open at knome.fi
Sat Sep 12 18:30:34 UTC 2009
Steve Dodier wrote:
> 2009/9/12 Pasi Lallinaho <open at knome.fi <mailto:open at knome.fi>>
> > My idea was the following : the current default theme has way
> too much
> > contrast and just hurt eyes with bright screens. And it is,
> sorry, NOT
> > APPEALING AT ALL. Alvaro is a great base theme. It has 2k downloads,
> > and some themes based on it too. It is performing very well in
> > (at least here, feel free to send me benchmarks :p), and the
> gtkrc is
> > rather simple. I used it for several months and didn't notice any
> > glitch with the xubuntu apps. I think we can make two themes out
> of it :
> I wholeheartedly agree.
> > a) Albatross, which would retain most of Alvaro and use my Alvaro
> > xfwm, and an unified and dark title bar, with a dark panel, and a
> > shiny blue as a selected_color. This would be our "dark based" theme
> > for Xubuntu. We dont ship OOo.org which sucks for dark themes, dark
> > themes fans will be happy and we will finally offer more than
> just the
> > XFCE themes and our own one.
> Alias "Blue Jay". We should however see if we can fix even some major
> bugs in OOo.org with the dark theme if possible.
> OOo is broken. I don't know what toolkit they use but they have way
> too many custom widgets, themed in a way too weird way. I don't wanna
> support that in a theme.
I seriously don't think that's a good attitude. OOo can be a pain in the
ass and I see that it's not wise to support its awkwardness, but really,
we should even look, if there is something to be done.
> > b) Seagull (because bird names are funneh, and we will have birds in
> > our GDM) which would be a light theme, with light grey panels and a
> > bright title bar meant to look good with the Default xfwm's
> active and
> > inactive look. It would use a brighter blue and we would tweak
> it here
> > and there to look good with the smooth side of the Humanity
> icons. We
> > would be going from a very contrasted gtk theme and icon theme to
> > something much smoother, which i believe is important when you use
> > your computer daily.
> > As I said above, some themes are just too sexy when the title
> bar and
> > xfwm theme are unified - while others look really good without
> > unifying these. The default Xubuntu theme should use the default
> > because that one rocks and is part of our visual identity too. That
> > one can't have unified title bars, but it's really not a problem as
> > long as the title bar is not darker than the inactive xfwm
> window look.
> So, which one is meant to be the default (and have the default
> xfwm – or
> should both do)? Earlier I thought the dark theme would be the default
> (my strong preference). Sorry if I accent on this too much, but I
> like the Alvaro xfwm to be optional.
> I think the safest default is, for a11y and branding reasons, Light
> GTK + default xfwm. But if we also keep a dark / half dark variant,
> then we need a dark xfwm. The default one is light grey for inactive
> windows... This is why I wanna pull the Alvaro xfwm.
You can change the colors in xfwm also, right? :P
> > Something
> > like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlCVrtgxVcI&hl=en&fs=1&hd=1
> > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlCVrtgxVcI&hl=en&fs=1&hd=1
> rocks but
> > I don't think it's implementable. I'll try to grab some of Mat
> > Tomaszewski's time monday to talk about the limits of xsplash
> > I think the pink iteration 6
> > in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Incoming/Karmic/Boot has very
> > shapes, and that with a blue background could look just fine. We
> > just replace the Ubuntu 9.10 + the logo above the slider by a single
> > XFCE mouse, of approximately 1.5 times the width of the logo, in the
> > middle, and add nothing else. Thoughts ?
> If it's possible (Mads' "4th") anyway, I might be able to pull a
> programmer for this job. I think we really could use the default
> theme recolored (as Lionel suggested) if anything else fails. It
> really look bad and this can become quite a big burden if we keep on
> insisting doing something else than Ubuntu does. It has already become
> quite hard to match what they are having, even without talking about
> The mice might work well, but I think we would still want that the
> "Xubuntu" would appear somewhere. Also, I don't know if it would be
> marketwise intelligent to not include the (X)ubuntu logo – even if we
> use Xfce and we love it, we are not Xfce. We are Xubuntu, which is
> of part of Ubuntu, so we can't dismiss the Ubuntu marketing
> It is clear that the Xubuntu logo would not work as the Ubuntu logo
> (monochrome I mean; as the mouse is overlapping the circle), so
> what to
> do then? I don't know. Any other ideas?
> The idea of the mouse is that the shape of the mouse fits better
> alongside the slider than the shape of the Xubuntu logo. As for
> keeping the Xubuntu word, we could put it below (probably not sexy) or
> in the bottom left / right corner. Thoughts ?
I totally understand and agree, but try to see the Ubuntu/Shuttleworth
point of view :P I mean, we still are Ubuntu. Bottom left/right corner
is not probably the sexiest place, but we need to look at that.
> Steve Dodier
> OpenPGP : 1B6B1670
> IRC : SiDi on irc.freenode.net <http://irc.freenode.net>
> Jabber : sidi at im.apinc.org <mailto:sidi at im.apinc.org>
> steve.dodier at gmail.com <mailto:steve.dodier at gmail.com>
> https://launchpad.net/~sidi <https://launchpad.net/%7Esidi>
Xubuntu Marketing Lead
Web-designer, graphic artist
IRC: knome @ freenode
More information about the xubuntu-devel