Lisi Reisz wrote:

> On Tuesday 08 March 2016 20:07:51 Thomas Maus wrote:
>> > 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 was attracting more users.  Users who dislike all this "bling" that is
> so
> fashionable now.  Tim asked me to stop.  I have stopped.  You want TDE to
> compete with all these other desktops.  TDE appeals to those who do not
> want this competition.

Lisi, with all the respect - I do not think this is related. We all agree we
like TDE because KDE3.5 was most stable and usable. (Let's focus on the
common points).
We now have a new versioning and new name KDE 3.5 -> TDE 14
It seems logical to me to provide a new logo and complete this part of the
transition.
Regarding the logo - who cares actually about the logo that much? Is it more
important than stability and functionality? I do not think so.
I think TDE14 should have a new logo and completely agree with Thomas. The
old logo with the gear is causing negative connotations to KDE, which
failed for 2nd time in the past 5y to provide something stable and working.
I even do not mind if one changes the look and feel ( as far as it is not
childish colorful as someone suggested recently) but more options would
definitely add value to TDE in terms of new users.
I doubt however that this will attract that many new users. In terms of
younger users the look and feel is probably more important, but who am I to
judge.

> 
>> 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.
> 
> There is no need to be offensive.  I asked why "we" need a new logo.  We
> know what you think and demand that the rest of us think.
> 
> Your credentials in Open Source are not relevant to your insistence that
> your opinion has to be taken as incontrovertible fact.
> 
> Moreover you are ignoring the fact that Tim asked me not to proselytise.
> 
> You may feel that _you_ have already answered the questions I asked.  I
> asked
> them of "us".  Plural, not dual.  I know what you think.  What about all
> those who have so far said nothing?  What about all those on the users
> list?
> 
> You ARE wanting change for change's sake.  You want change because TDE is
> not "modern" enough.  That is change for change's sake.
> 
> The idea of having two completely different logos is IMHO a complete
> non-starter and makes nonsense of having a logo.

But new logo would be appropriate for the new TDE 14 branch, no?

> 
> You _will_ lose present users if you go along the track you want.  This
> may,
> of course, be part of your design.  You are of course going to supply the
> large amount of money needed to expand the hardware capacity of the
> project to be able to cater for large numbers of new users.

Wow, are you a prophet or if your statement is based on numbers/arguments
let us/me see them.
I do not think that the new user attraction has to do something with the
logo, however it would be good to cut the connection to KDE with their
insane mentality.

> 
> The release candidates for PCLinuxOS interestingly had a garish,
> deliberately
> Windows-like, logo.  It was ditched by the time of the first release.
> 
> I actually think that your analysis of the "problems" is completely wrong,
> and
> largely irrelevant.  There are IMHO obstacles to expansion that interpose
> long before you get to the point where it is too old fashioned or
> otherwise. Destroying the essence of the project will not lead to huge
> numbers of users. And if it were to do so, it would not make any
> difference if TDE was no more.
> 

I thought we are talking about a logo - did I miss something?
I have seen such transitions in big companies and mostly it is success. The
point is to cut the associations with KDE.

I personally do not care what logo it has. I would like to see some changes
in the look and feel or at least have more choice and I do not mind trying
something more "modern". The present discussion however is about a new
logo - I still do not understand why you oppose the idea so strong - it's
just a f***ing image of something - and the one with the gear is ugly, so
anything will be better in my opinion.
I never associate a gear with a working something. It is not bad but the
triquetra is way much better.

Why don't we vote on it? I have the subjective impression most of the people
here liked the triquetra idea.

I also do not like the type of arguments with authority - is it a "free
community" or is it not? Who cares who is who here - the logo is the
message, so you have two sides - the subjective and the objective.
The objective is covered by the message, the subjective is for each one of
us - it is simply I like it or I do not.
It makes no sense to argue about the subjective part, while arguing about
the objective part leads to the conclusion that some improvement in the
look and feel and in particular changing the logo will gain benefit for the
project.
If TDE was an enterprise it would have launched the new version of TDE with
a new logo, but it is not, however it is never late to do so.

regard