (and, by extension, all the others) should never come preloaded.

Most OEMs ship with a custom wallpaper anyway.

Yes. Yes it does.

If Ubuntu smashed its way into the preloaded machine world and Dell/HP/Toshiba had huge sales with Ubuntu on 'em, you can bet that the project would benefit greatly. One of the reasons Ubuntu is great as it stands is the gigantic community around it, it'll only get better the more is added.

One reason, for example, I love Ubuntu is the repos. While it's not too hard to compile, you have to find it, make sure you've got dependencies taken care of, and it doesn't update for you. Something's in the repos and bam, updates and effortless installation/removal. Without the massive support behind the project, would those resources be available? Of course not, the devs would have no reason.
The devs of Arch Linux have never tried to lure new users, yet they still have large repos supplemented by the Arch User Repository.

Dr Small
October 1st, 2008, 02:42 AM
The devs of Arch Linux have never tried to lure new users, yet they still have large repos supplemented by the Arch User Repository.

+1
You know, sometimes I don't get you. At times you are blasting ArchLinux, and other times you are literally defending it. Humm bug.

cardinals_fan
October 1st, 2008, 02:46 AM
+1
You know, sometimes I don't get you. At times you are blasting ArchLinux, and other times you are literally defending it. Humm bug.
I have never said that Arch is bad, evil, or poorly designed. It's a very good system with a great package manager and a friendly community. It also stays too close to the bleeding edge (I know this is debatable, but you can't deny that Arch's packages tend to be updated as soon as something is released) for me to use it as my main system. I'm currently dual-booting Arch and Slackware - Slack as my main system, and Arch for testing new stuff.

/off-topic

phrostbyte
October 1st, 2008, 03:01 AM
Who actually decides what the default wallpaper would be? Maybe there should be a vote instead?

Polygon
October 1st, 2008, 03:02 AM
the wallpaper was just a test, its not the final one

those screenshots were taken before the art deadline, the first beta should show the relatively 'final' theme for intrepid

Solicitous
October 1st, 2008, 04:14 AM
The theme now is looking better than it has in previous releases, but still isn't the best. The alternate-human theme is better. I'd at least prefer to see the brown be changed into shades of grey/gray. The default Kubuntu colour scheme looks more appealing and pleasing than Ubuntu's.

justsomedude
October 1st, 2008, 05:16 AM
I consider the default look of Gnome/Ubuntu to be a bug, and bugs need to be fixed.


Oh dear. Those ten seconds really hurt, don't they? ;)

The trouble is, there is no viable alternative available.


Can you find a nice wallpaper? Yes.

A nice gtk theme? Not so easy, but yes.


An alternative icon theme? This is where it gets troublesome, I claim there is no proper alternative available for the whole Tango icon set.

Sure, there are nice icons on gnome-look.org, but all the better looking icon themes either


-are incomplete. This applies to all of them, the whole stock icons for open office are 1000+ graphics alone, I have never seen someone even try to tackle those. Usually people do some folders, some device icons and some for the menus and call it a theme. And I don't blame them, a lot of these people work alone in their spare time. This is work for a whole team of designers.

-contain proprietary icons. While this may not be a problem for individual users, distributions can't ship those.

-scale badly. Instead of being properly designed for their display size, huge icons are often scaled down for the smaller sizes, which leads to blurry small icons.


Plus, there are a lot of pixmaps to be done etc...


A good, consistent, modern desktop with nice icons, gtk engine, wallpaper and pixmaps where everything is well balanced, usable and fits together well, will be a lot of work.

It's nothing some capable designers couldn't do in a couple of month though...
I have high hopes since the announcement Canonical would hire professionals. :)

cardinals_fan
October 1st, 2008, 05:48 AM
I really like the Tango icons. The orange version included in Ubuntu by default is a little weird, but the regular set is nice.

justsomedude
October 1st, 2008, 06:06 AM
Tango icons are very well done in terms of scalability and they are well thought out.

However, I think they look a little dated and it's time to part ways...


I've been working on a replacement for a couple of month now, but it will take several more month until I can get anything out in a usable state.


Plus, work like this should be left to pros, not dilletants like me. :D

DefiniteFail
October 1st, 2008, 07:30 AM
Oh dear. Those ten seconds really hurt, don't they? ;)

I usually sit at gnome-look for about a while before I find a matching theme that isn't cartoonish, and a icon set that is complete and matches my theme.

I like a theme that looks good by default, with a standard Icon set that looks good and is made to match that theme.

K.Mandla
October 1st, 2008, 08:03 AM
Similar threads merged.

globalprompt@gmail.com
October 1st, 2008, 08:07 AM
It's ok, but not as good as the Hardy wallpaper.

Yes you are right

billgoldberg
October 1st, 2008, 10:07 AM
I don't understand why anyone would care about the default look; especially the wallpaper. That's the easiest part to change (and changing the rest is pretty easy as well).

Sure, that's true.

But not all people know this. Not all people know how to do this.

Also, a beautiful default setup is better for marketing. More blogs/sites will write about it, thus more people read it and more people use it.

Shuttleworth also knows this, hence his comment about making it prettier than OSX (pretty easy after some tweaking).

billgoldberg
October 1st, 2008, 10:08 AM
I usually sit at gnome-look for about a while before I find a matching theme that isn't cartoonish, and a icon set that is complete and matches my theme.

I like a theme that looks good by default, with a standard Icon set that looks good and is made to match that theme.

clearlooks glow gtk theme with gnome-brave icon set.

davidryder
October 1st, 2008, 10:31 AM
Forget first impressions; nobody chooses an OS by the default desktop background. I hope nobody is suggesting new users will uninstall when they see the wallpaper.

And how many people are still using the default wallpaper anyway? I don't really know many people who use the wallpapers that come with the OS.

What I would like to see is an easier way to customize the desktop. Screenlets/Awn/Compiz-fusion pre-packaged and placed under the same preferences dialog. System|Preferences|Appearance and it's all there.

One of my favorite parts of Linux is the ability to customize everything. I just wish it was easier.

sepius
October 1st, 2008, 02:22 PM
I know this is a rant thread, but I actually like the theme, and as for Brown as the Ubuntu colour, that is how I identify it, like blue for Fedora, Yellow for Mandriva, Black for Slack ...etc

Brown is Coffee, what we Technologists feed off. Some even use nicotene. This forum measures in caffeine references. Keep the brown, it is not cheap looking ... it is human, it is the blend of all colours.

Ubuntu needs to be different to XP/Vista, that is how to get people to ask "what is that on your desktop?". I love it when they ask "how do I get Windows to look like that?".

puppy
October 1st, 2008, 05:00 PM
Oh dear - I've just seen the Ibex beta wallpaper - frankly that is disgusting. My ten-year old nephew who has the design skills of a gnat could come up with something better. It gives a *terrible* first impression - it's absolutely awful and doesn't even follow the prescribed colour theme!

I know people will say "you can change it", "who keeps the default wallpaper" etc but do you know what, with Hardy I did. The default wallpaper for Hardy is gorgeous and non-Ubuntu users would peer over my shoulder and comment on how pretty the wallpaper was.

I thought Mr Shuttleworth had put together a design team - what are they doing? Sitting in a backroom playing cards or something :confused:

cardinals_fan
October 1st, 2008, 05:18 PM
Black for Slack ...etc

Quite frankly, I've always thought that Ubuntu shouldn't go messing about with GNOME at all. Slackware ships the default KDE with no patching or changes, and I think Ubuntu should do the same with GNOME.

Take a look at Paldo Linux to see how a completely default GNOME setup can be used.

Ozor Mox
October 1st, 2008, 05:22 PM
I know people will say "you can change it", "who keeps the default wallpaper" etc but do you know what, with Hardy I did. The default wallpaper for Hardy is gorgeous and non-Ubuntu users would peer over my shoulder and comment on how pretty the wallpaper was.

Exactly. I think a lot of people are missing the point. It's not about how easy it is to change the wallpaper or theme, or whether Ubuntu's brown colour should or should not be the default. The point is, Hardy looks really nice out of the box. I also found people would comment on the nice background. There are some wallpapers floating about here like the carved Ibex one that would look great as the Ibex background. The project has an art team. The general response here is pretty negative. So why have they gone with this? If someone could answer that for me, I would give them a cookie.

Therion
October 1st, 2008, 06:17 PM
The project has an art team. The general response here is pretty negative. So why have they gone with this? If someone could answer that for me, I would give them a cookie.
This is a coporate-level collaborative project.

Hence, it's not about what the "general response" is here; that's not how collaborative teams work.
I know you don't LIKE that answer, but that IS the answer nonetheless.





/Oatmeal Raisin, or Peanut Butter, please.

Ozor Mox
October 1st, 2008, 06:37 PM
This is a coporate-level collaborative project.

Hence, it's not about what the "general response" is here; that's not how collaborative teams work.
I know you don't LIKE that answer, but that IS the answer nonetheless.

I understand that they won't be looking at these forums for an opinion on the artwork (though I think they should), but I mean if the general response here is as negative as it is (probably 70-80% disapproval I'd say), you'd think that an art team for such a major project would look at this and also say... "Hmm, yeah actually this is quite naff isn't it. If the community can make something so much nicer, surely we are capable of it too?" ... I mean, I could make that background, and if I admit to that, then it can't be a good thing! I'm just finding it really hard to get my head around them thinking that this is a) better than Hardy and b) anywhere near up to the sort of quality that Ubuntu offers across everything else.


/Oatmeal Raisin, or Peanut Butter, please.

You'll get a second if you have a good answer to my reply :)

Therion
October 1st, 2008, 07:47 PM
I understand that they won't be looking at these forums for an opinion on the artwork (though I think they should)
I agree with your thinking that the forums could provide an excellent resource for consideration.


...but I mean if the general response here is as negative as it is (probably 70-80% disapproval I'd say), you'd think that an art team for such a major project would look at this and also say... "Hmm, yeah actually this is quite naff isn't it. If the community can make something so much nicer, surely we are capable of it too?"
Right, I don't what "naff" means, but I'm getting the impression it means ugly or poorly executed? I get your point at any rate. The core of the issue here is that the forums are not a source of input for the Development Team. They just aren't. Should they be? That's a debatable question, and we could debate it, but the short answer here remains the same: These forums are not a source of input for the Development Team. Does that defy logic? I can see how you might think so.

On a project as big as this is, the Development Team HAS to isolate itself to varying degrees at different points in the developmental process in order to make progress. Reason being is if that does NOT happen (non-isolation) the constant inflow of new ideas will prevent ANY idea from being fully realized. And this is especially true for purely artistic projects. That's just the way these things work. It sucks to have to use that phrase, but I have to exercise a certain degree of brevity, eh? Why so especially for an artistic project?

Because everything artistic is, in short, a matter of "taste"; it's an entirely subjective thing. There is no "right" answer or any "wrong" answer. Further, Ubuntu has identified itself with a certain aesthetic: the earth tones are the best example of this probably. You're not going to see Ubuntu move away from the "s--t brown", as some people refer to it, and the yellows and oranges and such. Like it or no, Ubuntu is an African word and the colors and "branding" of Ubuntu now and in the future are going to follow along those lines. Simple as that. The choice, I think, represents the idea that Ubuntu (or Linux) is different. It looks different because it IS different. It wants to "scream", "NOT Windows!!" and too this effect does so at a very basic level of distinction - the color scheme. And the name of course... Both of which go hand-in-hand for an overall marketing strategy.

If you want to change THESE aspects of Ubuntu you'll need to get yourself elected to the board of Canonical.


... I mean, I could make that background, and if I admit to that, then it can't be a good thing! I'm just finding it really hard to get my head around them thinking that this is a) better than Hardy and b) anywhere near up to the sort of quality that Ubuntu offers across everything else.
I understand what you're saying here. A desktop wallpaper is nothing "complex" from an artistic standpoint. Creating something everyone on the Team can agree on is another. I look at a Jackson Pollock painting and say "Shoot... I could have done that." Why does a Pollock sell for millions while mine don't?

Sorry to "cop out" with a rhetorical like that, but it's lunchtime for me.

cardinals_fan
October 1st, 2008, 07:54 PM
Remember that Ubuntu is not a democracy. As it says on the Artwork wiki:

The decisions are made by our Self Appointed Benevolent Dictator for all final say and direction for the default artwork in the Ubuntu product.

Sealbhach
October 1st, 2008, 08:03 PM
It's ******* horrible.


.

Ozor Mox
October 1st, 2008, 08:04 PM
Good points well made Therion. I'd like to reiterate that I don't think Ubuntu needs to rebrand itself or change its default look from the current colour scheme. I just look at this wallpaper they have chosen for Ibex and think, surely that can't be the best they can do? They chose this over some of the vastly superior community produced alternatives? Doesn't Ubuntu deserve better than this? They must have some kind of secret plan to unveil an amazing looking wallpaper or theme right at the last minute? Right? RIGHT?!

Still, what they decide on is what it is I suppose, we will see.

Paqman
October 1st, 2008, 08:11 PM
The OP and the poll don't really match. I voted to keep Human, because I like it, but think the new wallpaper is terrible. Massive step back from Hardy.

Here's hoping they're going to surprise us with the "real" wallpaper in between now and final release.

quinnten83
October 1st, 2008, 08:18 PM
I love earth tones. I just think the art-team doesn't implement them correctly. Look at this site, has the same earth tones, but it doses them correctly. So the brown doesn't feel like it's closing in on you.

cardinals_fan
October 1st, 2008, 08:20 PM
By the way, what exactly do people dislike about the wallpaper? Most posters here just say "Nasty, * is better". I thought it was nice and simple... *shrugs*

eragon100
October 1st, 2008, 08:24 PM
The OP and the poll don't really match. I voted to keep Human, because I like it, but think the new wallpaper is terrible. Massive step back from Hardy.

Here's hoping they're going to surprise us with the "real" wallpaper in between now and final release.

I didn't make the poll :wink:

Therion
October 1st, 2008, 08:35 PM
I love earth tones. I just think the art-team doesn't implement them correctly. Look at this site, has the same earth tones, but it doses them correctly. So the brown doesn't feel like it's closing in on you.
Doubleplusgood.

I'm not saying I love the color-scheme, but I don't dislike it either. I do think they could keep the earthiness and warmth though, and do so without it being so heavy and claustrophobic. Maybe use more neutral shades (I said "more" neutral, as in "to move in the direction of being neutral" not as in "additional").

In short, keep the colors, but lighten them up a little. Put a little creamer in the coffee, so to speak. I think that would go a long way toward silencing some of the complaints. Some of them...

smoker
October 1st, 2008, 08:44 PM
Doubleplusgood.

In short, keep the colors, but lighten them up a little. Put a little creamer in the coffee, so to speak. I think that would go a long way toward silencing some of the complaints. Some of them...

i agree, but plenty cream, and sugar, as well:D

Therion
October 1st, 2008, 08:58 PM
Now this is, in my opinion, an example (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=5887302&postcount=4) of a well done earth-tone theme. It's a little heavier than I like, personally, but it's clean, polished and modern looking.

Ozor Mox
October 3rd, 2008, 12:34 AM
By the way, what exactly do people dislike about the wallpaper? Most posters here just say "Nasty, * is better". I thought it was nice and simple... *shrugs*

Obviously I can't speak for everyone, but for me it just looks so uninspired and dull compared to the Hardy wallpaper and, while I don't mind brown as a colour, the way it is used here is not nice at all! It is nice and simple, and maybe that is why is has been chosen, but I really think nice and simple can be done better than this!


Now this is, in my opinion, an example of a well done earth-tone theme. It's a little heavier than I like, personally, but it's clean, polished and modern looking.

That is very nice, vastly better than the dark theme on the Ibex alphas. Still not sure how I feel about a dark theme compared to a light theme though. Still, even if they just used that great background I would be happy!

Even Kubuntu (http://www.kubuntu.org/) has been given a better background! OK it might not be the most exciting thing ever, but at least it is visually pleasing.

bruce89
October 3rd, 2008, 12:36 AM
The colours are fine, the theme engine's and icons are not nice. That's why I use an orange Clearlooks (thanks to colour themes).

sharks
October 3rd, 2008, 02:30 AM
Will they change the theme in Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex?

Joeb454
October 3rd, 2008, 02:33 AM
Simple Answer: No

Changturkey
October 3rd, 2008, 02:49 AM
Why?

madscience
October 3rd, 2008, 03:11 AM
Please, for the love of $deity, change the theme... The particular shade of brown used in Human looks like something I flushed after my last draft beer drinking spree.
What's wrong with something bold and distinctive, such as Dust? I'm using it now, and while it may be dark, it's readable and looks nice on both my desktop (CRT) and laptop.

Saint Angeles
October 3rd, 2008, 03:14 AM
no... themes never change and will never change.

the default theme is all you need to see and i think they should just remove the options for changing the themes altogether.

our mighty OS creators have decided what our computers need to look like and i don't think we're in a position to tell them otherwise.

EDIT: OOPS! I thought i was posting on a Mac message board. Please disregard my post!

Solicitous
October 3rd, 2008, 03:24 AM
no... themes never change and will never change.

the default theme is all you need to see and i think they should just remove the options for changing the themes altogether.

our mighty OS creators have decided what our computers need to look like and i don't think we're in a position to tell them otherwise.

EDIT: OOPS! I thought i was posting on a Mac message board. Please disregard my post!

HAHA your reply had made me laugh and brightened my day :)

Kuroyume
October 3rd, 2008, 03:26 AM
Why?

NewHuman, which as i uindestand it was supposed to be the new theme for Ubuntu, still has plenty of bugs and usability issues

klerfayt
October 3rd, 2008, 08:34 AM
Couldn't you come up with better poll, e.g. 'do you agree with Intrepid art direction? y/n' or 'do you think Intrepid art is on the right path? y/n' or 'do you see Intrepid default appearance as improvement over Hardy? y/n' or 'Is Intrepid look a complete failure? y/n'

I read the question 'Do you want Intrepid to change Ubuntu's GNOME main theme?'
as
'Do you want Intrepid to come with unaltered GNOME?'
and obviously answered 'nah I like brown' as in 'I would definitely prefer brown Ubuntu over unaltered GNOME'

lukjad007
October 3rd, 2008, 11:42 AM
+1
There is no middle ground in the question. I like the Human theme but dislike the wallpaper.

ZarathustraDK
October 3rd, 2008, 12:25 PM
It's not so much that the wallpaper is bad (I for one get the Ibex-part of the wallpaper, not everyone do), it's just that it happens to come after Hardy's wallpaper which kicked *** in terms of brown wallpapers. Compared to that, it looks rather dull and uninspiring.

I really wish they'd start playing around in the yellow-orange part of their palette, instead of just brown on brown. If this wallpaper was a cake it'd be "Death by chocolate". :)

Edit: Can't let it slip : Let's hope the cake is a lie.

jeyaganesh
October 3rd, 2008, 12:40 PM
There is a glossy human and a dark theme in Ibex. I like the second one. They changed the shutdown window. The shutdown window looks lot better than previous ones.

Sand & Mercury
October 3rd, 2008, 12:44 PM
Unfortunately it's looking like the answer is no.

I'm pretty upset about the whole debacle; now if there'd never been any intention to change the theme, that'd be fine, but what I find upsetting is that Canonical went back on its word and didn't deliver what they promised. There's the argument that they never explicitly promised a new theme, yes, but they also made no effort at all to dispel everyone's expectations.

swisscow
October 3rd, 2008, 01:13 PM
Heard on the Linux Outlaws podcast that there is now a team of designers working on the looks of Ubuntu for the release after Intrepid. Don't know exactly what to expect but hopefully some improvements.

billgoldberg
October 3rd, 2008, 01:26 PM
I am kind of disappointed.

They promised a radical change, tried with a decent dark theme, but then went back to the butt ugly human theme.

Canis familiaris
October 3rd, 2008, 01:45 PM
If Intrepid is fast in bootup, fast overall, speedy and stable; I would not bother even thinking about the theme.

K.Mandla
October 3rd, 2008, 02:19 PM
Similar threads merged.

earthpigg
October 3rd, 2008, 03:56 PM
interesting little writeup, from the Ubuntu Art mailing list:



There's a point where ~sensored~ and moaning becomes unproductive. But at the
same time, realizing that Ubuntu has received a lot of hype regarding the
new theme for probably a year now, and you don't let something like that get
so hyped up and then expect everyone not to notice when you don't fulfill
the expectation.

Every single article, review and assessment of Ubuntu lately have promoted
the idea that we would be receiving a new theme soon, and that hype is
something that Ubuntu and Canonical have benefitted from. It's something
we've all benefitted from as Ubuntu users.

And all this time, not one officially affiliated Ubuntu/Canonical community
member has disputed the introduction of the new theme in Intrepid. Hype,
publicity and media is a dangerous thing and can backfire on you very
easily. I personally think it would be a very bad PR move by
Canonical/Ubuntu not to come through on the new theme, since it is dangerous
to mismanage your users expectations so badly.

You or I may be able to say, whatever, I'll install my own theme. But I'm
not sure that I can promote and advocate a product with which I personally
am unhappy how my own expectations have been managed.

I personally am very much hoping though, that this is a ballsy PR move, and
that they're going to wait till everyone's completely up in arms about it,
and then come through with a winning move. If that's the case, risky, but
respect since they're taking the game to another level :P

Alex

https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-art/2008-October/008079.html

lukjad007
October 3rd, 2008, 04:00 PM
Interesting idea.

issih
October 3rd, 2008, 04:44 PM
In almost every practical way the theme doesn't matter, because it can be changed. Nonetheless, that is not how most people use a computer, and it is naive to think they will just because the option is there.

90% of users stick with the default theme in xp, it therefore matters that ubuntu's default look is professional, polished and cohesive. Without that too many people will just assume the software beneath is shoddy and amateurish. We all KNOW that the basis is solid, we understand how good the actual product is, so we overlook the dodgy bits and we ignore the quirks.

In my opinion massaging the applications to have a more consistent look is as important (and in many ways a far harder task), but a new theme matters if we hope to become acceptable to the mainstream crowd, where the computer is what it is, and customisability is hardly ever used.

Hopefully a new theme will come eventually, we need it..

Changturkey
October 3rd, 2008, 05:44 PM
Disappointed. Hardy was supposed to get a makeover, now this.

fatality_uk
October 3rd, 2008, 06:11 PM
Theme, meh I can change it.
Gnome 2.24 very happy :D

davbren
October 7th, 2008, 05:00 PM
Hey, I've been playing about with the looks of ubuntu for a lil while recently. I think that the default theme for ubuntu is nice for proper admin work.

I know that really we shouldn't compare to Windows and mac. But lets face it. No one in a shop is going to pick Ubuntu over those two if its presented in that way.

I know there are plenty of mockups around as to how people think Ubuntu should like in the future. What I would like to see here are actual themes and compositions of professional looking themes and desktop layouts.

I think it would be great if we had some really unique ideas rather than stealing ideas from other OS's. I believe there is plenty out there to make it look unique as well as functional.

I hope to see some real quality here... enjoy! :)

snowpine
October 7th, 2008, 05:10 PM
I love Ubuntu's default brown and orange "human" theme. It is instantly distinguishable from Windows or Mac, creating a strong visual identity for the "brand." And if you are into "eye candy," Compiz has some very slick desktop effects.

Can you be more specific about how the Ubuntu artwork seems "unprofessional" to you? You are voicing concerns but not presenting alternative solutions. "But let's face it. No one in a shop is going to pick Ubuntu" is a sweeping generalization... *I* picked Ubuntu; did you?

davbren
October 7th, 2008, 05:22 PM
Well first off I picked Ubuntu because my laptop was overheating with Windows. I only began really understanding what I could do with it recently. If I was in a shop as a n00b I would choose either Windows or Mac. They are the two big players in the industry. You're right when you say there is eye candy with compiz. If you gave a new system to someone. Would they know what Compiz is? or where they would find it?

It's all very well and good saying its there but if doesn't have an identifiable name, who knows where that might be kept. Most PC users don't search for days on end for things that might be cool. They want a system that does what they want it to do. For the most part Ubuntu does that. But then so does Windows and so does Mac. How would you try and sell Ubuntu to the average Joe user when it looks lightyears behind the other two and it needn't be.

I voice concerns because people no longer want something that looks like win 9x. they want something pimped out. However sad that may be. I personally want the same. I'm not saying its for everyone. An OS should be an extension of the person using it. It needs to be as heavily customisable as it is now, but if there aren't any *seriously* good themes. Most people won't bother and they'll end up on Windows again. Think of a really nice pair of shoes. The may be really uncomfortable to wear but if they're pretty they'll keep wearing them. So people may persevere with using Ubuntu regardless of its annoyances if its pretty. Just like if they don't like the look of it, they'd prefer to go back to the annoyances of windows coz it looks better...

Shippou
October 7th, 2008, 05:29 PM
Well said. I think it is one of the major reasons why people refuse to play around with Linux. It is also one of the reasons why "user-friendly" distros like Xandros, Linspire, Linux XP and, to some extent, Ubuntu, exists.

I do hope that someday in the future Linux will have its own unique desktop. Maybe not a standard, but something that is not so much of a rip-off or imitation from other OSs.

I am not saying that GNOME, KDE, or other UI Managers are a rip-off; they just look like Windows UI. What I am proposing is a unique UI. Apple succeeded, so why not Linux?

snowpine
October 7th, 2008, 05:29 PM
Think of a really nice pair of shoes. The may be really uncomfortable to wear but if they're pretty they'll keep wearing them.

Most of my really nice shoes are comfortable *AND* brown. ;)

davbren
October 7th, 2008, 05:33 PM
Most of my really nice shoes are comfortable *AND* brown. ;)

Are they pretty though?

I don't mean 'Yeah they look nice'

I mean 'yes I actually look forward to putting them on my feet coz they so god damn purty'

Idefix82
October 7th, 2008, 05:41 PM
I love Ubuntu's default brown and orange "human" theme. It is instantly distinguishable from Windows or Mac, creating a strong visual identity for the "brand." And if you are into "eye candy," Compiz has some very slick desktop effects.

Can you be more specific about how the Ubuntu artwork seems "unprofessional" to you? You are voicing concerns but not presenting alternative solutions. "But let's face it. No one in a shop is going to pick Ubuntu" is a sweeping generalization... *I* picked Ubuntu; did you?

+1.
I really don't understand how people can say that Ubuntu's default theme is boring or ugly or anything like that. I think it's perfect for a default theme: easy on the eye, original and capturing Ubuntu's corporate identity.

Although my desktop now looks rather different (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=5910125#post5910125) I don't pity anybody who can't be bothered to learn how to customise the desktop. If they find it easier to stick with a virusy and buggy OS than to learn using and customising a new one then they are not a big loss to the Ubuntu community since they would come whining after day 1 anyway, complaning that they can't find drive C:.

As a matter of fact, most people I know don't even know that Windows is a replaceable piece of software. They think it's part of the computer. They have never heard the words "open source" in their lives and would never even enquire about Ubuntu in the shop. And if somebody does suggest to them that they do inquire then he shouldn't point out the default theme but the customisability, the user friendlyness and the security of the system.

snowpine
October 7th, 2008, 05:46 PM
Are they pretty though?

I don't mean 'Yeah they look nice'

I mean 'yes I actually look forward to putting them on my feet coz they so god damn purty'

They are prettier than my naked feet. :)

Check out http://www.gnome-look.org if you don't like the default Ubuntu theme. Linux is infinitely customizable...

Nonno Bassotto
October 7th, 2008, 05:50 PM
Would you believe I started using Ubuntu 5.04 for the looks? Back then I could compare it with XP and Gnome looked a lot nicer. Yes, even with a brown theme, and that has improved in the years. I just can't see why people compare it with windows '95. Maybe you forgot how windows '95 looked, so here is a comparison.

Windows '95 (http://www.guidebookgallery.org/pics/gui/desktop/firstrun/win95.png)

Ubuntu Hoary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ubuntu-desktop-2-504-20080706.png)

Ubuntu Hardy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ubuntu-desktop-2-804-20080708.png)

davbren
October 7th, 2008, 06:13 PM
Really and truly the differences (on face value) that I see between 95 and 8.04 are the greater colour depth the file manager and the wallpaper.

Nonno Bassotto
October 7th, 2008, 10:37 PM
So you don't see shadows, rounded corners, antialiased fonts, nicer icons, gradients, embossed buttons, nicer cursors...
Should I take this thread seriously or you are joking?

Pasto
October 8th, 2008, 08:11 AM
It seems to be another "I don't like the default theme so WE should change it, so THEY can benefit from it" thread.

airtonix
October 8th, 2008, 12:01 PM
If you gave a new system to someone. Would they know what Compiz is? or where they would find it?I've just given you a new windows system. Find powerbar...where is it?


Really and truly the differences (on face value) that I see between 95 and 8.04 are the greater colour depth the file manager and the wallpaper.you seemed to have missed out that msn icon that didn't make it onto the ubuntu desktop...
This is one of the reason I am not sorry to see windows walk out the door, it's like redmond created this system for all the tin pot retailers to invade your system.

I cant remember the last time an icon i didn't wan't appear in a place i didn't ask for..(aol cough msn cough hack *splutter*)

davbren
October 8th, 2008, 02:29 PM
It seems to be another "I don't like the default theme so WE should change it, so THEY can benefit from it" thread.

I think we both know that this isn't true. I'm really enthusiastic about Ubuntu. I've promoted it to my friends and family. I've even converted a few (including my mum). I had to talk to customers in a mobile phone shop about a webbook that had Ubuntu preinstalled coz they didn't have a clue.

Why shouldn't we try and improve what there is already? Isn't that what we call progress...?



I've just given you a new windows system. Find powerbar...where is it?

I don't even know what powerbar is, nor would most people. Just because Windows isn't accessible. That doesn't mean Ubuntu can't be. People would really appreciate the effects of Compiz. What if they went to appearance and selected "Extra" but didn't want the wobbly windows. I know I'd feel like a fish out of water. I wouldn't even know what to google.


you seemed to have missed out that msn icon that didn't make it onto the ubuntu desktop...

You seem to have forgotten about the Ubuntu logo thats there instead. I don't see a problem with having a logo of your current OS there. Do you? The only difference there is MS's corporate image that the general public don't know/ are ignorant about.


So you don't see shadows, rounded corners, antialiased fonts, nicer icons, gradients, embossed buttons, nicer cursors...
Should I take this thread seriously or you are joking?

Of course, we should all take this subject seriously. I see those things yes. Do I think they could be used better? Also yes. There is no way that you could say that the visual aspect (barring intuition) of Ubuntu is better than that of Windows or Mac. I'm sure we'd all agree it could be better on both of those. Perhaps they went too far. From my own observations, very few of my mac-using friends have changed the default theme of mac, this is because they are happy with it, they see no need to change.

At university, we have a room dedicated to Linux usage. We use Ubuntu there too. I only know one person in a class of 20, who hasn't changed their default theme on it. This has to mean something no?

I started this thread because I'm not overly artistic, if I could really go forward and implement some revolutionary change to how Ubuntu looks, I would. I am however sure that there are some really talented artists out there just waiting to really get their teeth into it. If no one asks them to come forward then no one will reply. You can try and disprove me by saying 'Oh look at the shine on those buttons' all you like but it the buttons themselves don't look great then the shine may even make them look worse.

I hope that answers your questions.

Nonno Bassotto
October 8th, 2008, 04:38 PM
I agree that Ubuntu can be made to look better by default. I just didn't want to start the discussion on the basis of "it's like windows 95" since it wouldn't go anywhere.

Anyway I think the default theme is nicer than XP or any previous version of windows, and that vista looks nicer than default Ubuntu 8.04.

BUT

you can install Hardy on pc with not so good specs, and if you want a better look you just need to activate desktop effects. With compiz on I think Hardy and Vista are on par (I don't like the big window borders in Vista).

With a better theme and gnome-do, Hardy wins hands out, so yeah, we could do better.

phoenix_snake
October 8th, 2008, 04:49 PM
I found these mockups I posted on another thread.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y111/raraken/kin_piano_kith.png

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y111/raraken/kin_piano_grass.png

A user told me they just can't be created in reality with the current gnome.

Therion
October 8th, 2008, 04:55 PM
I love Ubuntu's default brown and orange "human" theme. It is instantly distinguishable from Windows or Mac, creating a strong visual identity for the "brand."
Bingo.

Ubuntu is an African word. The branding of this product is going to capitalize on that association, period. To do otherwise would be foolish, which means earth-tones are here to stay. It would be incongruous to use, say, Bluebuntu as the default theme.


Can you be more specific about how the Ubuntu artwork seems "unprofessional" to you? You are voicing concerns but not presenting alternative solutions. "But let's face it. No one in a shop is going to pick Ubuntu" is a sweeping generalization... *I* picked Ubuntu; did you?
Doubleplusgood.

Let's distinguish what is unprofessional from what you, personally, do not like. I work in the Fine Arts department at a University and I see and discuss a LOT of professional-level design work. And while you may not LIKE the new default theme or wallpaper, I assure it it's quite professional. I don't particularly care for it personally, but I can look at it with a detached eye and judge it objectively.

TheFlyingPig
October 8th, 2008, 04:58 PM
I agree with Dave here, users are lazy, serve them a dish that looks, feels and sounds awesome and they will recommend it to others, serve it looking like my grandma's 30 year old sofa, feeling much the same as windows, and give them a task of putting everything you want to have to make it look good when they could potentially be made options.

I mean sure, I'm on an old version now, (Gutsy 7:10) but when I upgraded to this having set up beryl on 7:04 hearing that Compiz was going to be ready set up I thought great! except it wasn't properly was it, it didn't have its advanced menu available which at the end of the day is what makes it so cool, it didnt have the emerald add-on for the advanced gnome effects it was basically as restricting as windows and it was brown and orange, although I very much like my brown and orange shoes and I like spaghetti bolenaise I would never have an OS looking like it and the majority of current users have fully modded their theme to their preference which is more often than not, completely contrasting to the default theme. And given the majority of users artistic capabilities they more often than not make it look more mac, or more windows.

Which brings me conveniently back to why I responded to this thread. I agree that Ubuntu does not have an Identity as far a how it looks, it does not make it easy to customise "off the shelf" and although users like to make their OS look windows or mac esque on discovery of these customisation features, wouldn't it be great to see some new options and see what the user group thinks of them to find something that is better than how vista looks, better than how mac looks and that automatically has the functionality to function better than macs and windows can function graphically.

Yes keep it simple, but make it iconic. And if Ubuntu is truly customisable in how it is developed not only its function then why not let people that believe that it could be better make it better.

Now! Lets see some Pics of themes :)

SunnyRabbiera
October 8th, 2008, 05:03 PM
Well with hardy I think the artwork team did a good job, too bad I cant say the same about Ibex, if you hate dark browns and ugly colors you are going to lothe Ibex by the looks of it.

davbren
October 8th, 2008, 05:05 PM
Ubuntu is an African word. The branding of this product is going to capitalize on that association, period. To do otherwise would be foolish, which means earth-tones are here to stay. It would be incongruous to use, say, Bluebuntu as the default theme.

I can respect that, but lets bare in mind that there is more to Africa than Earthy colours... in fact its a tad narrow-sighted to think that. Its not so much the colours I'm on about *necessarily* its the actual visual experience.





Let's distinguish what is unprofessional from what you, personally, do not like. I work in the Fine Arts department at a University and I see and discuss a LOT of professional-level design work. And while you may not LIKE the new default theme or wallpaper, I assure it it's quite professional. I don't particularly care for it personally, but I can look at it with a detached eye and judge it objectively.

Ok again I can respect that, from a qualified perspective it may have all the elements of a quality piece of design. Like for instance, quality is based on how well something does the required task. The terminal installs programs very well and very easily. From a visual aspect, is that the best way of doing it. People like tactile design. We need to make the experience as pleasurable as possible, however trivial it may seem.

Much like a chef's cooking vs. mine. We might have all the same ingredients on the plate. It may even taste the same, but which are you going to eat? the one that looks like its from a cook book? or one that looks like you're gonna feed it to your dog. It's an extreme example but I think it works.

SSVegito888
October 9th, 2008, 03:40 AM
I hate to say this, but what about something similar to Windows Aero but about 10-20 times better with an African Tribal Colors theme.


Basically the same colors as Hardy Herons default wallpaper but make everything clear and glossy looking.


Also, make it so that there are a bunch color schemes that you can pick from.

cardinals_fan
October 9th, 2008, 03:41 AM
Basically the same colors as Hardy Herons default wallpaper but make everything clear and glossy looking.
I find clear/glossy/shiny/transparent themes revolting and unpleasant :)

SSVegito888
October 9th, 2008, 03:47 AM
The colours are fine, the theme engine's and icons are not nice. That's why I use an orange Clearlooks (thanks to colour themes).



Where do you get colour themes?