I agree that the engine should share long term support with the release. I don't however think system requirements need to be changed on this release and especially not on the account of something like a theme engine. Then again I'm also opposed to a LiveCD based standard install CD where if you don't meet the system req then you get the Debian installer based alternate CD, but that's off topic. Maybe there needs to be an all new (or rescued abandon ware or forked Clearlooks) GTK engine / window border / GDM theme maintained by Ubuntu? How else can long term support be guaranteed? It would be great for branding. <div>On 11/2/07, Matthew Nuzum <<a href="mailto:newz@bearfruit.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">newz@bearfruit.org </a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On 11/2/07, Jacob Padilla <<a href="mailto:jacob.padilla@gmail.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">jacob.padilla@gmail.com</a>> wrote: <div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <a href="http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200608/light_text_on_dark_background_vs_readability/" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200608/light_text_on_dark_background_vs_readability/ </a> I've read before about the poor accessibility of light text on dark background so I'm not really sure it's a good choice for a default theme. I, personally, think it looks cool and trendy but that doesn't make it a good decision for a default setting on a product with such a wide release. </blockquote><div> I agree. </div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">As far as Aurora goes, it looks nice but if it's a resource hog then it too shouldn't be a default. If it's a resource hog then you have to ask yourself, "Why is it hogging resources? Is it calling a lot of different modules or something?" I guess what I'm trying to say is that with more bloat comes more bugs. </blockquote></div> Let me play the devil's advocate and point out that with 7.10 the system requirements changed requiring a minimum of 384M of RAM + whatever is needed by the video card if that applies to you. Hardy will be around for quite a while and will be the platform future versions. I think its OK if we switch to a theme that requires more horse power. (IMHO) Now that being said, Hardy will be supported for 3 years, twice the length of 7.10... we don't want to choose something that in 14mo will be abandon ware. (though by merit of being included as the default in Ubuntu, a project will automatically gain wide notoriety) I think the time to make major changes was with the 7.04 and 7.10 releases and maybe instead of changing the theme engine for Hardy we should work on polishing what we're already using. -- Matthew Nuzum newz2000 on freenode </blockquote></div>