Another default theme coming

Martian · Post by **Martian** » June 6th, 2004, 10:39 am

marc00s wrote:These new icons just look as if they were taken from Netscape 4.x classic theme (or another 1996 app) and colorized. Also, the colors used in these are too flashy, Qute looks a lot calmer and does not distract the user from the webpages.

Yes.

Further critique (good and bad) of the new icons:

1. The Bookmark Manager buttons are excellent. The Qute icons use a giant greeen "+" that distracts from the actual purpose of the icon. The new icons reduce the size of the "+" so I can easily figure out whether I'm making a new bookmark, folder, or separator. And the "New Separator" button is great.

2. The new icons are too pointy. Windows figured that out when they moved to XP: people like soft, curved shapes.

3. The "Stop" button is startling and too much like a stop sign. A stop sign is bright red and octagonal and makes you almost jump out of your skin when you see it. This is good because drivers need to stop at stop signs. But web surfers don't need to be reminded to stop when they are loading a web page. The "Stop" button is used only occasionally; it should be more subtle -- an option for the user without being overbearing.

4. The new icons attempt to stand alone and resist integration with the Firefox interface. This is most noticeable in the slight shadows at the bottom of the icons. The shadows make the icons look like billboards or supermodels on a runway -- standing up and wanting attention. But they fail to then be cozy and clickable. A browser is a very personal piece of software and should use icons that are also personal and not standoffishly distant.

5. The "Home" button looks nothing like my home. My home has life in it. It is not a static neo-cool symbol for a house. (The Qute icon, on the other hand, actually looks like a house I might want to go inside: it breathes.)

6. The colors are cool, but not friendly. They need more value contrast, and the colors need to become more organic and friendly. They should still be cool, but not to the point of becoming beyond human (which they are now). We are, after all, quite earthy creatures.

Cheers.

TheOneKEA · Post by **TheOneKEA** » June 6th, 2004, 10:40 am

bangbang023 wrote:What the hell is with all the bashing of Ben? It's just pathetic how one move, a simple change of the default theme, causes you all to freak out. So, yes, the theme doesn't look too great, but to continue this bashing of Ben is just ridiculuous and outright wrong. Just a few weeks ago everyone was talking about the new extension manager he implemented and now this huge turn around? Give me a break.

It's egocentrism - everybody thinks that they know how things should be done and don't like the fact that Ben is doing it some other way *shrug*

z43420024 · Post by **z43420024** » June 6th, 2004, 10:41 am

Thumper wrote:
jedbro wrote:Out of respect, Ben and the Identity team should have contacted Arvid and had multiple discussions about licensing and ideas for a NEW theme post Deceber 9th, 2003.

Why? In the past Arvid has blocked changes to Qute. When asked if he would open Qute he said no. No contracts were broken. If Arvid wasn't willing to relicense Qute I don't see why he would be willing to negotiate new terms on a new theme short of being paid for it.

A lot of us here (the majority perhaps) think the "new theme" is much inferior to QUTE's standards and a very bad move for pushing Firefox on windows.

I don't. It'll look a lot better at 16x16 than either Qute or Pinstripe and the license will allow me to make a 16x16 theme and release it without begging permission. Heck, with any luck we'll finally get correct Windows icon sizes (16x16 and 32x32) because the theme will just be another thing to file bugs on.

- Chris

Even if it is sensible to assume that Arvid is not willing to relicense Qute, you can only say that it's an appropriate decision to create a new theme to replace Qute. However, it doesn't mean that Arvid should not be informed the situation.

How's the future theme development of thunderbird? It's better to clarfiy the situation.

e-Gandalf · Post by **e-Gandalf** » June 6th, 2004, 10:42 am

esavior wrote:(...)
I am a JUST one of two million users
I do not matter.

I feel the same. No matter how it is obvious and trivial - it hurts

Thumper's Evil Twin · Post by **Thumper's Evil Twin** » June 6th, 2004, 10:42 am

Got a source for that? I'm not contesting that he didn't say it, I'd just like to read the whole backstory myself.

Go search the Thunderbird forums for "new folder icons" or whatever it was.

Are you talking about the same license that allows people to create derivative works of the Firefox artwork? Oh wait.

Pinstripe's tri-licensed. Read my earlier post.

I also feel that it would be a bad PR move to move to a theme so customized that it doesn't look like anything anyone uses on Windows or Linux... If I wanted my applications to look like OSX, I'd run OSX.

It looks nothing like OSX. If I were you I'd actually have a look at the new theme before posting about how you don't like it.

I would entirely support a code fork to a group of people with more of a community driven solution as well. Or rather, a group of people who acknowledge that it has always been a community driven solution, as opposed to the current organization that refuses to admit it.

Without the community, Firefox would be nothing, Ben Goodger would be a nobody, and we would all be using Opera.

I don't know whether I'm more offended by your arrogance in assuming that Mozilla owes you anything or your ignorance in the development of the browser. Mozilla development would (and did) get on absolutely fine without the MozillaZine forums. "The community" is the group adding patches to Bugzilla, not the peanut gallery around here. Keep your ad hominem attacks to yourself.

- Chris

esavior · Post by **esavior** » June 6th, 2004, 10:43 am

bangbang023 wrote:What the hell is with all the bashing of Ben? It's just pathetic how one move, a simple change of the default theme, causes you all to freak out. So, yes, the theme doesn't look too great, but to continue this bashing of Ben is just ridiculuous and outright wrong. Just a few weeks ago everyone was talking about the new extension manager he implemented and now this huge turn around? Give me a break.

Sorry to disagree bang, but I read through this entire thread and it was more bashing the decision than bashing ben. Infact there was actually some praise of ben here, the general gist I get is people feel its a bad decision, granted some of this might be change is bad mentality but some may truely feel this was a bad choice. Also I would like to point out if my post came off as bashing ben I apologize.

steeler_fan · Post by **steeler_fan** » June 6th, 2004, 10:49 am

I like the new theme--it's not better, it's not worse (hell, its not finished) than Qute. It's just different. Every change that Fx goes through (just look at the name) there is a 30 page thread of people saying "DOWN WITH GOODGER!!" and "I'LL NEVER USE PHOENIX AGAIN!!!" (yes, Phoenix, just to be defiant). If you don't like it, you can use a new theme (if Arvid doesn't release Qute as a standalone, I'm sure someone else will). As for "people will be confused"...how? If you are showing someone Firefox for the first time, they won't know that Qute was ever used. Winstripe doesn't look that bad, you people are overreacting. Sure, this maybe could have been handled more diplomatically, but it's not up to us, it's between The Mozilla Foundation and Arvid.

As for all of you people leaving, you won't be missed. If a theme change will drive you from such a brilliant browser, then good riddance. Have fun with Opera or Internet Explorer. Just to repeat, you can use Qute (assuming Arvid releases it, of course). I have yet to see Ben check-in code that prevents Qute from being used. Have you tried K-meleon recently? Maybe you'd be better off there.

(I'd like to take this time out to thanks /. for making mozillaZine Forums such a wonderful place to visit right now)

wget · Post by **wget** » June 6th, 2004, 10:49 am

Thumper wrote:
Are you talking about the same license that allows people to create derivative works of the Firefox artwork? Oh wait.

Pinstripe's tri-licensed. Read my earlier post.

You completely missed my point. As I understand it the Firefox artwork isn't Free either (for various reasons that aren't really related to this discussion). What makes Qute different?

Quark · Post by **Quark** » June 6th, 2004, 10:51 am

I find all this griping funny, when the first thing I do when I mess around with Firefox (read: upgrade it, clean out profile, etc) is change it to a theme I like more, mostly Pinball.

Don't like the default theme? Use a different one. Wait, that's not a good idea. That would only take 1/10th the effort you guys waste on these fora.

Mat · Post by **Mat** » June 6th, 2004, 10:52 am

thanks for the screenshot
some icons actually do look better than Qute (eg. the "New Folder" icon in the Bookmark manager

Everything else just looks like Qute...

btw: if you change themes, you could merge stop & Reload to one button

Anthropic · Post by **Anthropic** » June 6th, 2004, 10:54 am

What makes Qute different?

The artwork is not a functional part of the program...However, a default theme is.

dunda · Post by **dunda** » June 6th, 2004, 10:54 am

Thumper wrote:I don't know whether I'm more offended by your arrogance in assuming that Mozilla owes you anything or your ignorance in the development of the browser. Mozilla development would (and did) get on absolutely fine without the MozillaZine forums. "The community" is the group adding patches to Bugzilla, not the peanut gallery around here.

Hello thumper, are you one of the core devs? You sure sound like one!

The success of firefox is owed to those who advertise it for no other reason than they are passionate about it. It is difficult to tear people from IE but we are doing it.

We are not the peanut gallery, we are the people standing outside the theatre trying to get people to come in and see the show, and more...

Thumper's Evil Twin · Post by **Thumper's Evil Twin** » June 6th, 2004, 10:58 am

wget wrote:You completely missed my point. As I understand it the Firefox artwork isn't Free either (for various reasons that aren't really related to this discussion). What makes Qute different?

The external artwork is more for marketing than anything else. There's already tri-licensed artwork available. The internal art (the theme) is actually a necessary part of the browser code.

The default theme not being free means it can't be hacked on. The application icon is mostly there for identification rather than function: the theme isn't. I want a 16x16 / 32x32 default theme with icons spacing which matches the Windows norms. I can't do so with Qute. I can with Pinstripe.

The success of firefox is owed to those who advertise it for no other reason than they are passionate about it. It is difficult to tear people from IE but we are doing it.

That you recommend Firefox to someone gives you zero rights to say how it is developed. It never has. You should never have been under any illusion that this was not the case.

CeleronXL can have his fork where he is in ultimate control. I'm sure you and the rest of the hard-working advertisers can more than match Firefox's market share by pushing your fork on a lot of forums.

- Chris

steeler_fan · Post by **steeler_fan** » June 6th, 2004, 11:03 am

I also liked the post about "without the community Ben Goodger would be a nobody".

Seriously people grow up. Without Ben Goodger, you would still be using IE, or maybe SeaMonkey. (This is where all the smartass people come in and say "Well Phoenix was Dave Hyatt's project originally, so I would be using Phoenix!")

Qute wasn't the original theme of Phoenix, but there were no demands for Goodger's head when it was changed to Qute.

From the reaction, you would swear the announcement was "Gecko is out, Presto is in!" (using Presto, because I don't know the name of IE6's rendering engine)

MistFox · Post by **MistFox** » June 6th, 2004, 11:05 am

oh give it up everyone, it is not like the election commission is going to overturn the "results". if we can live through the name change, why can't we live through the theme change?