#13: “Pretty” is a feature
If we want the world to embrace free software, we have to make it beautiful. I’m not talking about inner beauty, not elegance, not ideological purity… pure, unadulterated, raw, visceral, lustful, shallow, skin deep beauty.
We have to make it gorgeous. We have to make it easy on the eye. We have to make it take your friend’s breath away.
That’s why I’m thrilled with the work of some of our community artists. Check out this logo from Who (ignore the scaling, view it directly):
If you are of an artistic bent then I would urge you to get involved with the Ubuntu Art Team, and peruse or join the Ubuntu Art mailing list. There is also a new site for community-contributed artwork, being developed by Brandon Holtsclaw and I think currently available at art-staging.ubuntu.com though it will move to art.ubuntu.com and get more horsepower shortly.
Of course, “pretty but unusable” won’t work either. It needs to be both functional and attractive. Rather than bling for bling’s sake, let’s use artistic effects to make the desktop BETTER, and obviously better.
This is a challenge we (the free software community) share with scientists too.
I had a great coincidental chat with a guy from Imperial College, London, recently. He lectures in a course which teaches scientists and engineers how to communicate with the rest of humanity. This is close to my heart - I love the bleeding edge, physics, computer science etc, and I can’t stop my imagination from turning ideas into exotic works of mental art. But mental art isn’t something you can convey very easily - it’s in your head, after all. If we want people to get excited about science we have to show them what it’s makes possible. Imperial College teaches people who love science how to make it fascinating for everyone else too - something NASA could take to heart.
Similarly, I met up with Susan Greenfield from the Royal Institution - not a loony bin for inbred monarchs, but a public forum for the demonstration, discussion and discourse on science that goes back to the days of Humphrey Davy and Michael Faraday. In those days, science was hot entertainment for the gentrified classes, who would gather of an evening in formal dress to listen to scientists talk about the magical world that was opening up under their microscopes and instruments. We spoke about a number of things but I thought that their mandate was most similar to that of the Hip2BeSquare project which I fund in South Africa, which brands the idea of being “smart with your life” for students and pupils in SA (think about it - which pays off more in your life, an extra hour of math or an extra hour on the football field… it takes a lot of math before the marginal benefits line up and it’s time to hit the fields).
All of which goes to say that messaging is important - learning how to “show off your best stuff” is an essential skill, and I hope the free software community will take that to heart.
October 25th, 2006 at 10:40 am
The logo is beautiful in deed, but i loved the theme in edgy beta (troy’s work).
I wanted to have a default wallpaper in edgy that rocks and have own ubuntu style.
The final wallpaper is so similar to osx…
October 25th, 2006 at 11:10 am
Icons, logo and user experience have an major impact on people. Simple workflow & pretty icons (desktop) actually do go along.
October 25th, 2006 at 11:24 am
I’ve been part of the artwork team for a while now, but I have very little faith in the project, Mr. Shuttleworth. It is because our art is accepted or rejected by you, since you are the client. But, for some reason, you’ve been partaking in the rejecting of artwork for very questionable reasons. There was a lot of good art going on that did not make it to Edgy, and some of the changes in the Edgy artwork make things look worse (not just from my point of view, but from that of the established standards in design) or even break things (such as the LegacyHuman controls).
I will continue to contribute, but please don’t scare off longtime contributors by attempting to maintain arbitrary standards. That said, I’m glad you’re rejecting things that do not _completely_ captivate you. It’s those Linux distros that _don’t_ reject such things that come off as amateuristic, which is the absolute last thing Ubuntu should come off as. Design is powerful, especially when competing in a market of which the leaders have decided that it’s absolutely impossible not to have great design.
October 25th, 2006 at 11:25 am
[…] There has been a lot of talk about Compiz and Beryl in the Linux community lately and for those who not know what it is, have a look at the Wikipedia article on Compositing window managers. Mark Shuttleworth recently wrote an article about how to make the world embrace free software, and the number one reason that someone will try it it because it looks cool. […]
October 25th, 2006 at 1:23 pm
“We have to make it gorgeous”
I agree. So why not hire some beautiful women to model? You could start with a hottie like Sola Aoi.
October 25th, 2006 at 1:46 pm
The default, out-of-the-box Ubuntu needs to function as well as OSX before it will be taken seriously but the average user. The focus needs to be on composite graphics (a la XGL, etc) and the Gnome user interface. The art is already “pretty” enough. It’s time to get competitive with the user interface.
October 25th, 2006 at 1:48 pm
Ubuntu 2.0 Style Logos… I’m all for it!
October 25th, 2006 at 1:48 pm
So in the interest of “beautiful” art, could we PLEASE step away from the “brown, brown, some more brown with a touch of brown” color scheme, pretty please? Consistency is great, but this is borderline ridiculous.
October 25th, 2006 at 1:50 pm
Mark, please ditch the ugly brown desktop and go with either blue or emerald green. Kubuntu desktop is already 100% ahead in the game for desktop beautification!
October 25th, 2006 at 1:50 pm
It’s been my complaint about *nix systems is that the graphical interface is not standard or flowing. It’s one thing M$ has done well to keep it’s user base. The problem with *nix systems is that there are too many desktop variations that a standard can’t be agreed upon. I think people finally need to realize that variation is not always the answer.
October 25th, 2006 at 1:55 pm
Hi Mark, I think I suggested this to you on one of your blogs about 6 - 12 months ago. I stated that no average computer user would adopt linux while it looks the way it does - just take a look at vista, it looks great, and thats a big factor for most people. The average joe doesn’t really care about the intricate workings of an OS, but rather just that it works, and looks nice enough to work with all day.
October 25th, 2006 at 1:56 pm
Good news! My wife previously said “I hate this stupid linux” when I had it running on our PC. I finally found out that it was only because it was brown! I changed the theme, but haven’t gotten around to fixing the splash screen. Too often linux geeks forget that not everyone is as happy with a blank, iconless grey background and fluxbox as I am.
October 25th, 2006 at 1:59 pm
Linux distros need to be chasing the Mac GUI not Windows. And I don’t mean just pretty icons and backgrounds. The whole usability picture under Linux is haphazard at best. Part of this is just a natural result of x11 and the everything and the kitchen sink of most Linux apps. So it no-ones ‘fault’. But it’s going to take a serious effort by an organization to fix. RedHat made a good start on it with Blue Curve way back when. I’ve been hoping that Ubuntu might make a serious effort at it. Sure seems to be the distro that focuses on end users more than developers…
October 25th, 2006 at 2:01 pm
ya , the logo and the current artwork looks pretty . Talking abt functional ,recenlty whn i tried
Ubuntu i found some pretty basic utilities were actually not thr at all , like
a Internet connection Wizard to connect to PPPoE server etc, it’s such a basic tht
a every newbie using the OS ‘ll certainly look for Internet connection rather than with
the terminal .
October 25th, 2006 at 2:04 pm
When I had XGL + Compiz running on my machine at home, it blew my housemates away. If they’d have had the disk space they would have asked me to install Ubuntu on their machine right then. Nothing else from F/OSS has had the same effect on people like my housemates (people who think the google.com search box and the address bar are the same thing). That’s why I agree with Mark on this point. Usability is king though - that’s why I use XFCE. We need bling that makes things better.
And for the record, after using Compiz, I can say with certainty that the spinny desktop and OSX-like minimise do help usability. Not the other bits though.
October 25th, 2006 at 2:05 pm
For the scientific visualisation side of this check out:
http://ryanwyatt.livejournal.com/
the blog of Ryan Wyatt who is science visualizer for the Hayden Planetarium at the American Museum of Natural History in NY, USA. He posts just about every day some bit of science in a visual form with some coment - sometimes because it’s great, sometimes because it’s not great - always interesting through.
October 25th, 2006 at 2:08 pm
Thank You!
This is something that’s bothered me for some time about the linux world. Most people dismiss it all as eye candy and completely unnecessary. Well, some people do in fact like pretty graphics, and they are important to them. It’s about time linux appealed to people in this sense. Look at OSX, it’s not primarily focused on eye candy, but the subtle graphics make it a lot nicer looking.
First of all, XGL of course is important. It’s already fairly stable, but I do have it crash frequently enough. This will bring that hardware accelerated desktop that we should have had years ago. Who doesn’t have a graphics card capable these days (ok, except for those lingering low end systems that people set up with linux specifically because it’s trim enough to still run on. In this case, XGL should still be optional)?
Next, the theme needs a major overhaul. The look it offers now is too similar to windows classic. It’s just not that pretty looking. While I agree it’s functional, it could stand to be a bit flashier. i’d hate to see osx or vista copied, but they are both trying (let’s say osx is way more successful at it right now) to make things look nicer. The thing is, this needs to be different from the norm and unique, but familiar enough to not confuse.
I’m interested in seeing what comes of this all. I’m so close to switching over to Ubuntu as my primary OS, but it’s not QUITE there for me. Next I think Mark should make a call out for something better than Gimp (and gimpshop) to directly compete with photoshop. Right now, nothing replaces my photoshop on linux, not even that Pixel program that is closer than gimp.
Keep on rocking in the free world Mark!
October 25th, 2006 at 2:10 pm
[…] Lugu ise siin. […]
October 25th, 2006 at 2:16 pm
I switched to Linux in pursuit of eye candy…. so give me more! =D
October 25th, 2006 at 2:17 pm
People can/should have shiny choices among the preinstalled themes. The default (brown) theme might be worthy as an option, but why not replace it with something else? it’s subjective, of course.
October 25th, 2006 at 2:19 pm
I think a clean wrapper for XGL and improvements in the beryl window manager go a long
way to paving the way for a beautiful lnux desktop. Every windows user that see’s my desktop
allways replies with a “how do you do that?”
It never ceases to awe the vista fanboys, either.
October 25th, 2006 at 2:20 pm
Mark, you’re absolutely right, my hat off to you. Imho, one of the great disadvantages of open source projects has been the prettiness. Being an open source believer myself, I often found it hard to convince everyday “infidels” that something that looks geeky works exceptionally well. If we pursue the pretty course the future of open source will be much prettier.
October 25th, 2006 at 2:23 pm
Take a look at Murrine for the GTK theme:
http://gnomethemes.org/?p=52
Not only is it much prettier than clearlooks-cairo AND ubuntulooks, it is much faster. A brown human colored Murrine wouldn’t be as pretty as the default blue or green (in my personal opinion), but it would still be stunning.
Also, progress bar animation on my default is eyecandy that stunned my younger sister. Take a look. You can get Edgy debs here:
http://southernvaleslug.org/ubuntu/edgy-eft/
And you can get themes that use them here:
http://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=45419
Note that murrine was made with the intention of being easy to configure and change the colors. Finally, good work on the Edgy artwork. It is the only Ubuntu release so far that I kept the default bootsplash, gdm theme, and login splash. Awesome job to you mark, and the ubuntu team!
October 25th, 2006 at 2:26 pm
I love Ubuntu, and I couldn’t agree more with Mark on the above topic. However, it seems one of the easiest ways to make Ubuntu prettier is to ditch the orange/brown theme used in the main distro. Even though this theme has been gussied up in recent versions, the base colors are just awful. I find myself wanting to use Kubuntu instead just for it’s soothing/smooth blue theme. If the orange and brown can’t be removed from the base distro for branding reasons, at least give users of the base distro an easy way (meaning, all theme files/boot screens/login screens/etc) to change it with a entirely different color scheme out of the box.
I’m liking what I’m seeing with 6.10, so I believe your team has the potential to address this concern (and the others). Good hunting!
October 25th, 2006 at 2:31 pm
In addition to being ‘beautiful’… you have to make it easy. I’m a Windows and Mac user, and quite frankly while Linux may possess some of the best technology or speed, it leaves far too much to do as far as small things.
Things like, installing software. On my PC, I double click, hit next next next, and boom! — the software is installed. The Mac makes it even easier — I drag software into my my Applications folder, and it’s installed.
Linux.. no, it’s not easy. I download let’s say, Firefox off the web. “Missing this library”. Then you have to go find out which one it is — and myself, being unfamiliar with Linux, it takes some time. Then you have yet another missing library. After you finally get it installed, you find that the OLD version still resides and is the main shortcut. You have to call firefox from the command line in order to get it to run the NEW version.
And in all that effort, I simply delete my computer of Linux, throw up my hands and go back to using my Mac for a “linux like” experience.
Beauty is in simplicity too. Not just art.
October 25th, 2006 at 2:42 pm
I think the experience of Myspace shows that beauty and a nice GUI isn’t always everything. But mostly, yes, I agree. Prettier software can’t hurt.
October 25th, 2006 at 2:46 pm
Does this mean we’re doing away with the Africa-safari theme? Yay!
October 25th, 2006 at 2:47 pm
Well, I love Ubuntu, and you are 200% right, it needs to be prettier.
First step (about 1 hour of work) - GET RID OF THAT BROWN THEME, which I affectionately refer to as “Diarrhea”. Change it to something blue and/or silver. I’m not saying clone Aqua or Vista, but create something better using a similar color scheme.
After that, I really don’t care what’s done. But that brown theme has to go. It turns so many people off so quickly that the never bother trying the rest of the system.
Also, you might want to get rid of that picture of people holding hands on the web site, it is unmanly and, frankly, just a bit wierd, and definitely turns off many would-be adopters.
October 25th, 2006 at 2:48 pm
Follow Apple’s lead and provide capability for high resolution icons, anti-aliasing, decent fonts, and a smattering of shadows and other eye candy. Make all easy to modify. Make it easy to deploy suites of high resolution icons (compared to hit or miss app by app icon changes).
Switch focus from earth tones to more lively tones (greens, blues, etc.)
Leave the themes and wallpapers up to the user.
October 25th, 2006 at 2:48 pm
i find that the “blubuntu” package is a step in the right direction. i guess most people don’t find brown appealing, and most find orange a bit “too strong” on the eyes.
but, enabling by default xgl+beryl+emerald is maybe a step too far…
October 25th, 2006 at 2:51 pm
We at Amarok always put a premium on making sure things look nice. We also always have trouble keeping artists for longer then a few months, haven’t figured out the magic in keeping the mythical open source artist around.
October 25th, 2006 at 2:56 pm
[…] October 25th, 2006 by J Google, IT八卦, Kubuntu, opera, ubuntu, 推荐阅读“Pretty” is a feature-Mark Shuttleworth […]
October 25th, 2006 at 2:56 pm
I completely agree, Mark. You are my hero, BTW. If I was independently wealthy…. well, that’s neither here nor there, now, is it?
In addition to being beautiful, Linux needs to be ADVERTISED. Actually, it needs to be several things that are somewhat outside the scope of typical F/OSS development:
* Needs to be well advertised and promoted.
* Beautiful to look at.
* Needs to work, work well, work smoothly, and all that. (This part is coming along very nicely, BTW. Kudos to Ubuntu on that one!)
* Needs to come preinstalled on mass-market available PCs. Dell shipping Ubuntu? BestBuy PC with Ubuntu? HP, Compaq, IBM, CompUSA, with Ubuntu, anyone?
I think the first one, marketing, and the last one, preinstallation, are the two most important. And I think preinstallation trumps them all by a long shot. People will use whatever is there, now, on their PC, and inertia will keep them there.
October 25th, 2006 at 2:57 pm
I am part of a large group of people that believe that it is most important for the os to be easy to use (including update and install programs) then worry about pretty. Ubuntu has brought linux up to speed with other os types. Don’t give up on ease of use for fluff. Remember, for someone to switch from windows to any form of linux it is important for the user to be able to use it nearly as well as windows. Right now, although it is getting easier to do most things in linux then it was 3 years ago, it is still not easy. It is much too easy to kill things and not as easy to fix them. I think that ubuntu is a big step on the evolutionary chain of linux. They need to keep it up and get more and more hardware supported. The more hardware that is fully supported the more likely it is that people will switch. I am a new user to linux and currently have 4 machines running some form of linux and love it, but I have one machine that is giving me fits and haven’t been able to get it going. I admit that I am a long time windows user and have to “unlearn” some habits. One example is sun java. Installing it can be problematic and there is no documentation out there saying not to install it through adept because you cannot agree to the license so it cannot install. Those are the typs of things that need to be addressed for any version of linux to become really main stream and replace windows. I am willing to do rsearch to make sure that things will work if I am going to install them. Most users aren’t willing to do that. Keep up the good work though.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:00 pm
Yup - couldn’t agree more.
Everytime I boot into os X on my macbook it simply it seduces me and each time I have to resist with every fibre of my being to continue using (k)ubuntu - if it could reach the same level of polish as os X I can guarantee the subscriber base will very rapidly grow.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:01 pm
Well, making ubuntu look good is definately important. A lot of Open Source software lacks good design leadership.
The above logo however is just a glossy version of the main logo. That ‘gloss’ effect was start by Apple a few years ago and has been copied many times over. Apple are now moving away from that now because it’s becoming a little clichéd. Just be careful not to copy what’s out there or else it’ll look dated.
Design doesn’t lend itself to collaboration as much as development does so It would make more sense to hire/sponsor a talented designer to act as a leader and guide for the ubuntu brand.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:02 pm
I think the Beryl project also plays a huge role in creating a wow effect. It actually convinced my brother to try Ubuntu ;-). The sooner this becomes a standard part of a stable release, the better for Ubuntu imho. Thanks to QuinnStorm and her team for making this happen. It’s great.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:05 pm
who is this guy you’re talking about –> I had a great coincidental chat with a guy from Imperial College, London, recently. He lectures in a course which teaches scientists and engineers how to communicate with the rest of humanity.
How can we adopt this?
btw, the logo is really nice.
greets, mirjan
October 25th, 2006 at 3:06 pm
I’ve been saying for years that the average user won’t accept Linux because it’s not pretty.
Just please don’t make it an OSX clone.
Also you have to hide feature that are confusing to average users.
Someone’s mother is not going to know what virtual desktops are and will be completely lost if they accidentally click on one and everything vanishes.
What’s always been missing from every OS is two GUI modes: Average User / Power User. And I’m not talking about permissions.
I’m talking about GUI layout (Power user likes tons of tools at their disposal at all times / Average user like the minimalist look), helpful messages (Power users shouldn’t get any repetitive messages, once is fine. / Average user needs short simple messages that are different enough that they realize the serious ones from the informative ones.), finally choice (Let them pick the color of everything, give them themes, give them icon sets to pick, cursors).
Also power users are the ones helping out the average user. They’ve probably installed Ubuntu for them. Give them two things: one end user clicks on a support icon and can connect to the power user for help (EX: I talk to my mother, she’s done something and needs help. I tell her click on the support icon and pick the “connect to your son” icon (which I setup in the setup of the average user account, aka a default help client) I see a request for help on mine, I control her desktop. No firewall setup on her end, I can do the same thing on my sister’s laptop while she’s at Starbucks.). The second is allow me to switch to average user mode so if the average user can’t connect to me I can at least be following the same screens as them.
Auto-update everything.
Finally, which Ubuntu is doing right, the average user doesn’t need 8 different web browsers (a web developer might), 4 email clients and 80 admin tool. Make the menus only have the useful stuff for the end user and keep the complex administrative junk in a settings and administration area. One area that houses all settings for everything in the OS and all the tools to maintain the OS. (Windows control panel should be shot.)
Also.. everyone likes nice animations.. unless they are slow and choppy.
I could go on.. but that’s enough of a rant for today.
Keep up the good work.
(PS pay Adobe to make Photoshop, Premiere and Dreamweaver for Linux.. that will help a lot too.)
October 25th, 2006 at 3:08 pm
I share your passion for beauty. Logos are nice, but we spend much more time looking at text. The fonts that are used on our screens are not bad-looking, but web’re been looking at them for too long. Webfonts is a way to increase the visual richness of our environment — browsers should download and use fonts similar to how they use images.
http://news.com.com/Microsofts+forgotten+monopoly/2010-1032_3-6085417.html
-h&kon
October 25th, 2006 at 3:08 pm
I agree, it’s largely responsible for OS X’s widespread appeal in recent years. I love using Ubuntu, but I have to ask why in the hell it’s still brown?? At best it looks like dirt, at worst it looks like something needing flushed. I’m glad you feel “pretty” is important, but I think it would be worthwhile to talk to some marketing/psych experts on people’s response to different color schemes. I know you obviously love your “earth tones,” but I think you should reconsider that in larger scope.
I know of a Fed-Ex employee who’s office door had a piece of toilet paper on it with “What has brown done for you” written on it in brown. That’s the kind of thing many people associate with the color brown.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:09 pm
I’m about to switch away from Ubuntu after a 4-month experiment using it as my primary OS.
Pretty is great, but I need solid power management and wifi support, period, and the lack of these means I spend way too much time hassling with my system. I’d also like major software releases to be available immediately - i.e., I don’t want to have to go outside the normal package management system to get Firefox 2. I realize there are reasons why things are the way they are, but that doesn’t change the fact that if I switch to a Mac, I’ll get new releases immediately.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:11 pm
[…] (more…) […]
October 25th, 2006 at 3:27 pm
I think this: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Incoming/EdgyProposals/GlossProposal?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=contact_gloss.jpg (first logo image) line of work is perfect… Its like a tango-gloss artwork.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:28 pm
I’m an open source advocate, but I refuse to use Songbird because of the idiotic farting logo. Artwork in programs is a lot more important that a lot of people realize.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:30 pm
Absolutely right on! And great work so far; I look forward to watching Ubuntu become more and more beautiful with each version. One thing that would go a long way towards this goal is a greater focus on fonts. Fonts in Ubuntu need some serious help; there’s too many fonts that look almost identical and are kerned poorly. Paring the list down and adding some more interesting looking fonts would go a long way to beautifying Ubuntu.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:36 pm
Ubuntu would do a lot in the beauty department if it supported anti-aliased windows.
This is something I can’t stand about windows… Seeing jaggies in Ubuntu actually turned me off.
There are a lot of under-utilized theme artists at http://www.macthemes.net. I’d bet that a good many of them would be willing to donate their themes for a little recognition.
R
October 25th, 2006 at 3:40 pm
create a better experience not better artwork
October 25th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
I agree and that’s one of the things that pulled me to Ubuntu, the beauty of it. It can be made more beautiful. Pulling in some great visual minds to work with the great coding minds all with an agreed upon goal will do wonders.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:55 pm
I agree….many people seem to think that “being pretty” is useless
But then, one of the reasons why Mac OS X is the desktop OS reference, is because it’s _pretty_ (and useful). Mac OS X has been “pretty” (transparence, drop shadows) from 2001 or so, and every other OS in the world has only tried to catchup with them. I can’t imagine how following the Mac OS X example and putting a lot of efforts into being pretty and useful can be bad.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:58 pm
I use KUbuntu. And I think it’s quite beautiful.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:58 pm
One idea might be to stop copying the played-the-hell-out glossy look and come up with something original.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:15 pm
I say this is a great idea. Too many linux apps look rough. I would also suggest getting a better name. I don’t even know how to say it.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:27 pm
Ucraptnu as I would like to call it. Is a linux distro for sheep. Now I really don’t have an issue with the os as much as I do with the users. The users for this linux distro have no repect for other linux users. Yes its a linux distro not a new os. A word to ucraptnu users respect others and stop the bashing. I can’t help if you can’t understand how to treat other people. Ucraptnu users are the rudest linux users yet.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:29 pm
I will agree, your distro could use a few pretty-ups, but it’s rather pretty as a linux distro goes.
But the problem is, the criteria for us to create more striking visuals is far too strict, we have to take over more than people are comfortable with to get better results.
Not many people are fond of the Human theme, myself included.
Frankly it just looks bazaar, when people look for themes they look at calming color schemes, like blues and greens, Or futuristic kubrick-esqe stark white and black.
But these styles always get shoved aside and a modified human theme gets shipped.
Also, the software used seems to be a huge issue with most ubuntu die-hards.
Better results can only be obtained with better software, and gimp/inscape are just not there yet, if people were to focus on the content of the material, and less on what software was used, you will attract higher classed artisans.
Thanks for allowing me to post,
Have a fine day.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:42 pm
Where is the logo? There is no link to click. Copyright problems?
October 25th, 2006 at 4:45 pm
I remember the good old days when one would go over to the Enlightenment team’s webpage and gawk at the screen captures. Sleek and sexy (if not racy) backgrounds, window decorations, illuminated pop-ups, glistening wet buttons, transparent canvases, and blazing speed. It was the sense of wonder and amazement that _your_ computer could be just as beautiful and just as functional.
Logos are nice, but there needs to be a large collection of some down right jaw-dropping awesome icons, themes, backgrounds, and screen savers that the end user can twiddle and change to give a sense of customization, ownership, and personalization.
As developers, we recognize that this is superficial and don’t spend much time on it. However, the non-development world cares about form almost as much as function. Beauty has value, more than one might think. Compare the prices on two cars where the only thing that differs is the paint job. Bright red and emerald sparking green often can go for thousands more. So, artists, make something that someone watching over our shoulders will ask what we’re running so we can hand them a free CD and they’ll want to try it. Make themes that can be mixed and matched.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:52 pm
I have to disagree with the logo. I find the logo bland and unattractive, and I’m sure others out there agree.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:13 pm
While looks are important, I think it’s at least evenly (probably even more) important to make sure Ubuntu does what users expect. The age old argument of media comes to mind again. If a user clicks on a MP3 file, and gets a message saying ‘This format is not supported’, the user only thinks playing the media file on Ubuntu is impossible. He doesn’t get to know that there ARE solutions to this problem. Tthe system IMHO should note the format is proprietary, not supported by default, but offer an easy solution to add support for it, of course all with a big fat ‘we don’t like proprietary software’ warning, so the user can decide if he wants it or not.
There are a gazilion of these usability weaknesses in linux distributions which make users not want, or able, to switch to Ubuntu from for example Windows.
My point (among others) is also described at http://www.osnews.com/story.php/16284/A-Call-to-Distros-Give-Users-What-They-Want
October 25th, 2006 at 5:18 pm
couldn’t agree more, which is why Compiz and so on are so important from a desktop perspective.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Please convince Adobe to collaborate with FSF and Ubuntu to release a GNU-Linux version of Photoshop.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:27 pm
I very much agree.
With the likes of Microsoft’s Aero interface engine, and more fine tuning to the Apple OS X interface with core animation and such, standard users like this sort of polish on their computers.
Some really cool things are emerging within the free software community in regards to this with Lowfat, Compiz, Beryl and Elisa etc… but a super shiny interface would be fantastic for ubuntu.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:30 pm
Get these guys to port the eyecandy to amarok/xmms etc.
http://www.winamp.com/user/view.php?uid=1483223&show=submissions
http://www.winamp.com/user/view.php?uid=1452738&show=submissions
I spoke to the fellow that runs http://www.soundspectrum.com/ and he says there is no interest in him porting it to linux as there just isn’t enough users
If you’re looking for open source solution to it check out Cthugha … its ancient but it did the trick back in and around ‘97
http://torps.com/Cthugha/
October 25th, 2006 at 5:40 pm
Would be nice if it were easier to coordinate the colors of various things with our own wallpaper. Not everyone’s definition of ‘pretty’ includes brown and orange.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:42 pm
For the goal of a pretty desktop, I believe features like Beryl/Compiz should be fully integrated into the new releases, as they add a great deal to the Linux desktop.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:43 pm
Perhaps, but ease of use should come first over ease on the eyes. Installing applications can still be a hassle. You can’t just download an executable and install. Sometimes you need to gather 10 different packages before it will work. Only when this hurdle is overcome will Mom and Pop use Ubuntu or any linux distro on a regular basis no matter how pretty it is. I am an Ubuntu user.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:53 pm
“We have to make it gorgeous. We have to make it easy on the eye. We have to make it take your friend’s breath away.”
You mean you have to make it not brown? ;-D
October 25th, 2006 at 6:17 pm
I certainly agree, but if we want open source software to be embraced and loved, it needs to ‘Just Work’. That’s beautiful in my eyes.
I recently purchased a brand spankin’ new Dell Latitude, and I spent about 12 hours trying to get the wireless networking to work, and about 5 hours trying to get my display to use something other than the default resolution/color depth. I still haven’t been able to get it to use the same resolution/color depth that Windows automatically uses.
This is probably the wrong place to whine about technical issues, but I really believe that until open source software can pass the ’so easy my mom can use it’ test, it’s all so much unrealized potential. No matter how pretty it is, it’s got to work, or it won’t be widely accepted.
Ubuntu seems to be more receptive to this than other linux communities, but there’s still a ways to go before it’s there. Keep up the good work though…
October 25th, 2006 at 6:25 pm
Sir, you hit the nail again. Thank you for listening the many comments you have heard from ordinary users (developers alone tend to view world their weird ways). Keep up the good work! I’m REALLY looking forward getting some Ubuntu cds mailed to me, I will distribute one to each person at work and brainwash completely at least ten. (That’s my personal goal.) Now it is far more easy than with the previous version. The only gripe for single ordinary users there is now is the lack of network manager.
October 25th, 2006 at 6:31 pm
I am forced to comment on the color debate. What certain shades of colors mean to people is about culture. Different colors mean different people to Americans, Russians, people from the African nations and so on. Brown is, I have understood, clean and beautiful color for many.
The Hoary brown shade has only ONE meaning in where I am from. Shit. Sorry, but that is it. The later warmer shades do not have that problem. If I was in Ubuntu art team, I’d conduct a small research of the major cultural differences in colors and shapes and pick some 3 different target groups that would be pleased via small modifications to themes. (Like, brown blue and green versions)
October 25th, 2006 at 6:31 pm
Actually, I believe that it should be functional first, then pretty. If pretty interferes with the function of the product, like Creative’s windows drivers for their sound card, then it should be left out.
On top of that, get everything functional first, then you’ll be able to concentrate on getting things pretty. For instance, no version of Linux has a decent installer. installing programs is many times an operation in complexity and futility. Average users certainly can’t install programs if a computer tech weaned on DOS 3.0 and in the business for 12 years can’t install it. I refer, of course, to myself. I am well versed in Windows, and can run the registry with the best of them. I can manually uninstall Office 97 in under 30 minutes. I have manually written Win.ini and system.ini files in the old Win 3.1. I certainly can handle complex projects, but I still can’t figure out how to install Linux programs on any of the current distributions. This is a significant problem with Linux. As long as this problem still exists, Linux can never be adopted as a mainstream OS.
October 25th, 2006 at 6:32 pm
“Pretty” is sign of design sophistication, and a very important element to the overall reaction an individual will have, whether it is in response to a car, a pen , or an operating system. Clearly the engineering behind the object will have to be good, but if it is “ugly”, or without a coherent and balanced look, well, who will want it?
Good Luck !!!!
October 25th, 2006 at 6:59 pm
I can understand that with the kind of money you’ve invested in the Ubuntu project, that you have undoubtedly have a right to put your foot down on occasion and say ‘The buck stops here”. But your choice of using this ugly brown ‘Human’ color scheme is as self-defeating as it gets. I have alot of contact with potentially new users every day and I can’t get past the topic of the brown screens. I tell people “but you can change that to whatever you want.” Reply: “No thanks, it’s ugly as homemade sin and why do I want to go to using that thing when Windows already looks the way I want it to out of the box.”
Do you think Microsoft just arbitrarily decided on blue/green for XP because of any particular reason? How about almost every other Linux Distro out there? Until something is done about the ugly brown theme, I’m not wasting my time trying to turn people onto Ubuntu anymore. That way I don’t have to try to defend the choices of someone who obviously has no sense of what attractiveness is. Either accept that people hate the brown desktop, or continue wasting your capital on this ugly distro.
October 25th, 2006 at 7:07 pm
Besides colors and icons, are we expecting to see some wierd mod of Gnome KDE and XFCE sometime soon? I mean really, you can only go as far as what the Gnome, KDE, and XFCE developers give you, right?
Or are we going to see “Ubuntu’s very own super ultra special DE” sometime soon?
Change the icons, make the windows fade/shadow/whistle/whatever but it doesnt really matter. Your still clicking the same buttons to do the same things.
October 25th, 2006 at 7:14 pm
This guy have done very good job by modifying some aspect of Ubuntu look:
http://www.taimila.com/orange-look.php
it is nice to see something similar in Ubuntu. the orange looks pretty good.
October 25th, 2006 at 7:31 pm
The bikeshed is brown.
October 25th, 2006 at 8:01 pm
I would not change the DNA of the IMAGE of UBUNTU - its PERFECT and BEAUTIFUL!! (Red, orange, yellow, white, black text) People associate colours and images differently depending on experiences, seasons of life, culture etc. So let me give some other associations of the Ubuntu colours besides brown for POOH! - (support, foundation, home, root, source, secure, self, identity, belonging, relationship, basic needs, survival, instinct, desert, simple, bushmen, tracking, logic, intuition, nuturing, primal, passionate, energy, power, visceral, raw, fire, bond, connection, earth, physical, emotional, reproduction, create, unleashed, freedom, wild, soul,…..) It all ties together into the BIG PICTURE! I think the Ubuntu teams are producing well! I would cool the heat down with a nice cool, sky blue background to balance it out! The above logo is getting there - the tone needs to be slighty brighter!!
October 25th, 2006 at 8:16 pm
Leave the brown theme, i want “happy” colors like green, orange, blue, but not brown. A lot of newbee, i have met, coming from windows dont want to use ubuntu because of the brown colors, they are not aware that you can switch between themes. (take a look ar fedora core 6`s wallpaper as an exampel, it`s beautiful). 95% of those i talk to about ubuntu talks about the color and NOT in a positive way, they often prefere suse or the new mandriva 2007.
It could also be interesting with new desktops features like Widgets, here we can use gdesklets, it`s beautiful and you can use them for something.
October 25th, 2006 at 8:18 pm
I dont understand why no one mentioned Kbuntu… Its On the same darn webpage. It uses KDE instead of Gnome and looks a whole hell of a lot prettier…
October 25th, 2006 at 8:21 pm
Please, no more glossy logos, buttons, text or other artwork. It’s just distracting. Enough already.
October 25th, 2006 at 8:43 pm
I think the interface such as the windows and stuff can be improved alot. KDE and Gnome look very Windows 2000 like. I think if the interface can improve such as on Mac OS X, Vista Aero then it can give a lot of eye candy. It needs to be changed. People argue about the XGL and stuff being better than OS X and Vista but the windows that can be moved and transparent are still the same windows. The lines, icons, fonts needs major work. Also, I guess for installing apps there should be an installer that will detect if their is a package missing and it will take care of installing the needed updates via the apt thingy.
October 25th, 2006 at 9:42 pm
As an Artistic Director, I would love to be able to help, but I would refuse to. I have a great history of identifying a market and creating products aimed at that market. What I will not tolerate is someone who asks for my skill and experience vetoing and micro managing my work. Would any programmer accept an artist having creative control of their coding? Why do programmers believe they are experts in all fields? Why do some programmers also like to treat artists as chaff by effectively running art competitions?
The conditions I would need to work on a project like this would be as follows. Complete artistic control and freedom. A UI programmer with the skill and time to work on graphical features. A complete set of lessons from an expert in the current UI/screen rendering system so I can get up to speed and work within these confines as much as possible to avoid complete rewrites.
The result would be a completely new look, putting natural calming graphical features into a User Interface that reduces OS clutter for ease of use for the end user.
Unfortunately you will have art students and low level artists fighting over the scraps you throw them. A top level artist doesn’t suffer the meddling of others. As an Artistic Director it is actually my job to stand my ground for the sake of the project. To concentrate on targeting the client while retaining any core branding. Ask yourself what you would prefer. The best, and in many ways most original User Interface, or to micro manage the artists because you, with no artistic training or expertise wants creative control. I will get back to my work now. Where I am adapting my companies look to a new target audience. Contact me if you need more detail on anything I have said.
October 25th, 2006 at 9:50 pm
ubuntu artwork is much-much better than other *buntu distributions. that’s a mess…
p.s. hello from saint-petersburg, we got a 10th birthday of our LUG here…
October 25th, 2006 at 9:57 pm
I agree with some other posters who say ditch the brown….I’d go for blue
October 25th, 2006 at 9:59 pm
i agree, edgy splash artwork sucks!
October 25th, 2006 at 10:07 pm
while pretty certainly is an attractor to ubuntu, i believe there’s more to that to get people to switch to linux-based OS
simply put, ubuntu needs to be like windows without the security problems
(that includes, ease of use, COMPATIBILITY, visual quality, did i mention ease of use?, etc……)
October 26th, 2006 at 12:13 am
Beryl & Kiba-dock
Kiba-dock needs to be brain dead easy to customize.
Desktop widgets of some sort - like gdesklets without being such a resource hog.
October 26th, 2006 at 12:18 am
I disagree with those who say ditch the brown. I like the brown - it is warm and calming. I find the blue of Xubuntu really boring and I’m trying to work out how to kill the blue of my Kubuntu install. Blue is conservative and masculine. KDE feels more masculine than GNOME anyway - it’s just a shame that KDE seems to have better applications…
October 26th, 2006 at 12:25 am
Stop wasting your time. Pretty is the last thing any Linux distro needs to worry about. Until Linux becomes easy enough that the average user can install (with minimal fuss) and start using popular applications (web browsing, mulitmedia applications, etc) in a reasonable amount of time, it will NEVER become a mainstream alternative. An OS should be transparent to a user. It should not get in the way of the task the user is trying to accomplish. The OS is not the experience a user wants, pretty or not. The APPLICATIONS available and COMPATABILITY with the users hardware that lets the user accomplish their computing goal should be the priority, not fluffy graphics. The Mac OS and Windows OS can now concentrate on pretty graphics because they both mastered useability and compatability a long time ago. Until Linux gets to that point, forget about pretty graphics.
October 26th, 2006 at 1:31 am
Good stuff. I am not a fan of the brown color either, and it would probably be good to allow users to select between a couple of default looks. There are a bunch of metacity themes at gnome look.org that are far better then the default Gnome options. For example “Human Azul” icons and “Blended” window borders along with a blue desktop background make a very nice (non brown) default look and still maintains an Ubuntu look. I’m sure your artists could come up with something even better. Having a couple of options during the install phase would be a great addition.
- Jason
October 26th, 2006 at 1:39 am
Here’s what would put Ubuntu into mainstream use:
–An installer that
prompts users about proprietary vs. open source drivers and lets users choose between performance and free
autodetects performance level of system to determine whether or not to install beryl/compiz
prompts the user about non-free and copyrighted components and allows them to choose to install them
–A desktop that
easily handles hardware changes such as new input/output devices
has a better integrated connection manager for wifi, pppoe
attempting to connect to wifi networks in areas of poor reception is an exceptionally lengthy repetitious process
when switching a computer from being connected to a router directly to a cable modem, network settings do not adapt
–A network control system that
allows admins to easily add/modify/remove users
allows users to perform collaborative tasks such as sharing and messaging
allows users to log in to different computers while retaining their files and settings
These are the things I wish Ubuntu did better, sorry if anything I listed can already be done (I’m not all-knowing)
October 26th, 2006 at 2:49 am
[…] Myself, I have but the utmost level of respect for Mark Shuttleworth. And so it was today that I was of a feeling uncertain when I was a reader of this most interesting article by him. It is a talker of the Ubuntu Art Team. But it was at the most very end that I was a reader of this quoting: “All of which goes to say that messaging is important - learning how to “show off your best stuff” is an essential skill, and I hope the free software community will take that to heart.” […]
October 26th, 2006 at 3:52 am
Mark Shuttleworth for President of the U.S. in 2012!
October 26th, 2006 at 4:14 am
“Also, you might want to get rid of that picture of people holding hands on the web site, it is unmanly and, frankly, just a bit wierd, and definitely turns off many would-be adopters.”
What planet are you from, seriously?
The whole “men don’t cry, hug, or hold hands for any reason unless they’re feminine” thing is getting really, really old. Not only is it unhealthy to suppress emotions but it takes the humanity out of the man.
Real men reveal their true emotions and show their caring spirit towards others.
October 26th, 2006 at 5:29 am
[…] Mark Shuttleworth, CEO of Canonical Ltd. (the creators of the popular Ubuntu Linux distribution) posted on his blog today that he feels that skin-deep beauty is what Ubuntu desperately needs right now (before rambling on about something a little less to-the-point—maybe it sounds better when you hear it in from him in person). […]
October 26th, 2006 at 5:52 am
[…] UPDATE: um uma galáxia não muito distante, Mark Shuttleworth diz que é preciso deixar o Ubuntu mais bonito, para atrair mais usuários. Verdade que é preciso melhorar o suporte a fontes, mas me parece óbvio que o grande problema do Linux continua sendo a falta de aplicativos decentes - a comparação Gimp x Photoshop é só a mais óbvia, mas existem outras. […]
October 26th, 2006 at 6:58 am
Beautiful isn’t the issue. Making it work is. I have two computers, one a laptop with the 915 chipset that I can’t get to run on the 1280 by 800 resolution, the other an Athlon64×2 dual monitor system that it can’t see the second monitor on. If you can get it to work with my displays I’d love it. Otherwise, no thanks, not ready for prime time.
It NEEDs to support common graphics options out of the box or it’s worthless.
October 26th, 2006 at 7:25 am
Fonts, fonts, fonts, fonts, fonts, fonts …….. ! The look starts with the words on a screen, after that worry about color and decoration, clean lines, understated. Now if someone could just hire Ross Lovegrove and company …
http://www.ted.com/tedtalks/tedtalksplayer.cfm?key=r_lovegrove&flashEnabled=1
October 26th, 2006 at 7:51 am
Hey, you’re right about this. But I’m sorry to hijack your post:
Mark, I just finished my thesis (you’ll have to excuse the Spanish there, I haven’t translated it yet). I ended up choosing Ubuntu, your contribution, to create a free software solution for the Third World. Now, here’s what I’m asking:
I have vast experience in free software. What are the chances that I could work for Canonical? What are the right avenues to ask? I honestly have no idea, but I’m willing to move and do the work, especially in areas that can lead to wide adoptions of free software.
OK, that’s it. Hope everything’s well. Good luck, and thanks for your contribution!
October 26th, 2006 at 7:58 am
Cam Cope: Agree with all this.
Else Ubuntu must have things, good ideas - wich makes it different from other distros. OSX is successful because:
a - It has an stable and good hardware. (On PC not really reachable this)
b - The OS keeps together everything, and so easy as possible - so holds functionality
c - Makes it similar to the real life, leaves choices to reach things in same way
Therefore what we need is for Ubuntu I think:
- Hide terminal as possible, keep everything on one common desktop (dont separete people into gnome-kde-x.)
- Keep way to make it real the scalable 3D desktop. Everybody speaks of it but must thinking in 2D desktop, wich is more then 20 years old, and all hardware usage ’til today is NOT fully used out.
- If linux/Ubuntu want a part of the war for living room - keep it everything simpliest as possible. If an user looks on the desktop first time must say wich thing is what is, and why is looks so.
- You must integrate the 3 different distros and GUI (Kubuntu-Ubuntu-Xubuntu) into one to have more power
- Choosing packages, part are good, but it can better - must cumulate parts under one name. Install-uninstall will be no more horror.
- Desktop beutification: Must have an tool to conf all parts of the desktop.
October 26th, 2006 at 11:36 am
Ci siamo! Edgy Eft!…
Ci siamo! E’ uscita l’ultima relase di Ubuntu 6.10 (Edgy Eft).
Fra i software aggiornati, The Fridge, proclama Gnome 2.16 ed Evolution 2.8.0 e Firefox 2.0, ma ci sono da segnalare due new entries fra le applicazioni native: Tomboy e F-spot …
October 26th, 2006 at 11:38 am
Why not change the default color to blue? Orange is too ugly…
October 26th, 2006 at 1:28 pm
[…] Page Summary: Mark Shuttleworth recently wrote an article about how to make the world embrace free software, and the number one reason that someone will try it it because it looks cool. I think people finally need to realize that variation is not always the answer. I stated that no average computer user would adopt linux while it looks the way it does - just take a look at vista, it looks great, and thats a big factor for most people. They need to keep it up and get more and more hardware supported.read more | digg story […]
October 26th, 2006 at 2:23 pm
Please leave it all alone. If you want ubuntu to be prettier, you can do that your self with kde-look.org, gnome.look.org or XGL with compriz.
I like my system simple and I dont need pretty.
thank you
October 26th, 2006 at 6:38 pm
About the brown,
I know that a lot of people feel that it’s ugly, and has bad connotations, but I love it. At first I didn’t, and i messed around with customizing away from human to other fun eye candy, eventually settling on an obnoxious orange/purple theme that lasted until I made some REALLY BIG admin mistakes. Be that as it may, when i reinstalled dapper (with default theming), I was blown away. I haven’t even considered switching away from the human theme, in icons or window preferences. and while I don’t use the default brown wallpaper, I do love Dawn of Ubuntu and a pretty little (brown) png of a gnu playing the flute next to a floating Ubuntu logo.
All in all, just as I once converted from Windows to Ubuntu, I have also converted from the oh-so-2000 bright and shiny os, to the tame, mature brown gloss of Ubuntu.
Keep up the good work, we all love ya for it.
October 26th, 2006 at 7:22 pm
Waaaaaaaaay to go!
I agree with all that have been said. Eye-candy isn’t useless and if linux is to take “normal-people”’s desktops it has to be pretty and easy.
Just reading the splash-screen messages is frightening to most of people. Now things are getting prettier and a beautifully shining free open world is coming.
And yes! We need also a decent graphics editor. It’s odd to make beautiful graphics for use in a open environment using commercial tools because we don’t have a good one wich is open source.
October 26th, 2006 at 9:02 pm
Okay, so how many artists were among the original developers(coders) you gathered at your home for the first Ubuntu brainstorming session? When did you discover that art is essential and not an afterthought? Sorry, had to ask, b/c it goes back to the basic puzzle of form vs. function. First make it work, then make it look good, and then somewhere in the middle is the balance between design and good code. . . but what if you turned it all around and made it beautiful and then coded to support that. . .
oh about that NASA dig, they do “know” what needs to be done, they just choose not to do it. . . sigh. . .
October 26th, 2006 at 9:17 pm
Raymond Lowey designed beautiful and useful things. His motto was “Never Leave Well-Enough Alone”. He would agree that the aesthetic and the pragmatic go hand in hand. He designed or redesiigned:
- Sudebaker Commander
- Avanti
- Gestetner Copier
- Skylab
- Streamliner trains
- T9 Toaster (Sunbeam collectible)
- US Mail logo
etc, etc
October 26th, 2006 at 11:17 pm
I hope Ubuntu stays with the “brown” desktop. It’s so good to se not “another blue desktop”…
And - I know it’s hard to work with creative people. Everyone of these take theire work as theire “babies”. And if YOU say, that work is bad (or not good enough) it’s shocking for that kind of people. It’s very hard to work with them, believe me…
… I know that, because I am one of them.
October 27th, 2006 at 1:17 am
brown/orange forever, blue never! anyone thats been using computers for more than 5 years must be as bored of blue/black desktops as i am
October 27th, 2006 at 7:29 am
Dinda I agree with your comment girl! I have always promoted science, technology, entrepreneurship, ART and maths - “STEAM” as I call it! Life is definitely more exciting when you have all those headspaces operating!! The thrill is trying to find the BALANCE POINT - it can be big shifts or even fractions each way to finely tune something - It is a ART and SCIENCE but when you hit that SWEET SPOT - it is soooo sweeeeeeet!!!!!
October 27th, 2006 at 4:26 pm
What I don’t get about the color scheme which Ubuntu uses by default is why the logo’s colors are not all used. Yellow, red and orange have great potential for a desktop scheme. I know that Mr. Shuttleworth has been advocating the inclusion of brown, but very few people like it. The logo’s colors, though, have the potential to make something very sporty.
October 27th, 2006 at 8:05 pm
I’d also like to add that font rendering (note I haven’t looked at Edgy) needs serious looking at. Though I’ve applied a fix from ubuntuforums.org that is decent, it’s unacceptable that Ubuntu out of the box makes you feel sleepy eyed. Crystal clear rendering is one must if you want Ubuntu to really complete against Mac/Win.
October 28th, 2006 at 5:40 pm
There’s nothing wrong with brown; It’s soothing and pleasant. Feel free to ignore the sci-fi geeks that want everything “Star Trek LCARS interface” coloured. How cliche and boring.
October 28th, 2006 at 6:30 pm
beauty… nice
Hopefully mostly scalable… SVG
October 29th, 2006 at 8:22 pm
[…] Mark Shuttleworth » Blog Archive » #13: “Pretty” is a feature “If we want the world to embrace free software, we have to make it beautiful […] We have to make it gorgeous. We have to make it easy on the eye. We have to make it take your friend’s breath away.” (tags: usability opensource opensourcesoftware development pretty design beautiful ubuntu) […]
October 30th, 2006 at 12:10 pm
[…] If we want the world to embrace free software, we have to make it beautiful. I ’m not talking about inner beauty, not elegance, not ideological purity… pure, unadulterated, raw, visceral, lustful, shallow, skin deep beauty.read more | digg story Links […]
October 30th, 2006 at 3:55 pm
[…] http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/63 […]
October 30th, 2006 at 8:00 pm
[…] I know it’s been said before (and will be said again), but it’s nice when Mark Shuttleworth says it. […]
October 30th, 2006 at 9:24 pm
[…] Mark Shuttleworth » Blog Archive » #13: “Pretty” is a feature […]
October 30th, 2006 at 9:46 pm
while i agree with Mark on this I guess its a question of pursuing a Mac approach, which is beautiful and functional or Windows approach, which is functional or butt-ugly. I prefer the Windows approach but the comments on this post sort of convinced me otherwise.
October 30th, 2006 at 9:47 pm
Linux distributions should look for their own ways to solve problems as well as copying OS X or Windows.
Look at the “breadcrumbs” path feature in Nautilus’ browser, and standard Gnome file picker for an example of how Linux can lead instead of follow in GUI design. This feature is as useful and easy to understand as OS X Finder’s column-view, but is implemented in a competely novel way.
I also like the idea of a configurable menu bar at the top of the screen ala Gnome. It’s the “start menu” from Windows, rethought and re-implemented better in most respects. (More information available at first glance, and one level of cascading removed from the menu structure).
The cube desktop switching effect in Compiz is beautiful, informative and intuitive. It gives the feeling that you are manipulating a physical object which responds in exactly the way
you would expect.
These things are so immediately accessible and comfortable for most people that they barely even percieve that it’s been done differently. They “feel right”. People only complain about things that don’t have this quality. When things look great, respond obviously and promptly and feel right, they just “fit”.
Linux needs to have more of that quality, it needs to lead the way with intuitive, visually appealing features. You can’t be better than the competition by always following, and you can’t lead the way if you’re not confident that your way is better.
October 30th, 2006 at 9:50 pm
Why does everybody create icons with a glassy effect now? It’s disturbing on the eyes and not a nice thing from a usability standpoint.
October 30th, 2006 at 10:05 pm
I *do* want eye candy I’ll lust after. Beryl, Compvis, etc - all are great. Shiny logos - whatever. I still think Gorilla was the best of all Gnome themes, so what do I know?
Still, that brown theme? I’m sorry, but you’re the one who brought up focusing on superficial things. Goodness knows, I’ve tried to like the Ubuntu theme and colors. Honest. But it just doesn’t work for me. So the first thing I do when I boot up the LiveCD is pick a different wallpaper and color scheme.
Brown makes Ubuntu unique, and I’m sure some people love the colors. But there’s a reason you don’t find it in other distros. Have a look at a random smattering of wallpapers and photos - what colors do people find pleasing? I don’t see brown as one of them.
But don’t think that superficial polish is what Ubuntu really needs at this point. I gave the latest Ubuntu LiveCD to my co-worker to try out last week. He took it home, and tried to get it working with WiFi. No dice, even after he had gone online and followed the instructions. The bottom line: it’s worthless for him - too bad, because it looked like it had some neat stuff in it.
A few days later, I read a slew of similar complaints on Slashdot.
There are features most of the population consider “make or break” for them. Playback of videos, MP3s, and so on. I’ve got co-workers who’d find Ubuntu ideal, but it lacks some key features. So one’s gone with Apple, because it “just works” for him. Another doesn’t want to hassle with trying to put the missing pieces together (yes, she knows about EasyUbuntu).
Despite that I’d really, really like to use Ubuntu as my main distro, I’m still holding off until it “Just Works.” Each release looks really, really close, and I’m really tempted - but I’m still sticking with PCLinuxOS.
Hopefully the next release will change my mind.
October 30th, 2006 at 10:26 pm
[…] ~ Mark Shuttleworth […]
October 30th, 2006 at 10:57 pm
Nice interfaces get people interested but the foundation needs to just work to keep them there. The biggest problem by far with Linux is getting the experience to just work out of the box. It’s come a long way but there’s still so much hardware out there that works poorly or not at all under Linux. The Linux distributions (and kernel developers) need to do everything they can to encourage and support hardware vendors to support Linux.
I can’t tell you how annoying it is to want to use Linux only to run into basic problems with my hardware. Nice graphics get me interested but a no-fuss system that just works will keep me there.
October 30th, 2006 at 11:44 pm
i have a multiboot computer using gentoo primarily, with ubuntu as my ‘back up’ system. even though the learning curve on gentoo can be very steep, i enjoy the optimization philosophy behind gentoo, even though compiling can get tiresome at times. but after using gentoo for a while and then booting into ubuntu, watching the boot up messages can be painful. so much stuff gets loaded, which i simply don’t want or need. this is the microsoft philosophy too: just throw everything, including the kitchen sink into a monolithic kernel and load every driver known to man at bootup and the user will somehow have everything they’ll ever need. then come the crashes. i need a desktop system which respects my resources and doesn’t use them up recklessly, just because they’re availabile and it seems ‘easier’ to do. it’s taken some time to get my gentoo box where i want it, but at least i have everything i want and need, but not more (except needed dependencies) and i use fluxbox, not gnome for similar reasons. my kernel has the features i want and need and nothing gets loaded on bootup unless i want it to. i know this all is probably beyond the reach / commitment level of many users ubuntu is targeting who can’t/won’t spend time and effort optimizing their system, but i think ubuntu should trim some bloat and have a straight-forward ‘expert mode’ during installation; as well as system tools, which allow for more optimization and customization of a given system.
lastly, i’m not trying to promote gentoo at the expense of ubuntu. i really like and support what the ubuntu project is trying to accomplish. gentoo is just too hard for many folks..that’s fine. i just think ubuntu execs and devs could take the best of gentoo’s philosophy and apply it to ubuntu and everyone will win. well that’s my two cents.
good luck
October 31st, 2006 at 12:06 am
The best way to achieve growth is to follow a process:
1) Develop a culture of product management for the entire distribution AND for the individual components.
Socialize a user interface and functionality style guide so 10 different developers aren’t implementing 10
slightly different approaches to the user interface in their individual contributions. Colors schemes are the
LAST thing to worry about, that layer needs to be customizable by the end user any way. Eye candy only
helps get attention, the feature/functionality is what will keep them.
2) Bridge the cultures - maintain the Unix tools philosophy while embracing a component-oriented model to support a graphical user interface. This will allow both styles, command-line, and GUI, to be supported by the same code base. There are times you want to use command line for a batch style of interaction, and the GUI to support the interactive style. This will provide a technical advantage over existing Microsoft offerings.
3) Leverage scripting and embedded extension languages such as GUILE, or Python, to allow components to be controlled or extended in sensible ways.
Finally, advertise high-quality reference implementations with design documents, that use these principles, to serve as an example to others. All the contributing user interface designers, software component developers, and front-end (scripting) developers need to all be working from the same playbook.
October 31st, 2006 at 12:22 am
I have installed several different flavors of linux a dozen times over the last few years but I’m still a newbie when it comes to the OS. The thing that keeps driving me back to Windows is that I can’t find an open source program (any program) for linux, download it, install it, configure it and use it without going to a scary text based shell. Windows software has friendly GUI installers that explain installation options and holds your hand through the process. Linux has to adress this before it’s ready for the general desktop.
October 31st, 2006 at 12:27 am
What do all the people like about the shiny plastic look? I would prefer if all the 24bit pixels would be put to use. What do all these pictures of folders give me, even if they are plastic styled? Let the icon display something useful about the content of the folder at least. How much files are in there, what type, when edited last, folder is copy of another folder maybe? If it is plastic it is new, if it is matte it is old etc … that would be progressive. Everything else is nothing but eye candy, and MacOS has plenty of that, mostly uninventive, just glossy.
October 31st, 2006 at 2:00 am
Now if only Ubuntu installed correctly.
I tried and it gave me memory errors. good grief! how do you expect everyone to use this OS if it won’t even install… and I’m a techie.
October 31st, 2006 at 2:49 am
Maybe better than beauty would be to make absolutely sure that Ubuntu will function for people who access the internet by dial-up as well as that fortunate minority who access it by broadband.
At the moment ubuntu/kubuntu is booby-trapped against dial-up users:
dial-up modem users must comment out the ‘auth’ line in /etc/ppp/options and create an empty /etc/resolv.conf file. Once these two arcane measures are taken, dial-up modems work fine. This problem has been incorporated in every kubuntu since at least 5.04.
October 31st, 2006 at 4:01 am
If you want pretty you have to pay for it. That means hiring real designers. I recently used Compiz with Fedora Core 6 and while the technology is impressive, the “wobbling” effect made me nauseous. “Pretty” is good fonts (Ubuntu’s fonts at the moment are frankly a bit of a shambles), good graphic design (Ubuntu falls woefully short here) and sensible, attractive colour choices (you can probably second-guess me on this one).
October 31st, 2006 at 4:31 am
The picture of the people holding hands is cool. It reminds me in a second that the operating system isn’t just for older programmer types like me, but for everone, of any color, any age… It is not unmanly. I found that comment too wierd. The photo embodies ubuntu. Keep it around. It is impportant that ubuntu keeps on course being for all sorts of people. Not just nerds. That is part of it’s appeal, and differentiates it from some other distributions. It is what captured my imagination. Keep up the good work.
October 31st, 2006 at 5:11 am
I use kubuntu for this very reason - I find it prettier than ubuntu.
October 31st, 2006 at 6:19 am
Personally, I want to use Ubuntu. I’d really, really, really like to. I actually sort of like the look of the main distro, to be honest. On the other hand, I hate Windows and its default aesthetic, but I’m still using it. Why am I using it? Because I run windowblinds, which allows me to skin the OS so that it looks like whatever I want (even Linux, if I feel like it).
You have to get artists USING LINUX to get the benefits of good art on Linux. You need a compelling product like Photoshop. I know the GIMP is good, but people still want an “industry standard” program for their work and comprehensive support for tools like Wacom tablets. Get a good, comprehensive customization tool and then funnel resources into artistic program development and the artwork will sustain itself by creating a competitive community trying to “wow” each other. You just given people the means to make good art on Linux, then give them the reason to use it to the point that they make it comfortable for themselves. That comfort comes through as a “feel.”
Find out what controls aren’t open to people that want to pimp their PC, then offer a tool that allows them that basic access to Linux. Then set up some sort of Linux “approved” grading system and have teams of people compete for recognition or cash prizes. I can guarantee that the artwork will improve much more than trying to “unify” the look by pointing at a plastic-shiny and saying, “More of that!”
October 31st, 2006 at 7:07 am
[…] Mar Shuttleworth über “Schönheit und freie Software”: http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/63 […]
October 31st, 2006 at 7:18 am
Mark (hi there), I’m working on something in the realm of beauty that will blow your socks off, and Ubuntu will have more or less have first shot. I’ll try to call you later (driving from Zurich to London which gets a bit in the way logistically
because I would like you /personally/ involved.
When I’ll tell you what I’m up to you’ll understand why I (a) can’t say any more right now (which is v. frustrating) and (b) why you best stick your nose in. It won’t take much of your time, though - I know how valuable time is..
/// Peter ///
October 31st, 2006 at 7:31 am
I like the Earth-tones in Ubuntu. As long as people can customize things a bit, I can’t see any reason for people to complain if they have another preference.
Also being an OS X user, I hadn’t expected to be quite so impressed on installing Ubuntu. I was particularly surprised at how easy it was to add programs, and keep them all up to date. And mounting/burning disc images was something I figured out in no time, another thing I hadn’t expected.
I’d like to see a global “report a bug, make a suggestion” feature, where users could provide feedback about any component/program without having to hunt down individual forums. Generally have had a good experience. Some font handling wierdness in a JAVA chat program, would like to see a simpler integrated way of bringing in more media features (mp3 support, DVD and video file playing etc)
October 31st, 2006 at 8:32 am
As we all know Linux is an operating system developed by amateurs with a flair for user interfaces that come out of high school projects.
Ubuntu is horrible in this regard, with its butt ugly brown dirt look (”the earth”), well duh… whoever thought up the scheme should be flippin burgers.
Even the ugly boot screen offers no respite from the brown dirt look!
KDE and GNOME are two fine examples of how NOT to develop GUI’s - the ‘feel’ of both reminds me of Windows 98!
October 31st, 2006 at 10:43 am
I have ubuntu installed on one of 3 computers I have KVM’d together. I must say that I enjoy it only somewhat better than the default Windows desktop. All of the window managers of any substance are designed around the dreadfully awful “start menu” concept, making a user repeatedly dig through an ever enlarging and confusing menu. It’s a drudgery that most people just accept because they’re use to it.
Mac desktops are only mildly easier to navigate. Why do you people chase these things? Mark, If you have access to a Windows computer (and I’m sure you do), I would suggest that you check out a little known replacement shell for Windows called bbLean 1.16. It’s based stylistically on the Blackbox WM but the similarities end pretty much right there. What is unusual about this desktop environment is the ease a user can build and customize it to their own specific work method.
The bbInterface plugin allows users to actually build programmable desktop UI elements on-the-fly via a menu and no programming knowledge and little effort. This is cutting edge stuff, why isn’t anyone paying attention? Why do you chase after the tired out Windows and Mac desktop UI’s. Simply to provide a familiarity factor? That is a road to stagnation. I implore you explore the bbLean\bbInterface desktop paradigm with more than a passing curiosity - or get some else to do it.
October 31st, 2006 at 11:10 am
Design is what makes the system work - getting the design right is what will decide if Ubuntu is sucessful in the long term. You have make a good start, but that is in competition against other Linux distros, to be ‘cooler’ than OSX and easier to get into than XP & Vista needs to be the goal.
The Gnome front end is lovely and simple, Evolution is a great email client, but Kmail or Thunderbird is cleaner and more effective on the screen. If I open the file browser in Gnome I can navigate to files, but Konqueror shows me what’s in them at a glance. You have a great opportunity to bring the best of each together to make a simple and effective way to deal with information and forget that you are using a computer. I am making the leap to Ubuntu, but still hit a compromise in selecting the features I like from KDE into the more welcoming world of Gnome.
October 31st, 2006 at 11:17 am
About the above logo.. The logo itself is ok. The color scheme red/orange/yellow and the glossy. well its ok but there are some other things that are not. The bluish background to that picture. Having a 3d typeface thing going on on the text “ubuntu” . That looks like crap. What need to be adressed is 2 things. And thats not 2 small things. The first is a HIG (Human Interface Guidelines) Everything in the OS neeed to operate in a similiar fashion, wheater you are in Gimp or in some configuration application for apache ( quit, edit/paste, windows, minimize and more consitence and also in the os itself. Menu with applications etc.. Streamkline it more. Look at windows/macos X.. They have come further in this. (not having a zillion applications installed default)
And the second thing wich is more what this topic is about is, u need a “total ubuntu design profile” , what typefaces where, size, color themes, what colors where , why? shapes? why? etc.. And make them obvious why they are choosen.. Having brown/orange fine.. but is it because its african? Whats that have to do with an operating system..? Ok the word ubuntu.. but hmm.. A corporate executive dont buy that… Make it slick , exiting, maybe not futuristic. Make a classy classic look and feel. And make it consitent. No 3d logos please.. Check out real artist and there work like ex seigmeister. Dont work with computer people on this and artist that only been working with computer graphics etc. Get on guy that are an ordinary artist and get him to make this design profile for you. And then you will get something really Great!
October 31st, 2006 at 11:36 am
oh and blue.. like in macos X and windows is so overused.. will be good for people to feel familiar but from an artistic pov it sucks. Everything the same… I think linux have come a long way very fast even in looks but something really great can come. i know it..
October 31st, 2006 at 11:39 am
Personally I love the brown
October 31st, 2006 at 2:12 pm
I agree that Linux needs to get prettier. While I don’t want TOO much eye-candy, i relaize that there are many who do.
Personally, I would like some simple GUI Network Management tools for setting up linux networks both as pure linux, and to mesh with Windows servers. One of the things that keeps many whole shops running on Windows is not the prettieness of the GUI (althought that certianly helps convince the PHB’s) But the fact that linux is a pain in the arse to manage! Unless you want to spend piles of cash on a proprietary linux solution (such as Redhat’s or Novell’s) you get basically no GUI network management utils. You basically have to do EVERYTHING via command line! While that may be a more granular method of doing it, it also makes it very daunting to manage, and keeps FOSS OSes out of enterprise applications.
Not to mention that if you have to pay piles of cash to get a GUI network management solution, (and the VERY expensive training to learn to use it, remembering that most Admins are already Windows trained and thusly have large sunk costs with respect to training budgets) that pretty much eliminates the cost advantage of using OSS software. The PHB’s are going to say “well then why don’t we just use Windows?” and oss will be out the door.
Linux needs a STANDARD (IE: comes in EVERY Distro by default) answer to The mmc, Active Directory, and Remote Desktop. This is the 21st century guys. The Terminal needs to go the way of the dodo.
October 31st, 2006 at 2:23 pm
[…] Interestingly, an old debate is resurfacing in the Linux community with the recent posting on Mark Shuttleworth’s blog. For those that don’t know, Mr. Shuttleworth is the luminary behind Ubuntu (and the many other *buntu’s) Linux. His company, Canonical, foots the bill for the development of a rather revolutionary new distribution. It is available completely free, and you can even order a free CD sent to you without charge. Their motto at Ubuntu is “it should just work” and by and large their distribution doesn’t disappoint. It is probably one of the best constructed distributions I have ever installed. This is no mean feat. Many Linux companies produce two versions of their distribution - the free version, and the commercial version. The idea is that the free version generates interest and sales of their commercial version. The problem with this model is that often the free versions are buggy and difficult to work with, and serve merely as hooks to shelling out for the commercial version (a la “you wouldn’t be having this problem if you paid for it” alerts). I have found this to be particularly so with the latest Mandriva 2007 Free release, but have also run into it with Fedora. I digress, however. […]
October 31st, 2006 at 3:12 pm
Beautiful would be nice but could we get things like printer and sound card drivers that work first? My recent Ubuntu install on my residential Dell 8200/Canon Pixma involved many hours of trolling around for drivers. Printing/sound is still sporadic at best. (This was, however, by far the easiest and best Linux installation I’ve ever experienced.) WinXP on that same box has no problems with printing or sound. Unfortunately, WinXP also has that annoying malware infestation problem or I wouldn’t even have to bother with Linux. I really just want a machine that my family can use without bugging me for tech support all time and I’m too cheap to buy a Mac.
October 31st, 2006 at 4:35 pm
[…] Mark Shuttleworth’s recent post on the new gaudy desktop prettiness of Ubuntu has received a good deal of interest and discussion (more than 130 comments and counting). […]
October 31st, 2006 at 5:43 pm
Oddly enough I find both the Mac and the Gnome interface make me spend more time fighting them than being able to work. KDE is for the most part what I use, Windows I fight with almost as much as Mac and Gnome. None of the modern Interfaces KDE, Gnome, Mac, or Windows should impede the users ability to do whatever work they are trying to do. Of all the UI systems I use only KDE allows me to configure it the way I like and allows me to do the work I want with a minimal amount of hassle.
Cheers,
Cthulhu
November 1st, 2006 at 1:42 am
I also agree with another user’s comment that the biggest thing should be making sure the average user can get their system working with no problem. There is no way to set up PPPoE without command line (my system wouldn’t let me use the graphical set up because it wasn’t accepting my sudo pw). This is a problem because as the user a few comments above me stated, lots of things don’t work out of the box. I’ve helped people on IRC that need help with their all in one printer, but then their scanner doesn’t work. I can’t have multiply programs using sound (I know their is a work around, but their SHOULDN’T be a work around). The important thing should be having a Ubuntu box that will take a user with many different variables and their system should be set to work. I understand the current split with F/OSS vs propriety issues, not all the hardware vendors make it possible to have drivers (Fatality sound card comes to mind) however it is a shame that the community can’t just hack up a driver.
Let me say the current Ubuntu default desktop is ugly. It is my opinion that brown/orange is an awful combination. I would rather look at the Kubuntu desktop because it doesn’t hurt my eyes to look at it. Look at Kubuntu Edgy, they took a step that involved Blue and Purple, it was controversial, (I enjoyed it) but it broke from KDE blue blue blue blue blue model, making Kubuntu much more distinct.
I believe *nix is about choice. From what I understand FC6 brought people back to their distro by including desktop effects into their default installed. I played around with XGL/Compiz but decided I didn’t like it. Compiz has a memory leak and slowed down my computer. In hindsight. I was more productive without it. I think maybe for 7.04, we should bundle Beryl/AIGLX or something along those lines, but have an option that says, “Here is what beryl is all about, install it?” and have a beryl walkthrough. Alternatively, we would need a one-click Beryl uninstalled for users unhappy with desktops effects.
November 1st, 2006 at 2:58 am
i would agree, pretty AND stable should do it.
November 1st, 2006 at 3:53 am
It’s obvious that Mark, among others, just doesn’t get it. Eye candy is not what the world needs to make Linux a viable OS replacement on the corporate or home desktops. KDE and/or Gnome do a fine enough job for most users (of course power users like to tweak).
What Linux needs to be successful is better / more fool-proof installation shells for applications! I consider myself very technically inclined (24 years experience with computer hardware/software - work in the industry - my first computer ran DOS 3.2 - pre-windows, etc.) I’ve played around with many different Linux distro’s (Ubunto, OpenSuse, RedHat, Knoppix, Debian, OpenBSD, Slackware, etc). The one problem I’ve run into on every one is getting the various applications I need installed.
Regardless of how well the company making the dristo does in implementing their “packaging” software, I always end up needing to research dependancies, permissions, and/or text-based configurations on my own. The dependancies are the worst! This application depends on that library which isn’t included. That library depends on another. That library has some archane configuration file that about 68% fully documented, etc.
No non-technical corporate or home users are going to be able to go through all that. It’s frustrating enough for us geeks!
Windows on the other hand has the rare odd case that requires a VB runtime or the .net framework installed. Other than that, 99.99% of the applications out there install/run right out of the box (download).
(I assume this is true for Macs as well - I don’t get my Macbook until spring!)
So until the Lin