Slashdot Mirror
Design A Standard For the Linux Standards Base
The widely reknowned HeUnique points to this LinuxWorld article, writing: "LSB wants to ask the Linux community people -- well, the artists among them -- to create an LSB logo." Rather cool to see a contest one of the rules of which is "All submissions must be created using Linux and native Linux tools. Frankly, most of us don't have a clue about how to check for violations. Just do it. We trust you." You've got until March 1st to submit two copies of your award-worthy artwork. See that LinuxWorld site for the full schmear, though. The LSB has been quiet for a little while, hopefully this contest hints (like the article does) at some action in the near future.
There's always good old xfig, but if that's too primitive for ya, try sketch.
How about this: you are an obvious imbecile.
I didn't say a damned thing about the GIMP. I like the GIMP. I use the GIMP.
For making any sort of logo or image that is going to be printed in a wide arrangement of sizes, you **HAVE** to use a vector format or all you'll end up printing is a blurry smudge.
And I'd LOVE to see you try and print some professional level brochures and what not with the GIMP. No CMYK color-space you say? Oh, well, I guess I'll just have to use my BLOATED software on another platform that actually is geared towards designers.
Hmm.. streaming media company. What company would that be? Would you mind posting a link to some of your work perhaps?
Rami
0o0o0o0o
rJames.org - illustration
Dude. 600/1200dpi? Magazines publish at 2400+ DPI. At that resoultion, a page-size graphic consumes over 2 gig of memory. Without the big-memory patches, Linux won't even handle that much. And I don't even want to think of trying to do a poster-sized logo in GIMP. Use REAL tools, it will make your life easier...
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I think he was trying to be funny. And if he wasn't, and actually *likes* Mandrake's logos, then somebody call a medic...
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Irreverent (in the context of the quote) means kinda offbeat, unusual, silly even. Mandrake's logos are definately silly. Maybe I shoulda said cutesy?
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
There is Gimp, and photoshop-like tools such as Killustrator and Sketch which are good tools (not as good as Illustrator, that's true). Anyway, the article doesn't say if running Illustrator inside Linux+Plex86+Windows or running Linux+Wine+Illustrator is forbiden ;)
Ironically, old Cray computers were developed using a lot of Macs.
This kind of circular time travel must stop at once, or I will report it to the timecops!
Seriously, how can you tell on which machine a design was made? There was a time when saying something was "computer designed" gave it an aura of technological sophistication, but that was long before most /.ers were born.
Of course, sometimes it's easy. To tell if a website was designed using microsoft software, look for the telltale '?' symbols that appear where quotation marks should be.
As a previous poster mentioned, the availability of good vector illustration products for Linux is either questionable or nonexistant.
:D), surfing, chatting, etc. Ih have used the Gimp for small graphics tweaking, but would enjoy the challenge :D
:D
I assume it is possible to export to an EPS directly from GIMP, but this is hardly any more than a raster inclusion into a "scalable" PS file. I would think (correct me if i'm wrong) that it is no more resizeable than a high-res TIFF.
I hope to enter something myself, but I ususally do my design work in Windows/Macintosh and use my Linux machine for hacking unix (or learning/trying to do so, anyways
So, anyone know of some good vector illustration programs for linux ala Freehand or Illustrator?
BTW, I guess designing the logo on the Mac and then "reproducing" it from scratch on the Linux machine is out of the question?
Alex Diaz
Look through their mail archives, and you will find the leaders of the LSB are all focused on making it easier for COMMERCIAL software companies to write Linux software.
Bah. The *ORIGINAL* selling out happened long before.
Just like the 1980's "Great Unix Unification" effort, when UNIX was going to have 'one interface' and be able to act as 'one market', the common binary on X86 effort was to obtain Unity. With this Unity, developers could be approached and told "write once, to this standard. Run all of these places."
The in-fighting and "use our implementation" ended up with "linux ELF" as the "standard". Ok fine.
The LSB group will NEVER obtain a workable standard because it is not SEEN to be in the interest of the bigger players in the linux market to allow the smaller players a "software stamp of approval". The "runs on redhat" stamp makes the use of RedHat a "supported option" instead of unsuported in the case of the other 180+ linux distros. And to choose "supported" or "unsupported" is an easy choice.
The LSB will only obtain the reluctant approval of RedHat and their bretheren when some outside force makes them feel their existance is threatened. At the moment, nothing like this exists. And the feeling that "Open source will take over - hence Linux will take over" makes a waiting game a win for RedHat and the other big players.
The LSB (or whatever standard replaces it) should be a standard anyone can Bake-Off their binary application against. And, any of the linux distros of the week should be able to run said application that was Baked-off VS the LSB.
If the "Linux community" (as opposed to the GNU/Linux community) wanted to show they had some balls, they'd:
1) Pubically throw up their hands and say "for 2+ years of effort, we have nothing to show, therefore this process is a failure."
2) Admit that "The goal however is worthwhile"
3) Point to the Linux emulation/compatibility modes of SCO/BSD/Sun and state "These are your bake off targets" under the idea that "If your Linux binaries can run on these machines, they should run anyplace else." Becasue for all the talk about how 'quickly' the 'open source world' can move, movement on the LSB has not happened. Code exists to provide a 'bake off' standard.
At a minimum, a "standard" would allow for more companies to have one less excuse to *NOT* produce programs that run on the "non Microsoft, non Macintosh" platforms. At a maximum, RedHat and others would see such a declaration as a 'threat' and actually MOVE to publish a "sanctioned standard". A standard the SCO/BSD/Sun would be able to get behind. A standard that can GROW the whole market.
If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
This is great fun watching slashdot folks talk about graphics. About as entertaining as listening to a bunch of graphic designers debate cobol versus Java, and just as accurate (see, the null pointer variable is creating an overflow into your read-only memory, dude!).
:)
First: Its absolutely idiotic to demand the logo be created in Linux. I mean, I know there are a lot of k3w1 linux kids out there who just love to get down with the gimp, but lets face reality here: if your goal is to have a good, professional logo that reflects well on the companies and community, dont set artificial limitations on the toolset. If you want some half-assed gimp graphic ("Look, your logo's on fire!") then by all means eliminate from consideration anyone who knows what they are doing.
Second: Please, dear god, everyone stop talking about specs.
Having Petreley say "Four colors or less often works quite well" is as annoying to a designer as saying "Try to keep the buffer overflows to a minimum" would be to a programmer. If anyone is planning on using Hexachrome for their logo design (or more than 4 spots), I'd love to know about it so I can be sure to never, ever work on a project with you ("what do you mean my business card will cost $10,000 to print?")
For those of you who can't figure out the issue between eps and TIFF, don't sweat it but please stop suggesting that you can just resample a TIFF to make it fit at any size. You can't. Yes, you can put a TIFF in an eps (hell, you could put the entire encyclopedia brittanica in an eps -- its just a wrapper format, like quicktime), no it won't make it scale any better. We'll just assume that when they ask for an eps that they are really asking for some vector graphic file in an eps format.
For future Consideration:
The kinds of things that might actually get you a good logo are never mentioned, presumably because they don't know the questions to ask (consider someone telling you to write a program for them, telling how many lines the source should be, what compiler to use, and never telling you what its for!).
What is wrong/disliked about the current logo? It does look very MS-office-ish (similar to the intelocking puzzle pieces) but is that the only thing they didn't like? Do they want something that conveys cooperation, cutting edge technology, stability, or what? These are all very different concepts, with different ways of representing them. If you focus on making an identity that highlights cooperation, you're making a trade-off against a feeling of speed and cuttin-edge tech. So which do they prefer? Damned if I know, they just want it at 640x480.
We seem to go through these same messages every time an article on GUI, logos, etc comes up here -- its fine if programmers don't want to know about how that stuff works, but its more than just a "pretty picture". Fedex did not spend millions of dollars redesigning their logo in the 90s because they wanted it to be "prettier". Having a window manager with "more colors" does not enhace the GUI.
Focus on what you are actually trying to do, and what you want to communicate -- not what color it should be (here's a design hint: if it matters what color your logo is, your logo IS BROKEN)
In a typical identity project, this would be an iterative process -- you'd bring one design for "cooperaton", one for "high-tech", etc -- and discuss with the client which they prefer, why, and then go back and incorporate the feedback. This is a one-shot deal, equivelent to programming an application without ever talking to the user, without having a beta test, and just dropping off an executable, never to be seen again. Sounds like a project I'm sure most programmers would LOVE to work on, right?
---------------------------------------------
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
Oh, god forbid that some Linux distros actually become COMPATIBLE and CONSISTANT. We UNIX grognards could never stand *anything* that was CONSISTANT. God help us, what are we going to do? People actually want to make MONEY of a good OS. How can we stop these capitalist bastards?
Good grief, quit complaining. If Linux get unified that would be a *good* thing, both for companies, and users. Not many people give a flying f*ck about tailoring their distro to their exact wants. Most people just want to use something that works well, without fussing with it. For these people, and LSB standard is a good thing. And for those people who couldn't stand a standard, well, Linux is free for a reason. The Debians and Slackwares of the world will always be around to annoy monolithic, all consuming companies like RedHat. Ideally, the LSB would write a strong standard, distros (but not all of them!) would follow it, and the free nature of Linux could be harnessed to keep the standard from becoming crappy.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
"All submissions must be created using Linux and native Linux tools." - That's the point where I stopped reading. It's just too silly for me.
All submissions must be created using Linux and native Linux tools
Just another example of how the Linux industries discriminates and unfairly competes against those who choose not to use its tools.
sub Save your precious mod points, I am joking subHopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
Whoaaa, that's the dumbest thing I've heared for a long time. That's like Ford hiring a contract product designer to work on their new car and requiring that the product designer drive a Ford.
Now, if this were, say, the Gimp, looking for a new logo then there'd be _some_ sense in it. It would be like Ford requiring that their travelling sales staff drive Ford cars.
You know, I'd bet that 90% of all Microsoft Marketing output is done on Macs, since that's what most advertising creative departments use. And I bet Microsoft really doesn't care about that because it's looking for an end product that's of high quality, not high ideology.
-----
The LSB is something that is very badly needed in the Linux community, but I have to ask: how long has the LSB been around, and to date has anything useful come from it (e.g. a distribution that actually follows the standard)?
-Karl
The rules indicate that the logo will be used on product boxes, and at a variety of sizes. A bitmapped image will neither scale well nor necessarily be of an adequate resolution to go to press.
:)
I'm probably showing my ignorance, but is there a Gimp of the Illustrators/Freehands out there? And if not, why not?
This is not a troll.
And why not? I am a graphic designer by trade and hobby, and I would love to submit something into this contest, but I can't because the tools and the operating system that I love and use (MacOS and adobe products) are not "supported".
The LSB is shooting itself in the foot with this one. I think that some of the most talented people out there are in a similar situation as myself and the LSB is going to end up with a subpar selection of logos to choose a winner from because of it.
Linux may be a great server, a wonderful programming environment and an OK desktop, but the one thing that it is not is a graphics workstation.
And until they have a decent, full featured vector illustration program you won't see me or much of my fellow trades(wo)men working on linux.
Rami
--
rJames.org - illustration
--
This sort of thing dose happen and makes perfictly good managment sence. An employee using a compeating product is both an endorcment of the product and an emberrisment to the employer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Except, not really. Nobody even knows what the people behind the scenes use. A lot of people at the MS campus use *NIX. MS really doesn't care as long as they get a good product.
This is much worse when you have Linux advocates making logos using Windows
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Who cares? Isn't Linux about using the best product for the job? I don't know when Linux became a religion, but last thing I heard, people used it because it was better/freer/cheaper, not because it was anything not Windows.
Linux has very good graphics software and unless people are willing to spring for $2,000 profesional rendering pacages you are not likely to get much better results on other platforms.
>>>>>>>>
Except not really. For anything 3D, Linux is out until Maya gets ported. (Yea right, Blender, don't make me laugh.) Then there is the GIMP==Photoshop arguement. Ha ha, funny. Also, anybody who is in the graphics arts business already has Photoshop, so its not a new investment. Of course, the logo is going to end up being some amaturish spiral, so its not like what tool is used matters anyway.
PS> Yes, that's the whole problem with Linux. Crappy logos. For example...
A) The X logo. Black and what? How '80's of them. Oh wait...
B) The Redhat logo. Two tone? No style whatsoever.
C) The Debian logo. A spiral? How damn creative.
D) The Mandrake logos: Good grief, if I see any more purple cartoon penguins, I'll scream.
E) The freaking penguin: I'm sorry, but compared to the BSD Daemon, Sting (an unofficail BeOS mascot), or even the flying Windows, Tux just look uncool. Needs to lose some weight too.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
You dont have have to agree, in which case you can revel in the irony that the gnu poster boy - Linux - is a cesspool of competing commercial insterests which serve no one but individual distributions.
Debian is as close to FreeBSD (in intent, not necessarily quality) as Linux is ever going to get. This LSB is wasted effort.
Fuck em.
--
--
Eat right, exercise regularly, die anyway.
If you like them, more power to ya. I think they look cheesy. I prefer "cool" logos over "funny and irreverent" (Linus quote from boot magazine) logos, but that's just me... and four fifths of the adult population...
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Peck of Penguin Picasso's The Linux Pimp
--It's Pimptastic!--
This is the key difference between meat-world communism and bit-world communism. The payoff for the cooperative behavior is much higher. This fits in quite nicely to a modified PD-norms explanation (Prisoner's Dillemma).
So that, my friends, is why Linux is winning out over OpenBSD. The good ole communist GPL cooperative contract. Anyway, just some thoughts on this. Regardless, I am a meritocrat. Let the best tools win, there's no need to force bad tools on a person, when what we care about is the product. If the winner doesn't use the GIMP, the GIMP should use the winner's feedback to see what's missing and improve their product. There's nothing worse than shitty software.
it was designed by Mandrakesoft's designers... They definately do the best graphisms related to Linux. See inside the latest Mandrake! A bit simple but I love those graphisms and they associate Linux with highly-positive image which is good for Linux...