Re: Exciting GNOME?
Both Novell (as Nat and Jimmac have stated before) and Red Hat (at this point, people weren't in the beginning, but its now Fedora, not RH) are happy with the use of Industrial or Bluecurve, respectively (though bluecurve *might* have to be called something different as bluecurve is TMed AFAIK). That said, while Bluecurve is a lovely theme with a lot of things that recommend it as a default sort of theme, the grey is going to look dated in a few years (if it doesn't already). In the bluecurve department, ClearLook (http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19527), which I just found through this thread, looks like a hands-down improvement. I'm probably going to suggest we cut Fedora over to it, as its both clearly an iteration of Bluecurve (which we use as default today) and quite a lovely change. -Seth On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 12:13:50 -0500, Pat Suwalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gabriel Bauman wrote: Most folks I know install GNOME, shudder, then install Bluecurve and never look back. Is it a Red Hat licensing issue perhaps? I would say it's a little more than that. Bluecurve is what identifies RedHat. I don't think that it would be appropriate to use it, legally possible or not. The same applies to Ximian/Novell and Industrial. --Pat ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
I was working under the impression having less major colours is a good thing. From memory, the icons are done using the HIG palette with some intermediate colours for gradients and such. Designers I have met will tell you when doing a design, pick a small number of colours and stick with them. It creates a feeling of uniformity throughout a publication or website (or GNOME Desktop). It does depend on what you're trying to convey. Using a rainbow of colours conveys a message (perhaps one that's harder to control) just as using a limited pallette sends a message. Boxes of crayons are very common stock images for a reason! Lots of colour can be very pleasant if its done well. Using only a couple base colours does make life a lot easier if, like me obviously, you're not a visual designer. Given that the pallette that a theme designer creates (i.e. a set of widgets and icons) will be used and recombined in lots of different ways, its probably a lot more dangerous to use a lot of colours. They just don't have the control. Also, a nice bright button looks good once, twice, thrice, and after the 100th time you've seen the same damn button you want to kill yourself. On the whole, I feel KDE's large numbers of colors are not used to very good effect. Their use of bright colors, on the other hand, does have some nice effects (as shown by Jeff's list of shots). -Seth ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
The combination of the little-known themes I'm using currently: Gtk2 - Perseid, from http://jp.bizet.free.fr/themes/gtk2.html (for some reason, this theme isn't on gnome-look nor at art.gnome.org, as far as I could tell). Metacity: RMilk (available from gnome-look). My point: I think that some really great themes can for some reason rot in obscurity, as things now stand. I think it'd really improve Gnome-look.org if external links section was expanded. Currently it doesn't even link art.gnome.org (again, as far as I could tell). Miro ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
Nuvola is today in gnome-themes-extras. I am going to move it into gnome-themes if the maintainers of that package approve the move and make a new final release of g-t-e without Nuvola. This means that while it will not be the default theme for GNOME it will be part of a default installation. http://librsvg.sourceforge.net/theme.php shows how the metatheme currently look. Christian On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 19:23 -0200, Everaldo Canuto wrote: Look at this: http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=5358 A nice icon theme. Colors and Life Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 19:09 -0200, Everaldo Canuto escreveu: Yes... it is nice and clean... but where is life and color? Clean is good when your work 8 or more hours on a computer but if you user 1 hour per day to read your mail Clean sounds like a Ugly. I like etiquette but now is time to thinking like a END USER. Or GNOME and Linux always is for hackers... The KDE team is on another way, the way for end users... and GNOME? Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 21:57 +0100, Michal Arnauts escreveu: I think the new etiquette icon theme is quite attractive... It's still clean like the default Gnome one, but it has a refreshing new look... Especially the mime-types... I love it... http://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19853 On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:06:17 -0200, Everaldo Canuto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ClearLooks is really nice but now we need a more atractive icon set. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 17:53 -0200, Everaldo Canuto escreveu: This CleanLooks is nice but I dont like menus... I think that menu need to be same aspect at tool bar like original BlueCurve. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 19:52 +0100, Daniel Borgmann escreveu: On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 12:13 -0500, Pat Suwalski wrote: Gabriel Bauman wrote: Most folks I know install GNOME, shudder, then install Bluecurve and never look back. Is it a Red Hat licensing issue perhaps? I would say it's a little more than that. Bluecurve is what identifies RedHat. I don't think that it would be appropriate to use it, legally possible or not. The same applies to Ximian/Novell and Industrial. Well, did you take a look at Clearlooks[1]? Someone mentioned it at the Wiki[2], I tried it and it totally blew me away! It's based on Bluecurve, but got more modern and fresh looks. It hardly looks like Bluecurve anymore, besides some pixmaps and the menus. The author is also very actively working on it and preparing a website including a voting booth. The next version will have properly rounded scrollbars[3] and some other improvements, for example he's looking into improving the comboboxes, which traditionally look a bit like a mess[4] in Gtk. It might sound overzealous, but my honest opinion is that this engine simply smokes the competition (including Plastik, which is very popular for good reason), the author is independent of any commercial vendor and it's still rather new, so not many people know about it yet. What could be better suited? [1] http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19527 [2] http://live.gnome.org/NewDefaultTheme [3] http://www.stellingwerff.com/headers.png (notice that Clearlooks has many color schemes already, that's just one of them) [4] I made this mockup to demonstrate the problem: http://213.133.111.182/Temp/ComboBoxEntry.png ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Garrity wrote: Site note: where's the best place to post feedback/suggestions for ClearLooks? I didn't want to start a theme-nitpick sub-thread here. Probably either here: http://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19527 or by mailing the author directly at remenic at gmail.com. I think he's currently getting more feedback than he'll ever be able to respond to. ;) -- Daniel Borgmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
Indeed, some of the better pixmap themes are designed by Jip. gonxical, for example, is a high quality professional theme. Arguably the best gnome theme I've come across. On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 14:54:51 +0100, Miroslav Silovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The combination of the little-known themes I'm using currently: Gtk2 - Perseid, from http://jp.bizet.free.fr/themes/gtk2.html (for some reason, this theme isn't on gnome-look nor at art.gnome.org, as far as I could tell). Metacity: RMilk (available from gnome-look). My point: I think that some really great themes can for some reason rot in obscurity, as things now stand. I think it'd really improve Gnome-look.org if external links section was expanded. Currently it doesn't even link art.gnome.org (again, as far as I could tell). Miro ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- My logic is undeniable. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 00:32 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: quote who=Seth Nickell In the bluecurve department, ClearLook (http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19527), which I just found through this thread, looks like a hands-down improvement. Then I guess I am pretty alone when I don't feel that this is an improvement? I was taught green with a slight amount of brown is dirt green ;). Seriously, even with different colours IMO that theme doesn't look more modern than the current default, or most of the other themes on gnome-look. It is the highest rated theme on g-l.o though, so many people seem to like it. *sigh*, I wish everybody had as good a flavor as me ;). -Samuel -- -- | Samuel Abels | http://www.debain.org| | spam ad debain dod org | knipknap ad jabber dod org | -- ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 19:52 +0100, Samuel Abels wrote: On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 12:32 -0600, Shaun McCance wrote: I'm not fond of the colors in the screenshot you're referring to, but I do like the engine a lot. I'm currently using the ClearlooksBluey theme, which ships with Clearlooks. I have to admit I only looked at the screenshot at g-l.o. Now I wanted to try it out but got hit by this bug http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148413 again. I just don't get it, on every single one of my GNOME installations (all of which are Debian Sarge or Sid) this happens at least sometimes. I seem to be the only person though, so maybe I am doing something wrong. I only click and drag though, so I would guess there's not much to go wrong with it. Did you actually install the theme engine? i.e., did you compile it, and install it, and install it to the correct prefix? Theme engines must be installed like software, and can't be installed with the theme manager capplet. Using a theme with an uninstalled engine can have weird effects similar to what you describe. -- Sean Middleditch [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
Using my voice as gnome-themes maintainer, please hold off on this Christian. -Seth On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:21:09 +0100, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nuvola is today in gnome-themes-extras. I am going to move it into gnome-themes if the maintainers of that package approve the move and make a new final release of g-t-e without Nuvola. This means that while it will not be the default theme for GNOME it will be part of a default installation. http://librsvg.sourceforge.net/theme.php shows how the metatheme currently look. Christian On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 19:23 -0200, Everaldo Canuto wrote: Look at this: http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=5358 A nice icon theme. Colors and Life Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 às 19:09 -0200, Everaldo Canuto escreveu: Yes... it is nice and clean... but where is life and color? Clean is good when your work 8 or more hours on a computer but if you user 1 hour per day to read your mail Clean sounds like a Ugly. I like etiquette but now is time to thinking like a END USER. Or GNOME and Linux always is for hackers... The KDE team is on another way, the way for end users... and GNOME? Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 às 21:57 +0100, Michaël Arnauts escreveu: I think the new etiquette icon theme is quite attractive... It's still clean like the default Gnome one, but it has a refreshing new look... Especially the mime-types... I love it... http://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19853 On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:06:17 -0200, Everaldo Canuto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ClearLooks is really nice but now we need a more atractive icon set. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 às 17:53 -0200, Everaldo Canuto escreveu: This CleanLooks is nice but I dont like menus... I think that menu need to be same aspect at tool bar like original BlueCurve. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 às 19:52 +0100, Daniel Borgmann escreveu: On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 12:13 -0500, Pat Suwalski wrote: Gabriel Bauman wrote: Most folks I know install GNOME, shudder, then install Bluecurve and never look back. Is it a Red Hat licensing issue perhaps? I would say it's a little more than that. Bluecurve is what identifies RedHat. I don't think that it would be appropriate to use it, legally possible or not. The same applies to Ximian/Novell and Industrial. Well, did you take a look at Clearlooks[1]? Someone mentioned it at the Wiki[2], I tried it and it totally blew me away! It's based on Bluecurve, but got more modern and fresh looks. It hardly looks like Bluecurve anymore, besides some pixmaps and the menus. The author is also very actively working on it and preparing a website including a voting booth. The next version will have properly rounded scrollbars[3] and some other improvements, for example he's looking into improving the comboboxes, which traditionally look a bit like a mess[4] in Gtk. It might sound overzealous, but my honest opinion is that this engine simply smokes the competition (including Plastik, which is very popular for good reason), the author is independent of any commercial vendor and it's still rather new, so not many people know about it yet. What could be better suited? [1] http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19527 [2] http://live.gnome.org/NewDefaultTheme [3] http://www.stellingwerff.com/headers.png (notice that Clearlooks has many color schemes already, that's just one of them) [4] I made this mockup to demonstrate the problem: http://213.133.111.182/Temp/ComboBoxEntry.png ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
Jeff Waugh wrote: More and more, I'm getting the balance of these two: The icons look good, but the colours are dull (which is somewhat on purpose, because we don't want to overwhelm the user, but they tend to come across very brown [1]). yup, brown is the same comment I got... after asking it turned out that the cause of this impression is not the whole icon theme, but just the folder icon... what about making the folder icon more yellowish? ciao Paolo - Jeff [1] Isn't that amusing! ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 21:45 -0800, Eugenia Loli-Queru wrote: I certainly support a new default widget theme (the popular candidates look nice to me, no favoritism there), but please, please please don't mess with the icon theme! Fully agreed. The default wm is not good (difficult to click its buttons) and both the Simple and Default widget themes leave much to be desired. But the icon theme rocks and it should not be changed IMHO. I liked the default either, but am somehow weary of the smooth palette. I found this: http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19853 to be a good compromise between shiny and soft. The icons are very clear from a usability point of view. It's also voted fairly good, so many people seem to like it. I personally like this: http://www.rad-e8.com/downloads/icn/snowe/ style most though ;). -Samuel -- -- | Samuel Abels | http://www.debain.org| | spam ad debain dod org | knipknap ad jabber dod org | -- ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 09:11 +0100, Paolo Borelli wrote: Jeff Waugh wrote: More and more, I'm getting the balance of these two: The icons look good, but the colours are dull (which is somewhat on purpose, because we don't want to overwhelm the user, but they tend to come across very brown [1]). yup, brown is the same comment I got... after asking it turned out that the cause of this impression is not the whole icon theme, but just the folder icon... what about making the folder icon more yellowish? As a slight counterproposal, could we perhaps offer folder icons in several basic colors, and have it selectable on a global, and then per-folder basis? (Possibly through the color/emblem selector) Perhaps the background color chosen for a folder could influence its icon color.). I know this is adding another preference, but picking a color seems relatively harmless. I envision a combobox at the bottom of the bottom of the icon theme selector that looks for gnome-fs-directory-color, and contains a list of all colors. Recolorable folders would be helpful for when you have a lot of folders (which seem to be the kind of icon that gets grouped together with other visually identical icons most often), and none of the available emblems seem quite right, or when you want to add distinction in addition to emblems, or are dealing with folders that have emblems assigned to them already (links, shared folders, nautilus-vcs controlled files). Or feel free to tell me I'm on crack here. :) ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
Gabriel Bauman wrote: Most folks I know install GNOME, shudder, then install Bluecurve and never look back. Is it a Red Hat licensing issue perhaps? I would say it's a little more than that. Bluecurve is what identifies RedHat. I don't think that it would be appropriate to use it, legally possible or not. The same applies to Ximian/Novell and Industrial. --Pat ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
Hey guys, Remember that not all user are technician and normal end users like colors. The KDE themes and icons is very nice, I prefer GNOME but normal users like a my girlfriend, my sister and my friends like colors. Ok... somebody say me hey install another theme, gnome-look theres a lot of icons and themes. Remember that a normal user dont like to modify default theme... I think that the best way to solve this problem is change default theme of GTK and GNOME... for technician is easy to cahnge to other clean theme but for end users no. The best way is the better way for users. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 04:31 -0500, Dave Ahlswede escreveu: On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 09:11 +0100, Paolo Borelli wrote: Jeff Waugh wrote: More and more, I'm getting the balance of these two: The icons look good, but the colours are dull (which is somewhat on purpose, because we don't want to overwhelm the user, but they tend to come across very brown [1]). yup, brown is the same comment I got... after asking it turned out that the cause of this impression is not the whole icon theme, but just the folder icon... what about making the folder icon more yellowish? As a slight counterproposal, could we perhaps offer folder icons in several basic colors, and have it selectable on a global, and then per-folder basis? (Possibly through the color/emblem selector) Perhaps the background color chosen for a folder could influence its icon color.). I know this is adding another preference, but picking a color seems relatively harmless. I envision a combobox at the bottom of the bottom of the icon theme selector that looks for gnome-fs-directory-color, and contains a list of all colors. Recolorable folders would be helpful for when you have a lot of folders (which seem to be the kind of icon that gets grouped together with other visually identical icons most often), and none of the available emblems seem quite right, or when you want to add distinction in addition to emblems, or are dealing with folders that have emblems assigned to them already (links, shared folders, nautilus-vcs controlled files). Or feel free to tell me I'm on crack here. :) ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 09:00 -0800, Gabriel Bauman wrote: Most folks I know install GNOME, shudder, then install Bluecurve and never look back. Most folks I know remove GNOME and switch to KDE because they don't find GNOME attractive with Bluecurve as default theme on Fedora or Red Hat. I think this theme is depressive with it's gray colors ;-). -- Przemysaw Sowa [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 12:13 -0500, Pat Suwalski wrote: Gabriel Bauman wrote: Most folks I know install GNOME, shudder, then install Bluecurve and never look back. Is it a Red Hat licensing issue perhaps? I would say it's a little more than that. Bluecurve is what identifies RedHat. I don't think that it would be appropriate to use it, legally possible or not. The same applies to Ximian/Novell and Industrial. Well, did you take a look at Clearlooks[1]? Someone mentioned it at the Wiki[2], I tried it and it totally blew me away! It's based on Bluecurve, but got more modern and fresh looks. It hardly looks like Bluecurve anymore, besides some pixmaps and the menus. The author is also very actively working on it and preparing a website including a voting booth. The next version will have properly rounded scrollbars[3] and some other improvements, for example he's looking into improving the comboboxes, which traditionally look a bit like a mess[4] in Gtk. It might sound overzealous, but my honest opinion is that this engine simply smokes the competition (including Plastik, which is very popular for good reason), the author is independent of any commercial vendor and it's still rather new, so not many people know about it yet. What could be better suited? [1] http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19527 [2] http://live.gnome.org/NewDefaultTheme [3] http://www.stellingwerff.com/headers.png (notice that Clearlooks has many color schemes already, that's just one of them) [4] I made this mockup to demonstrate the problem: http://213.133.111.182/Temp/ComboBoxEntry.png -- Daniel Borgmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 19:52 +0100, Daniel Borgmann wrote: Well, did you take a look at Clearlooks Just in case anyone wants a look at this engine and uses Debian, I've got packages in http://burtonini.com/debian, specifically: http://www.burtonini.com/debian/unstable/gtk2-engines-clearlooks_0.2.2-1_i386.deb Ross -- Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.burtonini.com./ PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Dave Ahlswede wrote: Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 04:31:43 -0500 From: Dave Ahlswede [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: desktop-devel-list@gnome.org Subject: Re: Exciting GNOME? On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 09:11 +0100, Paolo Borelli wrote: Jeff Waugh wrote: More and more, I'm getting the balance of these two: The icons look good, but the colours are dull (which is somewhat on purpose, because we don't want to overwhelm the user, but they tend to come across very brown [1]). yup, brown is the same comment I got... after asking it turned out that the cause of this impression is not the whole icon theme, but just the folder icon... what about making the folder icon more yellowish? As a slight counterproposal, could we perhaps offer folder icons in several basic colors, and have it selectable on a global, and then per-folder basis? (Possibly through the color/emblem selector) Perhaps the background color chosen for a folder could influence its icon color.). I know this is adding another preference, but picking a color seems relatively harmless. I envision a combobox at the bottom of the bottom of the icon theme selector that looks for gnome-fs-directory-color, and contains a list of all colors. Recolorable folders would be helpful for when you have a lot of folders (which seem to be the kind of icon that gets grouped together with other visually identical icons most often), and none of the available emblems seem quite right, or when you want to add distinction in addition to emblems, or are dealing with folders that have emblems assigned to them already (links, shared folders, nautilus-vcs controlled files). I always liked being able to change the folder colour back when I was using Mac OS Classic. If I recall correctly you could also set any icon you wanted for any file you liked, not just for shortcuts and such like (it was in the Get Info dialog but it may have been more restricted than I recall). If you wanted to be really crazy you could automatically assign the folder colour based on the folder contents, like a mood ring or something (or like that lava lamp tool I read about which provided an abstract view of system activity). Okay so that last bit was crack but coloured folders could be quite useful especially if the colours had some kind of semantic meaning. More recently I have seen thumbnailer programs (and windows XP i think) that will take images/other files and superimpose thumbnails of them on the parent folder. Here's an example I grabbed thanks to google: http://www.scotsnewsletter.com/winxpb2/graphics/screenshots/06_my_pictures.jpg Certianly there is room for improvement here, I'd be surprised if the Nautilus developers didn't already have some ideas in mind. - Alan H. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
This CleanLooks is nice but I dont like menus... I think that menu need to be same aspect at tool bar like original BlueCurve. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 19:52 +0100, Daniel Borgmann escreveu: On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 12:13 -0500, Pat Suwalski wrote: Gabriel Bauman wrote: Most folks I know install GNOME, shudder, then install Bluecurve and never look back. Is it a Red Hat licensing issue perhaps? I would say it's a little more than that. Bluecurve is what identifies RedHat. I don't think that it would be appropriate to use it, legally possible or not. The same applies to Ximian/Novell and Industrial. Well, did you take a look at Clearlooks[1]? Someone mentioned it at the Wiki[2], I tried it and it totally blew me away! It's based on Bluecurve, but got more modern and fresh looks. It hardly looks like Bluecurve anymore, besides some pixmaps and the menus. The author is also very actively working on it and preparing a website including a voting booth. The next version will have properly rounded scrollbars[3] and some other improvements, for example he's looking into improving the comboboxes, which traditionally look a bit like a mess[4] in Gtk. It might sound overzealous, but my honest opinion is that this engine simply smokes the competition (including Plastik, which is very popular for good reason), the author is independent of any commercial vendor and it's still rather new, so not many people know about it yet. What could be better suited? [1] http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19527 [2] http://live.gnome.org/NewDefaultTheme [3] http://www.stellingwerff.com/headers.png (notice that Clearlooks has many color schemes already, that's just one of them) [4] I made this mockup to demonstrate the problem: http://213.133.111.182/Temp/ComboBoxEntry.png ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
ClearLooks is really nice but now we need a more atractive icon set. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 17:53 -0200, Everaldo Canuto escreveu: This CleanLooks is nice but I dont like menus... I think that menu need to be same aspect at tool bar like original BlueCurve. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 19:52 +0100, Daniel Borgmann escreveu: On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 12:13 -0500, Pat Suwalski wrote: Gabriel Bauman wrote: Most folks I know install GNOME, shudder, then install Bluecurve and never look back. Is it a Red Hat licensing issue perhaps? I would say it's a little more than that. Bluecurve is what identifies RedHat. I don't think that it would be appropriate to use it, legally possible or not. The same applies to Ximian/Novell and Industrial. Well, did you take a look at Clearlooks[1]? Someone mentioned it at the Wiki[2], I tried it and it totally blew me away! It's based on Bluecurve, but got more modern and fresh looks. It hardly looks like Bluecurve anymore, besides some pixmaps and the menus. The author is also very actively working on it and preparing a website including a voting booth. The next version will have properly rounded scrollbars[3] and some other improvements, for example he's looking into improving the comboboxes, which traditionally look a bit like a mess[4] in Gtk. It might sound overzealous, but my honest opinion is that this engine simply smokes the competition (including Plastik, which is very popular for good reason), the author is independent of any commercial vendor and it's still rather new, so not many people know about it yet. What could be better suited? [1] http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19527 [2] http://live.gnome.org/NewDefaultTheme [3] http://www.stellingwerff.com/headers.png (notice that Clearlooks has many color schemes already, that's just one of them) [4] I made this mockup to demonstrate the problem: http://213.133.111.182/Temp/ComboBoxEntry.png ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 18:06 -0200, Everaldo Canuto wrote: ClearLooks is really nice but now we need a more atractive icon set. Are they icons really that bad? Is it just the folders that most people find boring? Most the icons seem pretty nice to me. The biggest problem I see with the icons has nothing to do with them being too boring, but with some being just plain out poorly designed. Take the Eye of Gnome icon, for example. What the hell is that thing? An eye in a gnome hat? I'd much rather see some more work go into updating some of the old icons to the new clean, usable style that newer icons all have, then is seeing all the existing great icons tossed out just to come up with some colorful but useless set of icons. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 17:53 -0200, Everaldo Canuto escreveu: This CleanLooks is nice but I dont like menus... I think that menu need to be same aspect at tool bar like original BlueCurve. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 19:52 +0100, Daniel Borgmann escreveu: On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 12:13 -0500, Pat Suwalski wrote: Gabriel Bauman wrote: Most folks I know install GNOME, shudder, then install Bluecurve and never look back. Is it a Red Hat licensing issue perhaps? I would say it's a little more than that. Bluecurve is what identifies RedHat. I don't think that it would be appropriate to use it, legally possible or not. The same applies to Ximian/Novell and Industrial. Well, did you take a look at Clearlooks[1]? Someone mentioned it at the Wiki[2], I tried it and it totally blew me away! It's based on Bluecurve, but got more modern and fresh looks. It hardly looks like Bluecurve anymore, besides some pixmaps and the menus. The author is also very actively working on it and preparing a website including a voting booth. The next version will have properly rounded scrollbars[3] and some other improvements, for example he's looking into improving the comboboxes, which traditionally look a bit like a mess[4] in Gtk. It might sound overzealous, but my honest opinion is that this engine simply smokes the competition (including Plastik, which is very popular for good reason), the author is independent of any commercial vendor and it's still rather new, so not many people know about it yet. What could be better suited? [1] http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19527 [2] http://live.gnome.org/NewDefaultTheme [3] http://www.stellingwerff.com/headers.png (notice that Clearlooks has many color schemes already, that's just one of them) [4] I made this mockup to demonstrate the problem: http://213.133.111.182/Temp/ComboBoxEntry.png ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- Sean Middleditch [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
--- Sean Middleditch [EMAIL PROTECTED] Are they icons really that bad? Is it just the folders that most people find boring? Most the icons seem pretty nice to me. I think the GNOME Icons are on the whole really good, and I'd strongly resist moving to some gooey kde-like icon theme. I do tend to find the folder a bit boring, however. My current setup uses the suede[1] icon them, which uses standard GNOME icons for most things (i think), but the folder icon is just much more appealing to me, and still fairly GNOME-like i think. [1] http://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=13430 ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
Hi, Ok... the icons are not ugly but need more colors, I say one more time, the end users like colors and because this some users like Kde Icons. End users dont like gray desktop and for a moment (except for Fedora users) the G of GNOME is a Gray. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 20:27 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu: --- Sean Middleditch [EMAIL PROTECTED] Are they icons really that bad? Is it just the folders that most people find boring? Most the icons seem pretty nice to me. I think the GNOME Icons are on the whole really good, and I'd strongly resist moving to some gooey kde-like icon theme. I do tend to find the folder a bit boring, however. My current setup uses the suede[1] icon them, which uses standard GNOME icons for most things (i think), but the folder icon is just much more appealing to me, and still fairly GNOME-like i think. [1] http://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=13430 ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
I think the new etiquette icon theme is quite attractive... It's still clean like the default Gnome one, but it has a refreshing new look... Especially the mime-types... I love it... http://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19853 On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:06:17 -0200, Everaldo Canuto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ClearLooks is really nice but now we need a more atractive icon set. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 às 17:53 -0200, Everaldo Canuto escreveu: This CleanLooks is nice but I dont like menus... I think that menu need to be same aspect at tool bar like original BlueCurve. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 às 19:52 +0100, Daniel Borgmann escreveu: On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 12:13 -0500, Pat Suwalski wrote: Gabriel Bauman wrote: Most folks I know install GNOME, shudder, then install Bluecurve and never look back. Is it a Red Hat licensing issue perhaps? I would say it's a little more than that. Bluecurve is what identifies RedHat. I don't think that it would be appropriate to use it, legally possible or not. The same applies to Ximian/Novell and Industrial. Well, did you take a look at Clearlooks[1]? Someone mentioned it at the Wiki[2], I tried it and it totally blew me away! It's based on Bluecurve, but got more modern and fresh looks. It hardly looks like Bluecurve anymore, besides some pixmaps and the menus. The author is also very actively working on it and preparing a website including a voting booth. The next version will have properly rounded scrollbars[3] and some other improvements, for example he's looking into improving the comboboxes, which traditionally look a bit like a mess[4] in Gtk. It might sound overzealous, but my honest opinion is that this engine simply smokes the competition (including Plastik, which is very popular for good reason), the author is independent of any commercial vendor and it's still rather new, so not many people know about it yet. What could be better suited? [1] http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19527 [2] http://live.gnome.org/NewDefaultTheme [3] http://www.stellingwerff.com/headers.png (notice that Clearlooks has many color schemes already, that's just one of them) [4] I made this mockup to demonstrate the problem: http://213.133.111.182/Temp/ComboBoxEntry.png ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 19:52 +0100, Daniel Borgmann wrote: Well, did you take a look at Clearlooks? Someone mentioned it at the Wiki, I tried it and it totally blew me away! Wow. I have a new default theme. The only issue I have with it so far is a common one with most GTK engines: menu bars look funny when there is a toolbar bevel directly underneath them. If Clearlooks disabled the top bevel of toolbars when they appear below menu bars, I'd have no complaints at all :D Thanks for the pointer, Daniel. -- Gabriel Bauman smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
This isn't the place to start a KDE/GNOME flamewar. End users is very general. Everyone likes something different. The current desktop trendiness is to be flashy with colors and stuff. OS X doesn't really have that much color. It's just a very well done interface. Making things shiny with a billion colors doesn't mean it is better. -- dobey On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 18:46 -0200, Everaldo Canuto wrote: Hi, Ok... the icons are not ugly but need more colors, I say one more time, the end users like colors and because this some users like Kde Icons. End users dont like gray desktop and for a moment (except for Fedora users) the G of GNOME is a Gray. Everaldo. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
I am not intent to start a flamewar... I really like to see GNOME with a better look but I think that the hackers know what change themes and is very important that default theme is designed to end-users like Windows XP and KDE 3.3. No flames please... I am a GNOME user. :) I dont like when I show GNOME for my friends and they say Hey Everaldo, i dont like this... please reinstall a Windows pirate because it is more nice than this. Everaldo. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 16:21 -0500, Rodney Dawes escreveu: This isn't the place to start a KDE/GNOME flamewar. End users is very general. Everyone likes something different. The current desktop trendiness is to be flashy with colors and stuff. OS X doesn't really have that much color. It's just a very well done interface. Making things shiny with a billion colors doesn't mean it is better. -- dobey On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 18:46 -0200, Everaldo Canuto wrote: Hi, Ok... the icons are not ugly but need more colors, I say one more time, the end users like colors and because this some users like Kde Icons. End users dont like gray desktop and for a moment (except for Fedora users) the G of GNOME is a Gray. Everaldo. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
Ok. Em Ter, 2005-02-15 s 13:39 -0800, Eugenia Loli-Queru escreveu: Look at this: http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=5358 A nice icon theme. Colors and Life Sorry, but this is just not gnome. What we see in this icon theme is cartoonish-style icons that have absolutely no consistency in terms of orientation. It's a mix'n'mash. IF the gnome icon theme is too change (personally I am against it at this point), the icon theme used must have the SAME orientation for all icons. The BeOS felt consistent on the desktop from the first sight, exactly because all its icons had the same palette, same orientation, same design. It felt _uniformed_. The icon theme you proposed has none of these qualities. Rgds, Eugenia ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
Jeff Waugh wrote: quote who=Jeff Waugh Particularly with GTK+ 2.8 on the horizon, we should be looking at leapfrogging the current best effort [2], no matching it. :-) [2] That has got to be OS X. Also, a theme so good that it would unify vendor appearance of GNOME. So good that vendors would be pathalogically stupid or so focused on their rear intake not to adopt it. The snag is any theme that is so awesome will probably be dog slow on the current theme engines. If we want the ultimate theme we would need an opengl theme engine (think dynamic lights, shadows, high quality textures all running at blistering speed) which would give us photorealistic quality (unlike all the cartoonish quality of most of the current crop). With Cairo and Xorg this should now be possible technically. Of course for the poor sods that dont have accelerated opengl we will still need a sensible default for them. jamie. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Sun, 2005-02-13 at 22:04 -0800, Eugenia Loli-Queru wrote: we should be looking at leapfrogging the current best effort [2], no matching it. :-) Fully agreed. That's how we should be thinking at all times. :) BTW, about the theme thing, I had a suggestion a few months ago: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2004-September/msg00172.html (which obviously need more work to smooth it out) Failing that, there's always this one: http://www.resexcellence.com/themes/butt_osigh/mes/01-25_mes20050121_lg.jpg ;-) (joking, but it's interesting) I remember enjoying your mockup at the time, but commenting how difficult it would be to code such a thing. However, with the advent of integrating gtk+ 2.8 with cairo, I think doing this becomes much easier, and since cairo can have hardware acceleration, it could even be fast! :-) Eugenia ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] The universe is always one step beyond logic. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
I think a competition is a good idea. Seems more likely than a long thread on d-d-l to produce results (based on previous discussions about themes on d-d-l). For what its worth, I never designed SmoothGNOME/Glider with flashy, shiny, eye-candy effects in mind. Not sure why we feel the need to have such a theme as a default though; the only reason I can see is to compete with OS X (lets face it, we've got Windows XP Luna beat, even with themes like Crux o_O). Do we want to advertise GNOME as a flashy eye-candy based Desktop? I always liked GNOME's clean, basic, simple interface; it was never cluttered with bouncing icons and flashing lights. That always appealed to me. Is the motivation for a flashy new theme to effectively gain more market share? -Link On Feb 13, 2005, at 4:31 PM, Callum McKenzie wrote: On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 10:40 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: Hey, Here's a list of screenshots that wonderfully demonstrates why GNOME does not come off as an exciting, fun, cool desktop for end-users to love. They are not show-off screenshots, just normal, everyday things: http://www.fireflybsd.com/screenshots/ It strikes me that the single biggest difference between the screen shots is the theme (widget, icon, background and window manager). KDE is shinier and more eye-catching. It also has more buttons and so looks more detailed and interesting (in a screenshot), but I think this is a very secondary concern. Should we start the default theme flame-fest again? I don't think so. How about we run a grand default-theme competition and let our community get involved with the design. (I envisage this being judged rather than voted on so we get something that is both usable and pretty, because votes only go to pretty.) - Callum ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- Peace, love penguins ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 07:48 -0800, Link Dupont wrote: I think a competition is a good idea. Seems more likely than a long thread on d-d-l to produce results (based on previous discussions about themes on d-d-l). For what its worth, I never designed SmoothGNOME/Glider with flashy, shiny, eye-candy effects in mind. Not sure why we feel the need to have such a theme as a default though; the only reason I can see is to compete with OS X (lets face it, we've got Windows XP Luna beat, even with themes like Crux o_O). Do we want to advertise GNOME as a flashy eye-candy based Desktop? I always liked GNOME's clean, basic, simple interface; it was never cluttered with bouncing icons and flashing lights. That always appealed to me. Is the motivation for a flashy new theme to effectively gain more market share? -Link Eye-candy and elegance are not mutually exclusive! Done properly (ala Apple :)) they can really make people stop and look, who would have otherwise scanned right past. Ed Mack ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
Incidentally metacity is due for a bump in the theme version to add new and exciting capabilities built on Cairo and Gtk 2.8 after the branch. Talented and visionary eye-candy folks are being solicited. Maybe metacity needs plugable metacity theme engines. -Rob Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: On Sun, 2005-02-13 at 22:04 -0800, Eugenia Loli-Queru wrote: we should be looking at leapfrogging the current best effort [2], no matching it. :-) Fully agreed. That's how we should be thinking at all times. :) BTW, about the theme thing, I had a suggestion a few months ago: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2004-September/msg00172.html (which obviously need more work to smooth it out) Failing that, there's always this one: http://www.resexcellence.com/themes/butt_osigh/mes/01-25_mes20050121_lg.jpg ;-) (joking, but it's interesting) I remember enjoying your mockup at the time, but commenting how difficult it would be to code such a thing. However, with the advent of integrating gtk+ 2.8 with cairo, I think doing this becomes much easier, and since cairo can have hardware acceleration, it could even be fast! :-) Eugenia ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
A theme competition on gnome-look.org and art.gnome.org might be a good idea. The first rule should be, No pixmap themes allowed!, however. I can't stand most of them. -- My logic is undeniable. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 09:35 -0800, Rob Adams wrote: Incidentally metacity is due for a bump in the theme version to add new and exciting capabilities built on Cairo and Gtk 2.8 after the branch. Talented and visionary eye-candy folks are being solicited. Maybe metacity needs plugable metacity theme engines. No engines if we can possibly avoid it. Causes a lot of problems. I'd rather have JavaScript if it comes to that. Havoc ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 12:43 -0500, Mystilleef wrote: A theme competition on gnome-look.org and art.gnome.org might be a good idea. The first rule should be, No pixmap themes allowed!, however. I wouldn't say that. If somebody comes up with a reasonable fast pixmap engine the user wouldn't even have to notice. The existing pixmap engine is however *extremely* slow - a notebook tab easily takes a complete second to render on my P4 2.4 / Radeon 9800. I can recall a posting on the themes list stating that the reason is nobody ever tried to optimize it. Either way, we need to make up at least /some/ rules from the beginning, like - What is the allow colour depth. (I suppose we need to think of terminal clients supporting only 256 colours.) - Is transparency allowed (IIRC widgets with rounded edges are likely to cause problems in some scenarios). - Possibly define a colour palette. Do we want to keep the current default icon set? In which case the theme needs to complement it's colours. - ...? -Samuel -- -- | Samuel Abels | http://www.debain.org| | spam ad debain dod org | knipknap ad jabber dod org | -- ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 19:36 +0100, Maciej Katafiasz wrote: Anything besides obvious it needs to be distributed separately thing? Does the fact that engines are compiled binaries ever cause compat problems? There are always going to be compat issues, binary or not. You either have a binary API or a string API, or some other API, that will require compatibility on some level. On a related note, there was one (vague, but nevertheless very desirable) point on GTK+ 2.8 TODO list: now we have cairo and all the goodness, make theme engine that would be far more flexible and allow us to specify declaratively what's currently being done via engines, fix all the currect shortcomings of theming and then get rid of all other engines. Is that still on radar, or got slipped into some unspecified future? I personally don't care if metacity gets engines or not. It seems to do well enough without them for now. However, I am very against removing them from GTK+. There's nothing special that cairo gives us, that would make removing the ability to have engines, any more possible than it is now. In fact, I would prefer that they get extended, so that new widgets can specify custom drawing routines. Sometimes, you need to completely change the math/layout of a widget to get real themability. Unfortunately, we don't have that. -- dobey ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
quote who=Link Dupont Not sure why we feel the need to have such a theme as a default though; the only reason I can see is to compete with OS X (lets face it, we've got Windows XP Luna beat, even with themes like Crux o_O). Do we want to advertise GNOME as a flashy eye-candy based Desktop? I always liked GNOME's clean, basic, simple interface; it was never cluttered with bouncing icons and flashing lights. That always appealed to me. Is the motivation for a flashy new theme to effectively gain more market share? Do you think of OS X's look'n'feel as flashy eye-candy? I don't. :-) It is very clean, very fresh, minimal in most cases (and becoming less funky with every OS X release). It might appear to be flashy because it's so different. - Jeff -- gnome.conf.au 2005: April 19th http://live.gnome.au/Canberra2005 ...and did you know that Twisties have real cheese in them? - Dave I didn't even think they had real twists in them! - Andrew ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 08:30 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: Do you think of OS X's look'n'feel as flashy eye-candy? I don't. :-) It is very clean, very fresh, minimal in most cases (and becoming less funky with every OS X release). It might appear to be flashy because it's so different. A lot of people are rather disturbed by the atrocities of the OS X Dock. It's got all stuff a good UI shouldn't - excessive bouncing icons, sanity-defying mouse-over behavior, concentration on aesthetics over organization, etc. The Dock of course isn't part of Aqua... just noting that it's a big part of peoples' impressions with OS X, and it tends to cause bad impressions at that. - Jeff -- Sean Middleditch [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Shaun McCance wrote: Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 16:34:41 -0600 From: Shaun McCance [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: desktop-devel-list@gnome.org Subject: Re: Exciting GNOME? On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 08:30 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: quote who=Link Dupont Not sure why we feel the need to have such a theme as a default though; the only reason I can see is to compete with OS X (lets face it, we've got Windows XP Luna beat, even with themes like Crux o_O). Do we want to advertise GNOME as a flashy eye-candy based Desktop? I always liked GNOME's clean, basic, simple interface; it was never cluttered with bouncing icons and flashing lights. That always appealed to me. Is the motivation for a flashy new theme to effectively gain more market share? Do you think of OS X's look'n'feel as flashy eye-candy? I don't. :-) It is very clean, very fresh, minimal in most cases (and becoming less funky with every OS X release). It might appear to be flashy because it's so different. Well, the original OS X look was very, very ribbed. It looked snazzy in the same way that gradients first looked cool when people first starting using them in themes. But it sort of got on your nerves after a while. Subsequent versions of OS X have toned down the ribbing, and it's a great improvement. Apple made a mistake and they fixed it. Let's learn from that and just avoid the mistake altogether. I believe Apple referred to them as *pinstripes*. I wounldn't normally see fit to mention it but the term you used unfortunately suggests something else completely different and given the day it is today it might not be such a bad idea to remind people to be particularly careful about their health. :P - Alan H ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
Hi, On last week my friend Willian (Willian is a lawyer) look at me using Evolution and say: Hey, this is a cool application. Can you install on my computer?. I have install the Fedora 3 on his computer and he likes the look of GNOME applications. The BlueCurve theme is nice for end users and I think that the most big problem of GTK and GNOME is your default theme... before BlueCurve and Fedora I dont like GTK too. Another problem is that when you GNOME and open a QT application, default theme of QT application looks nice but when you use KDE and open a GTK application then the end users say: This application is ugly!! Arrrg!!. A new default theme for GTK solve some problem but another problem is a default theme icon for GNOME... I ask some normal end users about the screenshots and all users (100% of 11 users) say me that the GNOME icons is not cool and needed more colors. Everaldo. Em Seg, 2005-02-14 s 13:31 +1300, Callum McKenzie escreveu: On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 10:40 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: Hey, Here's a list of screenshots that wonderfully demonstrates why GNOME does not come off as an exciting, fun, cool desktop for end-users to love. They are not show-off screenshots, just normal, everyday things: http://www.fireflybsd.com/screenshots/ It strikes me that the single biggest difference between the screen shots is the theme (widget, icon, background and window manager). KDE is shinier and more eye-catching. It also has more buttons and so looks more detailed and interesting (in a screenshot), but I think this is a very secondary concern. Should we start the default theme flame-fest again? I don't think so. How about we run a grand default-theme competition and let our community get involved with the design. (I envisage this being judged rather than voted on so we get something that is both usable and pretty, because votes only go to pretty.) - Callum ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 01:45 -0200, Everaldo Canuto wrote: A new default theme for GTK solve some problem but another problem is a default theme icon for GNOME... I ask some normal end users about the screenshots and all users (100% of 11 users) say me that the GNOME icons is not cool and needed more colors. This is interesting. People from work who have been switched to GNOME (and Linux) also comment on the icons straight away. However, they usually find the icons (and the rest of the artwork) quite nice. --d -- Davyd Madeley http://www.davyd.id.au/ PGP Fingerprint http://www.davyd.id.au/pgp/ 08B0 341A 0B9B 08BB 2118 C060 2EDD BB4F 5191 6CDA ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
quote who=Davyd Madeley On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 01:45 -0200, Everaldo Canuto wrote: A new default theme for GTK solve some problem but another problem is a default theme icon for GNOME... I ask some normal end users about the screenshots and all users (100% of 11 users) say me that the GNOME icons is not cool and needed more colors. This is interesting. People from work who have been switched to GNOME (and Linux) also comment on the icons straight away. However, they usually find the icons (and the rest of the artwork) quite nice. More and more, I'm getting the balance of these two: The icons look good, but the colours are dull (which is somewhat on purpose, because we don't want to overwhelm the user, but they tend to come across very brown [1]). - Jeff [1] Isn't that amusing! -- UbuntuDownUnder: April 25th-30th http://www.ubuntu.com/ Spam is about consent, not content. - Craig Sanders ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 20:10 -0800, Rob Adams wrote: I think that the gnome icons are absolutely gorgeous. I agree-- I much prefer the soft, toned down colors to the bright rainbow that (for example) the Crystal SVG icons offer. I certainly support a new default widget theme (the popular candidates look nice to me, no favoritism there), but please, please please don't mess with the icon theme! ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 00:20 -0500, Dave Ahlswede wrote: On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 20:10 -0800, Rob Adams wrote: I think that the gnome icons are absolutely gorgeous. I agree-- I much prefer the soft, toned down colors to the bright rainbow that (for example) the Crystal SVG icons offer. I certainly support a new default widget theme (the popular candidates look nice to me, no favoritism there), but please, please please don't mess with the icon theme! In terms of screen-shot appeal and first impressions, the icons are one of the things that look drab. However the current set are very nice to work with (I've been doing a review of the old theme-argument threads and this opinion is almost universal). I think this is one area where we are going to find it difficult to strike a balance between easy to use and first impressions. None of the current icon themes that we ship strike this balance in my opinion. - Callum ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
I certainly support a new default widget theme (the popular candidates look nice to me, no favoritism there), but please, please please don't mess with the icon theme! Fully agreed. The default wm is not good (difficult to click its buttons) and both the Simple and Default widget themes leave much to be desired. But the icon theme rocks and it should not be changed IMHO. The KDE noia/crystal icons are not as uniformed, most don't even have the same orientation which is very important for an icon set for a specific distribution of software. Eugenia ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
Il giorno lun, 14-02-2005 alle 21:45 -0800, Eugenia Loli-Queru ha scritto: I certainly support a new default widget theme (the popular candidates look nice to me, no favoritism there), but please, please please don't mess with the icon theme! Fully agreed. The default wm is not good (difficult to click its buttons) and both the Simple and Default widget themes leave much to be desired. But the icon theme rocks and it should not be changed IMHO. The KDE noia/crystal icons are not as uniformed, most don't even have the same orientation which is very important for an icon set for a specific distribution of software. Apart the current icon theme rocks motivation (I agree), widgets, windows and icons theme should be orthogonal: when I choose to change the widgets appearance, _only_ the widget appearance should change. GTK+ = 2.4 supports stock icons management via icon theme. I hope theme maker/packager will stop to provide gtk stock icons via gtkrc. This is bad. -- Luca Ferretti [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
quote who=Callum McKenzie On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 00:29 -0400, Steven Garrity wrote: If there was anything close to consensus in the last round of debate about a new default theme (Glider? Indubstrial?), it might be nice to get it in right at the beginning of 2.11 and start to deal with any new accessibility issues (and get the artists working on refinements). My guess was that this is why Jeff raised this now :). Indeed. But I don't think Glider and my slightly modified Industrial [1] are good enough. Particularly with GTK+ 2.8 on the horizon, we should be looking at leapfrogging the current best effort [2], no matching it. :-) - Jeff [1] Die stupid name, die! ;-) [2] That has got to be OS X. -- UbuntuDownUnder: April 25th-30th http://www.ubuntu.com/ Whoever wrote [the Twisted documentation] uses a vivid and interesting style of prose which triggers pleasure. - Francois Pinard ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
quote who=Ryan McDougall Its early in the consensus building, but I'm all for a hardcore push for a wonderful new theme, including heavily publicizing on art.gnome.org, gnome-look.org, even slashdot! Promises of wealth and fortune for the winner could be interesting. Donations welcome. However it all means nothing without the buying from the GNOME themeing community. We need them to be as excited as we are, since they'll be doing most of the work, no? I can't imagine we'd exclude them, no. - Jeff -- UbuntuDownUnder: April 25th-30th http://www.ubuntu.com/ The Motif interface, with chunkier controls, felt more like a ghetto blaster. - Liam Quin ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
quote who=Jeff Waugh Particularly with GTK+ 2.8 on the horizon, we should be looking at leapfrogging the current best effort [2], no matching it. :-) [2] That has got to be OS X. Also, a theme so good that it would unify vendor appearance of GNOME. So good that vendors would be pathalogically stupid or so focused on their rear intake not to adopt it. - Jeff -- UbuntuDownUnder: April 25th-30th http://www.ubuntu.com/ A rest with a fermata is the moral opposite of the fast food restaurant with express lane. - James Gleick, Faster ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 14:30 +0900, Ryan McDougall wrote: Yeah, but I would like to hear about or participate in formulating plans for actively involving the right segments of the community. This is where the plans start: http://live.gnome.org/NewDefaultTheme It is only ten minutes worth of brain-dump so far. More will come soon. - Callum ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Exciting GNOME?
we should be looking at leapfrogging the current best effort [2], no matching it. :-) Fully agreed. That's how we should be thinking at all times. :) BTW, about the theme thing, I had a suggestion a few months ago: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2004-September/msg00172.html (which obviously need more work to smooth it out) Failing that, there's always this one: http://www.resexcellence.com/themes/butt_osigh/mes/01-25_mes20050121_lg.jpg ;-) (joking, but it's interesting) Eugenia ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
