On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 09:13:22PM +0100 I heard the voice of
J.O. Aho, and lo! it spake thus:
> 
> It looks like something from the 1980's,

Well, it's at least from the 90's!

Not sure when it was adopted or who drew it.  But it came in in
current form in an XPM in 3.0 release (which I also don't have a date
for, but 3.2 was before Nov 1994, so that sets a latter bound).  And
it couldn't have been before 1992, since there wasn't ctwm then, so...

Heck, since then, even Pizza Hut changed their logo.  Though I'm not
sure which side _that_'s arguing for...


> sadly I'm not skilled in painting, so what ever I would do, wouldn't
> be better.

Ditto   :(

I could, with a lot of work, a little luck, and a very forgiving and
moderately inebriated judge, JUST about manage a credible stick
figure.  On my good days.


> It will not attract new users.

Quite likely.  While I don't expect us to attract hordes of new users,
I'd like it to be because they don't care about flexible window
managers, rather than turned off by graphics before reading a word.


> Nowadays I understand that people like flat and boring logos. What
> about something like a big C with twm written in the middle of it (I
> guess that could kind of look like the euro sign if scaled down).

Funnily enough, I messed a little with something similar.  I put a
solid 5 or 6 minutes into coming up with
<http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/dl/ctwm2.png>.  It almost scales
even down to favicon size (not quite, of course, but that's an extreme
case).  I think there's some preference for more rectangular stuff
though as well.


Not sure what our "relatives" are doing.  I'm not aware that twm
itself has any particular logoage.  The xwinman.org page talking about
twm <http://xwinman.org/vtwm.php> does have something, but it looks
like something from Sun or SGI or DEC in the workstation era.  And the
similar logo they show there for vtwm doesn't show up anywhere on the
vtwm.org page or in a look through their source tree.  I don't see any
evidence that vtwm HAS a graphical logo even; their page just has a
text header.  tvtwm and piewm don't seem to have websites or live dev
communities I can find.  FVWM is technically twm-descended, but is so
far off in its own place it doesn't really count.  And FVWM's
descendents are even farther afield.


-- 
Matthew Fuller     (MF4839)   |  [email protected]
Systems/Network Administrator |  http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/
           On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.

Reply via email to