Re: Better default background

[Alan <alan ufies org>]

Figure I'll throw my opinion into the mix here...

> Current default: http://xsu.sf.net/default-old.png

Kinda blah.

> Better default: http://xsu.sf.net/default-new.png

Kinda blah, but a different color...

> Even Better Default: http://xsu.sf.net/default-new-sexy.png

Not bad, but as someone else mentioned, it's a bit... "in your face". 

> First impressions are extremely important, which is why this is
> something I want to get right. The last time I brought this up
> durning 2.1.x the libgnome maintainer refused my patch, so if
> you agree with me please reply to this...

Completely agree.  You want the end user to start off thinking "man,
this is sexy!" when they first log in.  However, I don't think that a
plain one color bg will do that, or a big ass gnome logo (or even a
subtle one.  They will either know they're running gnome already, or
they won't care.  I'm not saying that gnome styled backgrounds aren't
good, just that they might not be appropriate for the default bg.

Not that I'm sucking up to Havoc, but the default bg that redhat 9 comes
with is the direction that I think should be taken.  Not flat, not in
your face, but nice and subtle, but with substance.  IIRC they use a
nice blueish bg color or gradient and then have a transparent PNG
overtop that gives sort of a "wavey" look (you can see a bit in the
shots at
http://www.redhat.com/software/linux/professional/index.html#apps) if
you don't know what I mean.

Anyone else think that this is the sort of look we want (without copying
redhat directly, or looking like we're trying to look like them without
looking like them of course :)

Alan

-- 
Alan <alan ufies org> - http://arcterex.net
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"There are only 3 real sports: bull-fighting, car racing and mountain 
climbing. All the others are mere games."                -- Hemingway