On Tuesday 08 March 2016, 11:41 wrote Lisi Reisz:
> Why do we need a new logo?  

I'm trying to lead a rational discussion here and I gave detailed arguments 
along this whole discussion thread. Have the kindness to read, consider and 
eventually falsify them -- the designs are secondary.


The KDE gear will not convey the same message to new users that it conveys to 
users intimately knowing KDE3.5 (and actually KDE4.7+). In other words: it 
conveys the wrong message to most of the people. IMHO nowadays it does damage 
to TDE.


How did I find Trinity?
Well, I was investigating into potential extended OpenSuSE support for KDE4 or 
KDE3.5 and stumbled over remarks on Trinitity TDE -- all being negative on 
grounds of looks and claims of stasis.

Well, luckily I give a * [insert an acceptable derogatory of your choosing] on 
the opinion of people, arguing purely on aesthetics ore vague perceptions, and 
figured that it would take me less time to install and test Trinitity TDE 
myself, than searching for any profound test. 

What did I find: 
A community keeping an excellent desktop not only alive, but improving it -- 
despite the fact that the improvements in e.g. TDErandrtray are quite buggy. 
I'm willing to see the potential, and contribute ... (most are not ...)

And the willingness to improve is necessary on many grounds:
* technological change: Wayland is coming and substituting X11 (and seeing how 
decision making in the Open Source community is going meanwhile, I'd not be 
surprised to see a (over-quick) demise of X11)
* improvements in other desktops: e.g. while XFCE was vastly inferior to 
KDE3.5 even 5 years ago, it meanwhile has nearly its level and is missing only 
a few (ergonomical important) features


So, how do I dare to suggest "change"?

Let's say: I'm not a complete stranger to Open Source community mechanics, 
since the early 80s ...

> And even more, why do we need a new colour
> scheme? We seem to be diving into design without asking those questions. 

I actually dived into these questions before presenting any draft, and 
deepened my argumentation on any response.

> The present blue is very pleasant, and changing logo often loses what one
> had before. Change for change's sake seems to me to be a Bad Thing.

As stated R+m times (m>0, R being the number of repetitions I find acceptable):

I do not want change for change's sake, but for a detailed list of arguments.
Read them and object to them ...

> ...
> The whole point of TDE is that it ISN'T new and glitzy and shiny.  It's
> functional.  That is its raison d'�tre and its strength.

All the functionality, and all the effort invested, is wasted if not used.

And actually the functionality contains the capability to support a modern 
looking desktop with superior features, compared to many current developments. 
So, why hide this power?
Why this "you can have the T-modell in any color, as long as it is black"?
The quality and functionality of the car  (and the desktop) is not in the 
least impaired if other choices for the paint work and the seats are 
available.

> ...
> Tim has said that what we need, in order to expand, is money and developers.
> I personally do not see how we are to get more developers and more money
> without more users. 

Exactly my point.
Now: How do you think to attract more users?

I'm open for suggestions and willing to support any promising idea in place of 
my own, because I would hate to see this project die a long agonizing death by 
starvation!

ciao,

ThoMaus