Shentino shentino at
Sat Oct 24 23:43:21 UTC 2009

Well I won't be quite so angsty about it but I will share my two cents.

When I saw the plain white logo at the bottom when I upgraded in place to
karmic beta, I was very surprised.

Actually, surprised is mild.  I honestly thought that the lame artwork was a
bug of some sort.  Considering NVIDIA's recent hissy fit with KMS, plus my
video card going kaput under karmic after a driver update.

But I would myself like to see that warm blend of yellow, red, and orange
that says "ubuntu".

The progress bar, however implemented, was notably absent...and for a brief
moment I thought that karmic had decided to crap out and lock up.

It is my opinion that a boot screen should be the pulse of the boot process,
providing the user with a reassuring "yes I'm ok and I'm booting just fine".

On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Martin Owens <doctormo at> wrote:

> Hello Coz,
> Lets not call for people to be fired just yet, I'm sure things can be
> improved with some community involvement and a little unmooding of the
> style.
> Though it's totally subjective, as style usually is. A lot of people
> call my graphics too cartoonish and not serious. I tend to iconify
> instead of illustrate and that's reflected in my styles.
> Is there an art team? much like the technical board?
> Regards, Martin
> On Sat, 2009-10-24 at 19:18 -0400, coz DS wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> >   I had been on the art team for a number of years.
> > I am really surprised that some of the artwork,  ie,,,boot splash  and
> > splash screen with progress bar  , were able to be considered let
> > alone actually used.
> >    I have to tell you that that the choices for these images and
> > colours  are completely not ubuntu in any way and certainly the worst
> > choice.
> >   When booting into karmic,  the white ubuntu symbol should have had
> > the colours gradually fill it in as a progress bar...and the following
> > boot splash the ubuntu logo certainly should have had color and the
> > background for that image most definitely should NOT have been
> > implies  a dark..albeit muddy,, theme is going to be default
> > system theme.
> >    I have seen none of the major distributions have any
> > inconsistencies...including ubuntu...with graphics during install..or
> > radical and inappropriate  as karmic has.
> >   Who ever has made these decisions  is most likely a developer and
> > there are NO developers capable of making final choices for anything
> > without discussing the options with at least one "qualified"  artist.
> >    Creating and deciding on graphics , especially for a distribution
> > as globally used as Ubuntu, takes as much skill and time and mental
> > capabilities as it does to code "any" application...or DE..and any of
> > the developers who think otherwise  should be kept as far away from
> > decision making about graphics  permanently!!!
> >   To mr shuttleworth,,, if you are making final decisions then you
> > need to pull yourself away from graphics altogether and let the art
> > team back in as official...if on the other hand you are relying on an
> > "artist" at cononical to make these final decisions ,, then please
> > give them their walking papers.
> >     coz
> >
> >
> --
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss at
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list