Community response of new ubuntu artwork

Mon Oct 18 01:49:19 UTC 2004

As a point of interest this morning i showed my CFO here the screens and sought
his thoughts, as someone with over 20 years experience in the corporate arena i
thought it might be interesting.

He actually liked the idea of the login screen and made the comment that if the
people were fully clothed it might be a really quirky and unique login, he
thought it looked interesting and was a good thing to him seeing people on a
computer smiling and looking welcoming, he also thought that properly clothed
it would not offend many businesses.  The splash screen and the background he
found amazing - he could not help but make the comment that the expressions and
body language of the people was sexually suggestive to him (and this is not a
bible thumping conservative by any stretch) and could not understand what they
were supposed to say, when i explained about benneton he got it but still didnt
think it was a workable idea for business and the nudity bothered him.

I think the linked hands people idea would go over well with business providing
those people were in fact dressed, even in T shirts, because then the idea of a
human linux would work work - he also made the point that you could reinforce
that with a slogan like "human linux" or something similar on that login
screen.  

To his non tech eyes the idea of people on the splash screen and the background
doesnt do much for him, if they were dressed it would be a non issue and the
desktop isnt an issue to his mind because (as i think i already said) most
corporates would change it anyway to their idea, as long as the people on the
default were clearly fully clothed he thinks it would be a non issue to most
businesses.

Oh and he was very impressed with the useability and the look and feel of it,
hes intrigued as to how we could use this to leverage some of our desktop OS
costs...

just another perspective to think about perhaps

Quoting Bryan Pizzuti <bpizzuti at optonline.net>:

> This illustrates one of the best points in this whole discussion.  People
> who like this new theme and want to keep it as default are asking others to
> respect their values, but in doing so, they are disrespecting the values of
> those who do not wish to have it around, whether for liability issues,
> religious issues, cultural issues, whatever.  That is, honestly, a childish
> attitude, more like "I deserve to be respected, but I don't have to respect
> you because I'm cooler" or something.  This kind of devisiveness is a bad
> thing...which is why most OSes stay clear of this sort of thing. ;) 
> 
> I think it's very important for Ubuntu to choose a default theme that will
> be acceptable to as many as possible, and ALSO offend as few as possible
> (Note the two are not always the same..you can gain the acceptane of many
> but still offend a large portion of people).  This is why people use
> pictures of fields or starscapes, or drawn logos in their graphics. You may
> think it's dull and boring because everyone does it, but there's a GOOD
> REASON WHY, as we are all discovering now. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ubuntu-users-bounces at lists.ubuntu.com
> [mailto:ubuntu-users-bounces at lists.ubuntu.com] On Behalf Of John Harvey
> Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2004 7:25 PM
> To: ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
> Subject: Re: Community response of new ubuntu artwork
> 
> Look i understand some of what you are saying and agree with it, but there
> are other less controversial ways to make this statement
> 
> Simply put if this image theme remains the default in the final release i
> will have to cancel the 20Cd's i was going to distribute and change the
> linux pilot at work to Red Hat or Fedora (and i really do not want to do
> that but my employer will not accept the splash screen and desktop and i can
> trust they wont be back without some sort of guarantee from the devs). I
> will continue to use ubuntu myself no matter what but the support from many
> enthusiastic people wanting to build the userbase for ubuntu in business
> will be lost for no reason at all.
> 
> Im sorry but even understanding the arguments for the imagery and
> sympathising some what i still cannot see what people hope to gain from
> alienating large amounts of the potential user base.  Do people truly think
> that good intentions can get around the cultural and religious taboos
> against such imagery in non european and US countries.  if ubuntu is linux
> for humanity we need to be mindfull of the sensitivities of different
> cultures and not just being cool and liberal to suit our own beliefs.
> 
> On Sun, 2004-10-17 at 13:05 -0700, Ubuntu Forums Post wrote:
> > The attitudes exposed by this innocuous Human Art issue are interesting,
> to say the least.
> > 
> > If the objective of the UbuntuLinux project is to maximize profit and
> appeal to the lowest common denominator, perhaps keeping it bland and
> cutting out all the "humanistic nonsense" is the way to go.
> > 
> > But if Ubuntu is about making a statement while helping grow a community
> around ideals such as humanity and tolerance, it might have to face up to
> the opposition by certain types with more restrictive moral attitudes.
> > 
> > Perhaps one way to bandage the tolerance gash that clearly exists, let's
> say, between the conservative american and liberal european schools of
> thought, would be to make the presented artwork dependent on one's
> geographical location. Maybe "work" installations could also be separated
> from "home" installations; I mean, shouldn't the app selection also differ
> tiny little bit there?
> > 
> > Not so long ago one expatriate (mainland) Chinese open-source developer
> dumped a project he had been participating in, simply because other folks
> felt like allowing the Taiwanese users to *optionally* pick their national
> flag to denote their island instead of the imposing the People's Republic of
> China's flag upon them. Should the project have imposed this man's political
> views upon the people living in Taiwan, instead of making the choosing of
> one's preferred symbols simply optional? What if a hundred million
> "conservative" mainland Chinese had descended upon this project to demand
> that their political(-ly correct?) views must prevail, or else...?
> > 
> > If the image of a few human beings holding hands in celebration of human
> fraternity is really capable of actually offending some people's moral view
> of the world, and if Ubuntu team wishes to appeal to the largest possible
> variety of people, surely the humanistic artwork and other items "offensive"
> to people with very strong views could be made optional.
> > 
> > Then again I'm sure that religious, political or nationalistic groups are
> fully capable of catering to their own followers exactly what they have
> grown to expect, but hey, there isn't necessarily much "ubuntu" left to
> celebrate... although then again all those groups can simply take the
> produce of the Ubuntu community (which is already a shared creation
> with/through innumerable other open-source projects) and slap their own
> symbols on it.
> > 
> --
> John Harvey
> http://www.monkeyc.net
> email : linux at monkeyc.net
> 
> Using ubuntu linux - http://www.ubuntulinux.org
> 
> 
> 
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
> http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
> 
> 
> -- 
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
> http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
> 

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.