Red Hat engineers announced today that the very popular ClearLooks theme engine will probably be the default theme for the Gnome 2.12. The theme was developed by Richard Stellingwerff helped out by Daniel “Spark” Borgmann, others, and with some help from myself on the usability side. This was a much needed refresh of the Gnome default desktop (old theme, new theme screenshots). Hopefully, a more usable variant of the Winter-Bold window manager theme (get matching colors, on-mouse-overs, don’t get so greyed out when unfocused, buttons better vertically centered etc) will make it in as the companion of ClearLooks on Gnome instead of the currently bundled (and not as sexy) Industrial. Update: Elsewhere, GTK+ 2.6.3 was released, with bug fixes mainly for the Win32 platform.
Gnome 2.12 to Include the ClearLooks Theme as Default?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSAlert.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Using the clearlooks Milk theme with delight, but the metacity theme that goes with it, not so hot, hope there is a version without the rounded edges when 2.12 comes out.
I hope they also use Gnursid, that is my favourite theme next to Plastik/KDE.
>Using the clearlooks Milk theme with delight,
The “official” ClearLooks-Gnome package will not have Milk in it. Only Blueish-default, DeepSky and Olive will be included.
To use your old Milk theme with Clearlooks, simply download the Milk pixmap engine and use its window maanger instead.
I think it is pretty interesting how similar ClearLooks is to the KDE Plastik style and window decorations.
PLEASE do not say the the window decoration is the same to Plastik, because it ain’t. The currently bundled window manager (that might change) is nothing else but Novell’s Industrial.
As for the widget theme overall, no, they are not the same. In the beginning, the theme was closer to bluecurve actually (in fact, it has derived from it).
I think
I really don’t like Industrial’s buttons. They are really poor IMHO. Additionally, I don’t like window managers to get completely greyed out when they are unfocused (both Industrial and Winter do that). It’s bad usability having the frame becoming the one and the same with the window body, or having the buttons very little visible (while they are still fully operational — it gives the wrong impression to the user that they are disabled).
Gnome always at least had their own look like the Gorilla theme which was different (and better) from KDE. From the screenshots, this theme is an *obvious* copy of the main KDE look approach of the last several years.
I agree, I liked Industrial better. The new one seems too xp-ish. Nothing bad about it, but surely Industrial had a more “unique” feel.
Anyway, anything will be better than the current theme, even Keramik.
Are you nuts? It looks marginally like plastic, but it also sorta resembles Windows XP (not really, but it doesn’t really look like plastic either!)!
ClearLooks is my most recent fav GTK theme too
Clear, usable and aesthetically nice looking too.
But what about the default GNOME icon theme (so the default GNOME icons, not the nice Bluecurve/Redhat icons)? There’s nothing basically wrong with the old GNOME icon theme either but it could need some facelift. The icons may lack a unified feel to some extent, and also some icons like the default folder icon look a bit boring and lame IMHO… Just making the icon theme SVG based might help http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=21296 plus making some more refinements like more unifid looks (a là Bluecurve or BeOS icons, for example) and more unified color palette (also a bit brighter/warmer and not so greyish perhaps?) could do good too, don’t you think?
> PLEASE do not say the the window decoration is the
> same to Plastik, because it ain’t.
It looks pretty similar. Same goes for the widget-style itself — except for the fact that Plastik looks less old-fashioned.
It looks so much like Windows with a small dash of OS X, that it just makes me barf.
Can’t anyone design anything new in the Linux world? Endless streams of Windows clones really are not all too exciting.
This has already being discussed in the mailing list of Gnome: most people felt that the Gnome icon theme is still good enough and it won’t be changed. And I agree with this too. SVG will add overhead btw.
This is why I love gnome, simple effective and good looking.
As long as Cairo/GL and GTK+ fixes are not done, there is NO WAY you can get a truly “innovative” theme going on as default on Gnome without major issues. There are a lot of fixes/additions that must be added to the toolkit before you can start thinking out of the box.
Until that day comes, ClearLooks is the best there is.
Yuck Yuck Yuck!!… This theme looks horrid. Thank god there are other themes out there that are lighter and just as usable and IMHO look way better!!
The official default theme should be something relatively neutral, non-disturbing, usable and approachable to everyone.
If you want your GNOME desktop to have more personal and individual looks, you have plenty of alternatives available, for example, here:
http://gnome-look.org/
http://art.gnome.org/
http://www.themedepot.org/
http://themes.freshmeat.net/
haha, like what? This one? http://gnome-look.org/content/preview.php?preview=1&id=19627&file1=…
Still ugly compared to KDE and windows themes such as gfxOasis, Luminous, Azure, OpusOS, TriaX, DogmaX.
isn’t the next release 2.10? why not use it then?
It really does look nice.
>The official default theme should be something relatively
>neutral, non-disturbing, usable and approachable to everyone.
Exactly. That’s the recipe for success for a good DEFAULT theme (remember, most people in the Enterprise/schools are not allowed to even change their themes or background images – the default must WORK well for all types of people).
SVG will add overhead btw.
Naturally, but actually I meant mainly the effect that it would do the icon looks (by unifying the looks maybe a bit) not the vectorization itself.
Not so big deal anyway, the icon theme I mean… But as the subject seems to have been discussed many times by GNOME developers too, and as other parts of the default theming are refined and developed, why not the default icon theme too sometime in the future?
>isn’t the next release 2.10? why not use it then?
The answer is here: http://www.gnomefiles.org/comment.php?soft_id=810&offset=15&rows=23…
I’ve become partial to Nuvola myself on Hoary.
In my opinion, this would be my favourite style/theme to use if anyone developed it. Its at KDE Looks, but the poster mentions it’s from a Gnome discussion. In any event, this is it, http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=15998
I don’t like the scroolbar. Besides that it looks great!
Well thats your opinion. Besides, choosing something like CDE-Solaris as an exmaple to prove a point is stupid. We all know that its old and outdated now and hardly fair for you to pick on. There are many more “MODERN” theme’s that look far superior to ClearLooks… The biggest mistake the Gnome community keep making is to choose things that my the desktop even slower… Thats really smart!
The default theme should be simple, ‘light’ and usable. ClearLook is not light and should be left as an alternative.
As I wrote earlier, to do things like that, you need fixes/changes on GTK and the graphics subsystem that are not in place yet. So, don’t dream too much. Clearlooks does deliver a good default for the limitations that the current X/GTK are imposing to the developer.
Eugenia I understand now, it’s to bad don’t you think.
RE: Ugly
gfxOasis Looks wow! Maybe its the font, I don’t know much about fonts. It looks really nice, but is to feminine. I prefer colours like browns, or dark colours etc, something more masculin.
ive been using nuvola for awhile, and this looks quite similar. i find even attractive, but flashy themes get grating, and rarely stay more then a week on my machine. the ones i use for years tend to be more toned down and simple themes.
um.. its a solid pastel color for active, the window color for inactive. how is that heavy?
Come on!!! Its a THEME. What innovation do you really expect? How is this theme speed wise (compared to other themes like BlueCurve and Industrial)?
>gfxOasis Looks wow!
gfxOasis has nicely colored buttons and font kind on the buttons. Also the thick line below the active tab is nice too (like on OSX). But the rest of the theme is largely _unusable_ from usability’s point of view. Especially these window manager buttons you need to be an archery champion to get to click on them fast enough. Productivity with this theme goes down the drain. Looks good “on paper”, but not on real life usage.
I think it looks similar enough to KDE 3.4’s default theme (plastik) that they should just do a really good port of plastik and make it default.
I think having a consistant default look between GNOME and KDE is a worthwhile goal.
The min, max, close button are not a problem for me (1600×1200 resolution). One thing about Kol’s themes that piss me off is that he sets the font size to strict. There are font properties everywhere. Luna does not have them. I moded gfxOasis, and made it usabale by making it readable. I deleted the font properties. I also moded Azure. I have never released these mods since no one wanted them though.
I’ve made the usual ./configure && make && make install but I can’t successfuly install it. Any ideas?
Thanks.
(feel free to moderate this)
What is the error? You need to probably do this instead:
./configure –prefix=/usr (in case your GTK+ installation resides on /usr and not on /opt or /usr/local/ — you need to know that stuff)
make
make install-strip
Then open the preference Theme panel and select it from the “Controls” tab.
I don’t know how anyone can say that Clearlooks theme is ugly. It’s just a very plain, conservative, and, yes, clear look. Slightly too XP for my liking but it’s really just what’s needed for the default theme.
I’ve noticed that a certain subset of, errm, geeks (and I use the term in a non-derogatory sense) tend to prefer horribly dark, claustraphobic themes, like white text on black or dark grey. On the occasions I have to share these desktops due to some long-running process going on on a colleagues workstation I usually end up feeling like I’m slowly going blind, and vaguely suicidal.
Personally, I’ve not seen a Gnome theme I prefer to Redhat’s Bluecurve, which I reckon combines aesthetics with simplicity and clarity.
>Personally, I’ve not seen a Gnome theme
> I prefer to Redhat’s Bluecurve, which I reckon combines
>aesthetics with simplicity and clarity.
Actually, Red Hat’s Seth Nickell said that he will work on making BlueCurve more ClearLooks-like.
Clearlooks looks solid, but way too cluttered IMHO. There’s no need to use dark borders, bevels and separator lines *everywhere* in the theme. That is so Windows 95… Even the old default theme was cleaner (but even more boring).
Just check out the Gnursid theme at
http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19088
It’s clean and innovative, and doesn’t get in your way.
Sorry, but I do not agree. Seperators help a LOT the usability. They create fast distinctions for the eye and brain to comprehent faster.
>Just check out the Gnursid theme at
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19088
> It’s clean and innovative, and doesn’t get in your way.
This is one of the WORST themes I have ever seen. That’s one big yellow thing (yes, with no seperators indeed). You call that innovative? This thing is not usable for more than 4 minutes at a time! Your brain will get confused too quickly with this theme. We need USABLE themes, meaning that you can sit down and do your WORK for 12 and 16 hours a day (yes, there are people who work that much) and still to be able to use the computer without your brain and eyes feel TIRED.
THAT what DEFINES a usable theme: to help you feel energetic and not tired after havign used it for many hours. The theme you pointed out is the exact opposite of that rule!
No need to be sorry
But for me too many and too “loud” separators create distractions rather than distinctions. They focus the eye on the space between content, rather than on the content itself.
I much prefer “border-less” guis (like OS X and Gnursid) to themes that look like they’re designed for B&W monitors.
When maximized, do the new theme’s windows follow fitt’s law? (specifically the “x”)
>>Personally, I’ve not seen a Gnome theme
>> I prefer to Redhat’s Bluecurve, which I reckon combines
>>aesthetics with simplicity and clarity.
>Actually, Red Hat’s Seth Nickell said that he will work on >making BlueCurve more ClearLooks-like.
But I presume he’ll preserve the essence of Bluecurve, no?
Anyhow, that’s just typical. If I like it, they’ll change it for something worse
> We need USABLE themes, meaning that you can sit down and do
> your WORK for 12 and 16 hours a day (yes, there are people
> who work that much) and still to be able to use the computer
> without your brain and eyes feel TIRED.
I agree totally. I like Gnursid exactly because it doesn’t make me tired and distracted (not that it really helps, after this rather awful 15 hour workday).
Sorry guys, but all these “new” themes look like sh*t to me… no orignal idea, just another copycat… (just as an example – Enlightement has at least something unique)
“no orignal idea, just another copycat…”
Yeah, it’s nothing but a slightly new look on the old ideas of buttons, scrollbars, textboxes, tabs, etc. Mac OS had all this stuff way back in 1985! Why can’t they do something new and innovative?
Oh wait, it’s meant to be a theme for an existing widget set, not a totally new and different way for you to communicate with a computer…
http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19814
I think it looks very good, especially the unantialiased ‘appearing’ fonts. I say ‘appear’ because I’m not sure, help me out.
Now if we can get smaller widgets, especially in the file selector, woot. Then we can can actually use it on monitors with max size of vga=791.
The font really makes it look like Windows XP. I prefer bigger, othe-faced fonts than the default tiny Tahoma.
The font is the Vera, which is included on most Linux and FreeBSD distros lately. It’s a Verdana copy and it’s the default on many distros.
Well, I think the title is a bit misleading, because there is no decision yet. Of course endorsement by the usability lead and Red Hat visual designer is a very good start!
Personally I’m just very much looking forward to GNOME looking great by default and hopefully we can help (with Clearlooks).
Plastik/Luna look-alike
Yes, Clearlooks is similar to those themes, but why are you surprised by this? All three use rounded corners where it makes sense, all three use subtile gradients to improve depth and attractiveness. Clearlooks isn’t about the most fancy or unique scrollbar, clearlooks is about nailing the details down and creating an overall usable, attractive and pleasant to work with environment. One that doesn’t become an eyesore after using it for several years straight.
This is not a theming revolution, the revolution will come when we get the new possibilities.
This is simply about improving the status quo and keeping up with the competition.
Metacity Theme
This one is a bitch to get right.
Please keep in mind that it’s the easiest thing to replace. I chose a look similar to Winter (which in turn is basically Industrial with rounded buttons) because that’s what Richard used on his screenshots, albeit for XFCE. I’m not happy with the look of inactive windows either, but it’s very hard to come up with a usable alternative that pleases most people. I still think that it’s very nice to use. Please note that the one in the 0.3 release is not the latest, meanwhile the buttons got rounded as in Winter: http://gnome-look.org/content/preview.php?preview=1&id=21237&file1=…
Suggestions are always very welcome, preferably to the mailinglist ([email protected]).
Font
What the heck does this have to do with the theme?
Richard likes his tiny Tahoma, but it’s not part of the theme at all.
I think having a consistant default look between GNOME and KDE is a worthwhile goal.
Agree, but an even better goal would be to make sure themes could be used both in KDE, Gnome,… without modification.
As it is now, a lot of artistic skills get lost just becaouse of the lock in/out effect between different DEs
If we actually count all the UI “work” we have to do to in order to do our “work”, it adds up fast. While these “themes” seem to be a matter of a lot of focus and interest, they are largely meaningless. They do not cut down on the work it takes to use the computer.
Realistically and objectively, there have been no improvements in productivity due to “themes”. If anything, they just waste time, CPU power, and cause bugs. The exception would be “themes” for the disabled or impaired.
It seems like the monkeys are endlessly playing with the knobs that just don’t matter. “Ohhh… look at what pretty colors I can make…” or “Mine match better!”…. or “Mine is the ultimate Queer Eye!”.
Innovation is needed in how a windowing system functions, not who can make the best metrosexual interface.
I have no emotional response to “ClearLooks” other than maybe it is too much like a mix of “OpenLook” and “ClearType” and offers no profound improvement over the “themes” I have seen in the past 3-4 years.
Will Cairo be ready by the time of GNOME 2.12?
Get annoyed with them making it easier to click the close button? I pull the thing off so I can’t accidentally click it! I must be an idiot, because they’re all “experts” right?
@ NIH Labs
Exactly!!!… well said!
Now you are getting it. The inmates are running the asylum.
Didnt they going to stop? 3.XX is in the works or what?
I disagree. The UI work being done can infact increase production. The more comfortable one is with one’s environment, the easier it is to work and to get work done. The work being done on Clearlooks does not hinder innovation, it is simply another way to look at what we have been looking at. If/When an innovative new way to interface with our computers arrives (which I doubt will happen until more natural interfaces like voice control vis-a-vis Star Trek arrive), we’ll likely still need to put a face to that interface. Clearlooks is simply the face, and I doubt it means to be anything but.
>Get annoyed with them making it easier to click the close button?
Have you tried putting it on the left side, like with KDEs laptop windowdecoration? It’s rather nice when you get used to it, both left side close and Laptop actually:-)
It references the current default theme, but adds some of my favourite elements from other themes (rounded edges and soft colours from plastik or keramilk: clean easy to understand buttons like in windowmaker)
Yes, its not very original, and the buttons do look like Plastik, but overall, this is a very clean, pleasing-to-the-eye theme.
The cloying scent of the politician is easily recognized.
And the politician’s soft bland half-truths just choke the life out of any rational discourse.
Rather than join you in the dark chambers of the Palace of Broken Memes, I will continue to enjoy the light.
It’s a nice engine and a nice theme but I really think the Smooth Engine w/ SmoothGNOME “Glider” would make a better default. Smooth at the moment is just allot more diverse and customizable… It also looks good w/ out being to flashy…
To each his own I guess?
as unanswered at gnome-look, where is everyone getting this mcity that is included in the engine? Oh, it’s in the source, but it is not installed. I’ve done it 4 times, and just did it again. And if it’s nothing more than Industrial, why? Why isn’t the real clearlooks mcity with rounded corners and buttons included and installed? What happened to a clearlooks-0.3.1 instead of a separate metacity?
http://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=21237
The ClearlooksMilk that was reference by Andreas is the one in the pkg;
http://bvc.kernow-webhosting.com/theme/gtk/Clearlooks-Big_Pack-0.3….
not the pixmap Milk mcity.
better to be concerned with broken ‘stock-icons’ in ‘icon themes’ than another icon theme so we can get them out of gtk themes with tedious iconrc’s
Well, this would be complicated to explain and I’m very tired right now. Let’s just say that it probably wasn’t such a great idea to include the Metacity theme in the engine release tarball.
You could always install it manually by copying the themes/Clearlook/metacity-1 folder in the tarball.
It’s not the same as Industrial, the titlebar and borders are different, but everyone seems to focus just on the buttons.
That’s what I’m saying. The only way to get the metacity with the engine is to copy it from the source, which at gnome-look I said I did. Point is, people are posting asking for rounded buttons and it’s not in the tarball so they don’t know it exist. I’ve seen screenshots on forums of people saying ‘it’s clearlooks metacity’ and it’s industrial. Clearlooks Metacity is a separate upload at gnome-look, and I don’t get that, is all.
It’s ugly and they shouldn’t have messed witha good thing
Looks almost exactly like KDE’s Plastik….
Yes, it does remind one of KDE’s Plastik – not a bad thing though, KDE’s Plastik is nice enough
>> Just check out the Gnursid theme at
>> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19088
>> It’s clean and innovative, and doesn’t get in your way.
>This is one of the WORST themes I have ever seen.
…
>THAT what DEFINES a usable theme: to help you feel
>energetic and not tired after havign used it for many
>hours. The theme you pointed out is the exact opposite
>of that rule!
I couldn’t disagree more. What defines a usable theme is what pleases the user, and no such thing can be solely defined by so called aesthetic laws or rules. I find Gnursid to be soothing, I don’t want anything “energetic” when I’m all stressed out. My mood changes means my theme changes, and I have no default mood. The only SANE and FAIR approach to theming is to do polls to select the default (or from what should the default be inspired) and offer CHOICE : a popular selection of themes, and invest time with the authors to make sure they are all working and bug free so they can be included. If anything, the various visual tastes expressed here prove this.
>What defines a usable theme is what pleases the user
That’s the definition of an eye candy theme, not a usable theme. As I said, a usable theme is a theme that doesn’t make you tired after long hours of using your computer and keeps you productive by being well-defined and clean.
The theme Milk for example is a great theme on a first thought. It’s eye candy and it welcomes/pleases the user. But when you get to use it after a few hours, your eyes are all strained out because of all the bright colors it’s using.
Milk is not a usable theme. Milk is an eye candy themd. There is a difference and that’s the difference you can’t understand.
For ClearLooks I tried to impose usability over looks to the developers. What matters on a default look is the ability to be productive. Users can later change it if they feel it’s not hip and sexy. But I can tell you, most will come right back to it, simply because it’s the most usable of all out there (even with the 2-3 fixes that still needs to be implemented and another 2-3 things that I wanted to have there and I can’t because GTK+ doesn’t support them correctly).
what about changing the default icons . the current icon them are old boring and very unattractive . it’s about time that gnome will get some work on the artistic side and not just removing use useful features.
I like the default icons just fine. Also, the same question was answered in this very forum a few hours ago, please don’t duplicate.
Your not biased at all I see lol… Its evident that this theme has mixed feelings but I guess that would happen with any theme that is chosen or is likely to be chosen.
I personally don’t like it at all but I guess I can change it later if I have to.
you will not satisfy everybody…
Eye-candy is nice as long as you can recognize what a button is. In general I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the look and feel of Gnome. IMHO maybe the gnome guys should focus more on functionality, than on the TNG eyecandy ™ stuff.
This theme is wonderful. I am so glad they are changing the default theme of Gnome, the current one is looking a bit dated. It’s a smart design, smooth, and doesn’t look like the wigets are about to fall off.
Lots of talk on innovation here. And didn’t we, just a few days ago, agree that there was no innovation on operating systems lately?
I guess it all boils down to using the same human-machine interfaces and the same old desktop/windows metaphor. How much can you innovate on drawing a window or some buttons? Yes, of course you can improve the details. I acknowledge that. But that’s just that, details.
So innovation on OS’s or on GUIs won’t happen anytime soon unless someone decides to leave behind those things. And as you can imagine, this won’t happen tomorrow.
As for this theme, ClearLooks, it’s nice in a clean, standard, not-new-but-better kind of niceness. And the change from the old was really needed.
Announcing detailed product details for a beyond-next version? Does this remind anyone else of a well known company?
As I said, a usable theme is a theme that doesn’t make you tired after long hours of using your computer and keeps you productive by being well-defined and clean.
Yes. But those words mean different things for different people. I wish people would FINALLY realize that just because they think that something is usable, that does not mean everyone does.
I take for example, the Mac OS X GUI. Eye Candy? Yes, most people agree it looks quite nice. Useable? Once again, most people agree it is quite usable.
But for all that consensus I still can’t stand doing any long term work on with the OS X GUI. I don’t know exactly what it is, but it doesn’t do it for me.
So how do you explain that? Your perception of usability is more of a taste than anything else. Yes there are basic guidelines, but in the end, there are a lot of interfaces that one person will find usable while another won’t.
Eugenia, I really don’t understand how you can insist that another’s choice in themes is wrong. If they say that the theme is the best for them, then they are correct. Their preference is the final, and only accurate measure.
I’ve tried a lot of themes since the discussions about a new default theme were restarted, and I keep coming back to Indubstrial:
http://www.gnome.org/~jdub/2004/indubstrial/
I use Indubstrial controls, with the Simple window border, and regular GNOME icons. I have yet to find a GNOME theme that appeals more to my eye.
I can only hope this will be bundled into gnome-themes in 2.12 (as the whole package could use some tweaking).
http://art.gnome.org/images/thumbnails/gtk2/GTK2-gonxical-Shot.png
Seems that its a direct descendant of that, down to the menu background. And you know what? I think its fine to look like KDE in this respect. Plastik is fine, although its less polished than ClearLooks, and the icon theme is far more appropriate in my opinion.
For all those asking for replacements for the theme and for the default icon set, repeat after me:
<blockquote>The theme, and the icon set, are DEFAULTS. I can change them instead of whining about how I dislike them. The themes/icons are chosen to be CONSERVATIVE, and visually soothing. NOT to show off the ability of our artists to use colours.</blockquote>
Gonxical does look nice but I’ve done some benchmark and it was the slowest theme among those I’ve tried
Heh… Ubuntu has gtk 2.6.3 packaged the same day it’s released. Awesome.
change the default color of just the scrollbar throughout gnome (gtk apps)?
I can’t believe all the bashing of this new theme. To me it looks like quite a needed update, and a good one too.
Remember, the default theme will influence new users – just because you find a black metallic theme with blood-dripping fonts cool, the newcomer might think that running a Gnome-desktop just isn’t for him/her. Having a plain and well designed theme as the default will benefit all – isn’t it great that we’re using desktop environments with the possibility of changing the look & feel if we’re not content with the way it looks? =)
The way i see it, having a default theme that resembles XP and MacOS is not a bad thing. Newcomers will adapt easily, and those who want a completely different experience will just select a new theme. Hooray.
I don’t want to spoil the fun here (really nice theme, btw), but wouldn’t it be better to add a news section to GnomeFiles than posting a whole news item about a *discussion* on the *possibility* of changing the default theme in one of *many* Unix/Linux desktop environements? Aside from the fact that it looks like OSAlert is playing favorites here, it also seems a tad too in-depth to qualify as “operating system news”.
Isn’t having the maximise/minimise on the same side as the close button a stupid idea?
I’m a KDE user not willing to change, but I like a lot the look of that theme. The icon theme is not so good, imho.
Eugenia,do you have a degree in Gnome theming? Seems that nothing is good in your oppinion. Why don’t you create your very own theme for all of us to see how do you envisage Gnome?
>Eugenia,do you have a degree in Gnome theming?
No, but I don’t need one. I worked 2 years as a UI designer while in UK. Probably more than any of you around here.
>Just making the icon theme SVG based might help >http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=21296
I’ve made that icon theme, and I think it is not very usefull.
SVG icons when scaled down loose details and look bad.
But, creating them in SVG make that process very fast, you can reuse elements for different icons (I’ve made more then 100 mime icons in few hours).
BTW, I’m working on colour mod that I think fits perfectly with Cleerlooks theme, check it out:
http://img8.exs.cx/img8/2659/gnomeblue7eg.png
No, but I don’t need one. I worked 2 years as a UI designer while in UK. Probably more than any of you around here.
And this is why we all love osnews. After a long discussion it comes down to ‘Eugenia knows better, the rest should just shut up and be quiet’.
Sorry Eugenia, but saying you’ve worked as a UI designer does not mean you actually designed *good* UI’s. It’s a known fact that very well known software companies have designed the worst GUI’s known to man.
This is probably going to be sent to the moderated down section, but I’m getting a tad fed up with these empty statements.
Usability and theme choice are a pure personal thing. What you like and are able to use for extended periods of time is not necessarily the same as what someone else uses. It’s not because 80% of the gnome devs think a theme is the best that the other 20% should bend over and accept that. The question you have to ask is ‘what would the majority of the users like best’ and put that as the default.
An extreme example: maybe I like my x and y axis of my mouse switched. You might think this is the absolute worst in terms of usability, but it might work better for me this way. So saying you’re the know all when it comes to UI design just because you worked as a UI designer for a UK company for 2 years isn’t saying a lot. Just that you worked there, not that you actually produced any good UI’s.
Just my 2 cents
In any case and no matter what you believe about usability or about my abilities, I do have more experience than most people around here. You can’t deny that no matter how much you try to disrespect my work publicly.
And I don’t agree with you about usability is a “personal thing”. There are some BASIC rules of usability that apply to ALL people, no matter likes and dislikes. When designing a DEFAULT theme, these basic rules MUST be applied, so you can reach more audience that will be at least “ok” with the theme.
For example, some people love the Milk theme. It’s a beautiful-to-look-at theme indeed. But it ain’t usable and under no circumstances should be considered for a default, because it does not follow these basic rules it should have.
Have anyone a screenshot of ClearlooksMilk theme?
Thanks!
Usability and theme choice are a pure personal thing.
For the sake of your credibility, I’ll pretend I didn’t read that. It just goes to show you don’t have a clue about what usability is.
Second, just because someone is a bit arrogant, that doesn’t make them wrong.
And third, and final thought. This is a quote from one of debates on (I think) this site.
“An intelligent person argues against the other person’s arguments. A moron makes up stuff that was never said and declares himself a winner.”
Granted you didn’t make stuff up, but you’re close enough.