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 <docto...@gmail.com> 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 > > used...it 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 > > boot..as 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@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss >
-- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
