[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Should generic-logos' system-logo-white.png be a smiling hot dog with arms and legs?



On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 11:14:16PM +0300, Joonas Sarajärvi wrote:
> I recently noticed that the system-logo-white.png file in
> generic-logos is (imo) a quite weird and unprofessional-looking
> smiling hot dog with arms and legs. It is shown in the middle of the
> screen when booting the system on a machine where KMS works. I'd
> rather have something more neutral and Fedora-ish in the default boot
> screen, but I must replace fedora-logos with generic-logos on my
> custom spins of Fedora. Therefore, I filed a bug about it here:
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495561
> 
> I already got one reply from Bill Nottingham, who noted that the
> generic logos were supposed to be replaced by the creators of the
> custom spins. He also noted that this is the first bug about the file,
> and replacing the image may be considered, if there is more pressure
> to do so.
> 
> I think the current image may well have stayed under the radar due to
> the rarity of people replacing fedora-logos with generic-logos. Until
> now, it has also been quite rare to have KMS enabled, but F11 is going
> to greatly increase the visibility of the hot dog logo on systems with
> generic-logos.
> 
> Note that I'm not creating my own distribution, so creating my own
> logo packages and repos for them is quite an overkill. I'd just like
> to share some custom Fedora spins with my friends and not have to show
> them an annoying and cheesy smiling hot dog right on boot.
> 
> Do the people here think that the hot dog logo is good as it is, or
> should it maybe be changed to something more usual and maybe less
> annoying? I'd see no logo (a completely transparent png) a lot better
> than the current situation.
> 
> I hope I didn't offend anyone with my dislike for the current picture.
> Thanks for reading this, hope to hear some other opinions on this.
> 
If we don't make it obvious to people that they can change this logo
(whether via smiling hot dog or explicit documentation) then they won't
think they can change it.

Acceptable alternatives would not include Tux, IMHO, cuz it's not from
the Linux Foundation, and they kinda own the trademark. Also, a
transparent PNG doesn't make it known that, yes, there can be a logo
here. It's just simply not obvious enough.

A smiling face (see /usr/share/icons/gnome/scalable/emotes) or the
"Computer" icon in the default icon set would be good alternatives.

(Not to start a bikeshedding conversation or anything)

-- 
Ian Weller <ianweller gmail com>
GnuPG fingerprint:  E51E 0517 7A92 70A2 4226  B050 87ED 7C97 EFA8 4A36

Attachment: pgpYfX3NHejmt.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]