[ANN] Redesign 2005, Round Two
why the lucky stiff
design and it is now presented on the redesign blog:
http://redhanded.hobix.com/redesign2005/
We hope you will comment on the blog itself rather than here on
Ruby-Talk, in order that our team doesn't loose what you say in an
impending ocean.
With a paraffin banjo on my knee,
_why
gabriele renzi
I responde here and not on the blog since this message is not really
related to the Redesign, but more to VIT in general.
Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon, I think it would be
great to come up with some nice images to put on our own websites/blog.
I'm not just thinking of "ruby powered" images but also something like
"Ruby Developer", "I Love Ruby", "Ruby Contributor" and such on the
lines of the mono gif[1]. What do people think of this?
[1]
http://www.mono-project.com/files/9/9f/Mono-contributor-static.gif
pat eyler
> I responde here and not on the blog since this message is not really
> related to the Redesign, but more to VIT in general.
>
> Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon, I think it would be
> great to come up with some nice images to put on our own websites/blog.
> I'm not just thinking of "ruby powered" images but also something like
> "Ruby Developer", "I Love Ruby", "Ruby Contributor" and such on the
> lines of the mono gif[1]. What do people think of this?
I think that's a great idea. I'd also like to see a logo usable by Ruby
Brigades as well.
>
> [1]
> http://www.mono-project.com/files/9/9f/Mono-contributor-static.gif
>
>
--
thanks,
-pate
-------------------------
We are often unable to tell people what they need to know, because
they want to know something else, and would therefore only
misunderstand what we said
- the Raven (George MacDonald, Lilith)
James Britt
> Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon,
How do you know that?
I find the literal gem image boring and impractical (in contrast to Ruby
itself), and I may in fact be in the minority, but I don't know how I or
anyone would really know that.
And I really hope to steer clear of any sort of "official" Ruby logo.
James
Ilias Lazaridis
> I'm happy to say that our little redesign team has come to accord on a
> design and it is now presented on the redesign blog:
>
> http://redhanded.hobix.com/redesign2005/
The design looks much better than the existing one, and should replace
it ther earliest possible.
you should post a link to demo-publish-location, thus it can be
evaluated 'live'.
some suggestions:
* reduce header height (and image size)
* "A programmers best friend" sounds inprofessional
=> launch a community
* round the top left corners of the left boxes
* remove the buttom-left rounded corner of the code-box
* remove _any_ insider terminology on the main page
* decouple product from project
http://lazaridis.com/core/project/product.html
> We hope you will comment on the blog itself rather than here on
> Ruby-Talk, in order that our team doesn't loose what you say in an
> impending ocean.
>
> With a paraffin banjo on my knee,
>
> _why
>
>
Jason Foreman
Yea, I am not a fan of that logo either. I personally like Michel
Martens' version that looks like a red square with a thick red border
and the top-right corner is hacked off to give a sort of silhouette of
a ruby. Not that John's isn't a lovely image however.
John's image would also be a difficult one to reproduce nicely on
anything other than a computer screen, or at smaller sizes. It's got
that distinct Photoshop'd look to it.
But great work by all on the redesign!
Jason
Mark Hubbart
> why the lucky stiff wrote:
> > I'm happy to say that our little redesign team has come to accord on a
> > design and it is now presented on the redesign blog:
> >
> > http://redhanded.hobix.com/redesign2005/
>
> The design looks much better than the existing one, and should replace
> it ther earliest possible.
>
> you should post a link to demo-publish-location, thus it can be
> evaluated 'live'.
I wholeheartedly agree to that. I can't wait till this rolls out. It's
like watching my neighbors landscape.
> some suggestions:
> * reduce header height (and image size)
> * "A programmers best friend" sounds inprofessional
I like it. One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding
fun". I think it's a good idea to give that impression on the main
page of the main site. A little unprofessional, perhaps, but so are
recursive acronyms like PHP. I remember trying to explain that to my
boss once... He was not impressed :)
> => launch a community
> * round the top left corners of the left boxes
> * remove the buttom-left rounded corner of the code-box
> * remove _any_ insider terminology on the main page
> * decouple product from project
> http://lazaridis.com/core/project/product.html
It looks to me like the current design is entirely about the product.
I don't see a single link inviting people to work on the actual ruby
project. It all seems to be resources for working with the actual Ruby
product. Download it, read about it, get help with it, see what others
have written about it...
I don't think that any project resources should actually be available
on this page. We don't want people to work on Ruby unless they're
familiar enough with it to find out for themselves how to participate
in the project. Even that is small barrier to entry; read ruby-talk
for a couple weeks and you'll probably know how to go about
contributing to the project.
cheers,
Mark
gabriele renzi
> gabriele renzi wrote:
>
>> Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon,
>
>
> How do you know that?
I don't I just noticed this was the one that was chosen for the second
round of the redesign.
> I find the literal gem image boring and impractical (in contrast to Ruby
> itself), and I may in fact be in the minority, but I don't know how I or
> anyone would really know that.
>
> And I really hope to steer clear of any sort of "official" Ruby logo.
I don't ever thought of an "official" logo.
Notice I did not even said "logo" but "icon" on purpose since I liked
the more logoish things in other designs :)
There is obviously room for different images on the same theme (I think
a common *theme* is cool, but obviously people will always remain free
to use whatevere image they like)
Ilias Lazaridis
> On 5/10/05, Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
>
>>why the lucky stiff wrote:
>>
>>>I'm happy to say that our little redesign team has come to accord on a
>>>design and it is now presented on the redesign blog:
>>>
>>> http://redhanded.hobix.com/redesign2005/
>>
>>The design looks much better than the existing one, and should replace
>>it ther earliest possible.
>>
>>you should post a link to demo-publish-location, thus it can be
>>evaluated 'live'.
>
> I wholeheartedly agree to that. I can't wait till this rolls out. It's
> like watching my neighbors landscape.
ok
>>some suggestions:
>> * reduce header height (and image size)
>> * "A programmers best friend" sounds inprofessional
>
> I like it. One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding
> fun". I think it's a good idea to give that impression on the main
> page of the main site.
[...]
"Coding Efficiency / Productivity" must be pointed out, in a
straightforward, CTO / CEO capable tenor.
something like "Ruby - Get Productivity Back"
>> => launch a community
correction: "launch a community discussion on this"
>> * round the top left corners of the left boxes
>> * remove the buttom-left rounded corner of the code-box
>> * remove _any_ insider terminology on the main page
>> * decouple product from project
>> http://lazaridis.com/core/project/product.html
>
>
> It looks to me like the current design is entirely about the product.
[...]
> I don't think that any project resources should actually be available
> on this page.
[...]
A link "Project" belongs to the main page.
> cheers,
> Mark
.
Jim Weirich
James Britt said:
> I find the literal gem image boring and impractical (in contrast to Ruby
> itself), and I may in fact be in the minority, but I don't know how I or
> anyone would really know that.
The icon is striking and eyecatching, I tend to like it (at least how its
used on the page).
My only comment is that I have never seen a picture of an actual ruby gem
in that particular shape. I've seen ovals, circles and pear shapes
(amoung others), but nothing in that red diamond shape.
It probably doesn't matter, I doubt anybody really cares, but it does
bother me a bit.
BTW, I'm no expert on gems. I'm just going on what I've seen by googling
the topic. I would be thrilled if someone pointed out that Rubies do
actually occur in that shape.
--
-- Jim Weirich j...@weirichhouse.org http://onestepback.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)
Bill Guindon
>
> James Britt said:
> > I find the literal gem image boring and impractical (in contrast to Ruby
> > itself), and I may in fact be in the minority, but I don't know how I or
> > anyone would really know that.
>
> The icon is striking and eyecatching, I tend to like it (at least how its
> used on the page).
>
> My only comment is that I have never seen a picture of an actual ruby gem
> in that particular shape. I've seen ovals, circles and pear shapes
> (amoung others), but nothing in that red diamond shape.
>
> It probably doesn't matter, I doubt anybody really cares, but it does
> bother me a bit.
>
> BTW, I'm no expert on gems. I'm just going on what I've seen by googling
> the topic. I would be thrilled if someone pointed out that Rubies do
> actually occur in that shape.
googled "ruby diamond cut". that first link looks like the "Lucky
Charms" page :)
http://www.sndgems.com/rubyeducation.htm
http://www.raru.com/images/gemstones/93rubyhtrtsa.jpg
http://64.70.201.108/ruby-bands-new-10.jpg
> --
> -- Jim Weirich j...@weirichhouse.org http://onestepback.org
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
> not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)
>
>
--
Bill Guindon (aka aGorilla)
Jeff Barczewski
Dave Thomas gave a wonderful keynote "The Art of Programming" at the
NFJS conference in St. Louis which was very inspiring.
I think this design being very beautiful complements Ruby as well in
that the whole package should be considered art. Not only the coding
but the documentation and websites should reflect the professional
"step above" status of Ruby.
I think your redesign fits well with all of this.
Jeff
Nikolai Weibull
> One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding fun".
Then how about making the comment read “Ruby: Makes Programming Fun!”?,
nikolai
--
Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/!
Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden.
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}
James Britt
> James Britt ha scritto:
>
>> gabriele renzi wrote:
>>
>>> Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon,
>>
>>
>>
>> How do you know that?
>
>
> I don't I just noticed this was the one that was chosen for the second
> round of the redesign.
Sorry, then, I perhaps misunderstood who you thought was in agreement.
Basically, I think it's the half-dozen or so folks quietly working on
that site.
>
>> I find the literal gem image boring and impractical (in contrast to
>> Ruby itself), and I may in fact be in the minority, but I don't know
>> how I or anyone would really know that.
>>
>> And I really hope to steer clear of any sort of "official" Ruby logo.
>
>
> I don't ever thought of an "official" logo.
True. That was my spin.
> Notice I did not even said "logo" but "icon" on purpose since I liked
> the more logoish things in other designs :)
Same here.
> There is obviously room for different images on the same theme (I think
> a common *theme* is cool, but obviously people will always remain free
> to use whatevere image they like)
I count on that.
James
Michel Martens
> > James Britt ha scritto:
> >
> >> gabriele renzi wrote:
> >>
> >>> Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> How do you know that?
> >
> >
> > I don't I just noticed this was the one that was chosen for the second
> > round of the redesign.
>
> Sorry, then, I perhaps misunderstood who you thought was in agreement.
>
> Basically, I think it's the half-dozen or so folks quietly working on
> that site.
Hi James,
We kind of made our work based on our ideas and the feedback we've got
on the first round, but that doesn't mean that we will impose that
logo or that we all think it's perfect. In fact, I'm glad a lot of
people is participating right now and I liked to read your opinion, as
it all adds for a better outcome.
Michel.
Florian Groß
> Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon, I think it would be
> great to come up with some nice images to put on our own websites/blog.
> I'm not just thinking of "ruby powered" images but also something like
> "Ruby Developer", "I Love Ruby", "Ruby Contributor" and such on the
> lines of the mono gif[1]. What do people think of this?
This one has graphical problems and I know of them, but perhaps somebody
from the VI-Team would be able to take the idea and rework it
consistently into the style of the current gem graphic. I'm not sure
what the exacts requirements for being considered a "Ruby Hacker" would
be (do we need them at all?) but chris2 seems to have suggested that
being in the change log or not might be one. Here's the graphic:
Ilias Lazaridis
[...]
> some suggestions:
> * reduce header height (and image size)
> * "A programmers best friend" sounds inprofessional
> => launch a community
correction: "launch a community discussion on this"
> * round the top left corners of the left boxes
> * remove the buttom-left rounded corner of the code-box
correction: buttom-right
> * remove _any_ insider terminology on the main page
> * decouple product from project
> http://lazaridis.com/core/project/product.html
.
David A. Black
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
Ilias Lazaridis
> Mark Hubbart, May 11:
>
>
>>One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding fun".
>
> Then how about making the comment read “Ruby: Makes Programming Fun!”?,
> nikolai
Simply open an new thread, [SLOGAN] ..., and ask the community to post a
slogan.
Then collect the results on a wiki-page, thus anyone can review for some
time.
.
Paul Duncan
I've responded on the blog as well, but I thought I'd say (again) that
these designs look fantastic, and I'd like to see them put in place as
soon as possible.
I think the current page looks embarassingly bad.
> _why
--
Paul Duncan <pa...@pablotron.org> pabs in #ruby-lang (OPN IRC)
http://www.pablotron.org/ OpenPGP Key ID: 0x82C29562
James Britt
>
> Hi James,
>
> We kind of made our work based on our ideas and the feedback we've got
> on the first round, but that doesn't mean that we will impose that
> logo or that we all think it's perfect. In fact, I'm glad a lot of
> people is participating right now and I liked to read your opinion, as
> it all adds for a better outcome.
Oh I don't mean to suggest there is some sort of secret society planning
out the "Ruby look", and it would be crazy to try to get constant
feedback during the process.
James
ES
Le 10/5/2005, "David A. Black" <dbl...@wobblini.net> a écrit:
>Hi --
>that you be a Ruby hacker and want to call yourself that. (I usually
>go with "Rubyist".) Or that you are not one but want people to think
>you are :-)
Woo hoo! I will experiment a bit and put out a couple t-shirt
designs. There is an 'official' ruby non-profit, right?
>David
E
--
I am a ruby hacker!
Nikolai Weibull
> Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> > Mark Hubbart, May 11:
> > > One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding fun".
> > Then how about making the comment read “Ruby: Makes Programming
> > Fun!”?,
> Simply open an new thread, [SLOGAN] ..., and ask the community to post
> a slogan.
> Then collect the results on a wiki-page, thus anyone can review for
> some time.
please note:
The new [slogan] will not [be] selected by democracy (vote).
It results out of research, reasoning and rationality.
Or?,
Rob .
> Mark Hubbart, May 11:
> > One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding fun".
>
> Then how about making the comment read "Ruby: Makes Programming Fun!"?,
+1 for "Makes Programming Fun"
gabriele renzi
> Mark Hubbart, May 11:
>
>
>>One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding fun".
>
>
> Then how about making the comment read “Ruby: Makes Programming Fun!”?,
> nikolai
IMVVHO "Ruby: Fun Oriented Programming" is still the best :)
Nikolai Weibull
> IMVVHO "Ruby: Fun Oriented Programming" is still the best :)
That’d be “Ruby: Fun-Oriented Programming” actually. Perhaps this
spin-off is viable as well: “Ruby: Putting The ‘Fun’ In Object-Oriented
Programming”. This would be a reference to the “putting the ‘fun’ in
functional programming”-type comment about functional programming
languages,
John W. Long
am trying to communicate through the current design is the elegance of
the Ruby language. It's not just fun, it's beautiful. I want the website
to be that way too.
--
John Long
http://wiseheartdesign.com
Paul Battley
>> nikolai
>
Personally, I rather like the "best friend" slogan on the current
redesign, although I think it should be "The programmer's best friend"
rather than "A ~".
Paul.
David A. Black
I agree. I actually think that while programming Ruby is indeed fun,
asserting "fun" can be a turn-off. Let people discover it themselves
:-)
David
--
David A. Black
dbl...@wobblini.net
Paul Battley
the previous reply in the thread, I feel I should preemptively
apologise and attempt to shift the blame entirely onto Gmail's
flattened threading display. :-)
Paul.
Paul Battley
> I agree. I actually think that while programming Ruby is indeed fun,
> asserting "fun" can be a turn-off. Let people discover it themselves
> :-)
Exactly. If you need to say that something is fun, experience says
that it usually isn't!
Paul.
Nikolai Weibull
> Personally, I rather like the "best friend" slogan on the current
> redesign, although I think it should be "The programmer's best friend"
> rather than "A ~".
No, no. The indefinite is definitely the way to go,
gabriele renzi
> gabriele renzi, May 11:
>
>
>>IMVVHO "Ruby: Fun Oriented Programming" is still the best :)
>
>
> That’d be “Ruby: Fun-Oriented Programming” actually. Perhaps this
> spin-off is viable as well: “Ruby: Putting The ‘Fun’ In Object-Oriented
> Programming”. This would be a reference to the “putting the ‘fun’ in
> functional programming”-type comment about functional programming
> languages,
> nikolai
then should'nt our become "putting the 'proc' in .." ? :)
Nikolai Weibull
> > > IMVVHO "Ruby: Fun Oriented Programming" is still the best :)
> > That’d be “Ruby: Fun-Oriented Programming” actually. Perhaps this
> > spin-off is viable as well: “Ruby: Putting The ‘Fun’ In
> > Object-Oriented Programming”. This would be a reference to the
> > “putting the ‘fun’ in functional programming”-type comment about
> > functional programming languages,
> then should'nt our become "putting the 'proc' in .." ? :)
Heh, I guess so :-),
Karl von Laudermann
>
> Yea, I am not a fan of that logo either. I personally like Michel
> Martens' version that looks like a red square with a thick red border
> and the top-right corner is hacked off to give a sort of silhouette
of
> a ruby. Not that John's isn't a lovely image however.
I like the gem logo. The square logo that you like looks sterile and
corporate to me. The site mockup that uses it doesn't look like the
home page of an open source programming language with a vibrant user
community; it looks like the corporate web page of RubySoft, Inc.
> > John's image would also be a difficult one to reproduce nicely on
> anything other than a computer screen, or at smaller sizes. It's got
> that distinct Photoshop'd look to it.
Huh? What would you try to reproduce the image on, where it wouldn't
start out as a Photoshop file anyway? You want it on a piece of paper?
Print it out. You want it on a T-shirt or banner? Send the Photoshop
file to a print shop. The logo is all geometric shapes and gradient
fills. There's no reason the source image can't be vector-based instead
of pixel-based, and thus nicely scalable.
Check out some of the icons/logos/emblems/whatever used at the top of
these other open source project web pages. None of them are flat,
simple geometric shapes, and I'm sure they've all been
reproduced on T-shirts and trade show banners.
http://www.freebsd.org/
http://www.linux.org/
http://www.gimp.org/
http://www.opendarwin.org/
Karl von Laudermann
Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> Mark Hubbart, May 11:
>
> > One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding fun".
>
> Then how about making the comment read "Ruby: Makes Programming
Fun!"?,
Or how about "Ruby: Rediscover the Joy of Programming"
Michel Martens
> Check out some of the icons/logos/emblems/whatever used at the top of
> these other open source project web pages. None of them are flat,
> simple geometric shapes, and I'm sure they've all been
> reproduced on T-shirts and trade show banners.
> http://www.freebsd.org/
> http://www.linux.org/
> http://www.gimp.org/
> http://www.opendarwin.org/
Karl, those are examples of bad logos. The Ruby gem is infinitely
better than that.
Besides: I don't think that all open source projects should look
alike, and good design can be found in projects like Firefox, Mozilla
(http://www.mozilla.org), PostgreSQL (http://www.postgresql.org/),
WordPress (http://wordpress.org/), etc.
Michel.
Jason Foreman
There is a huge difference between a nice image, and a logo. Many
people make the point that there should not be a Ruby logo, however a
logo has many benefits, the most important of which in my opinion is
instant recognition. If you're going to go to the trouble of having
an image there at all, make it one that people will remember and
associate with the site/language/community/whatever, rather than just
one that is 'pretty'.
I think the gemstone image fails in that regard. It's too obvious,
and it has nothing to set it apart from any other image of a ruby. I
like the links that Michel provides, and suggest also OSI [1], Debian
[2], and even Java [3]. All have logos that I could pick out of a
crowd very easily. I'm not saying I like the websites themselves,
just the logo.
Also, I still think the gemstone is limited in its use. I think it'd
be bad on a tshirt or other clothing (never seen a tshirt with smooth
gradients like that, at least not one that lasted more than one wash)
and it'd be bad at smaller sizes because it would lose too much
detail.
I posted some other comments on the blog yesterday too. I basically
don't like the look of the latest designs much at all... But I am
certainly in the minority.
Jason
[1] http://opensource.org
[2] http://debian.org
[3] http://java.sun.com
Christian Neukirchen
That was not referring to "Ruby Hacker", but to "Ruby Core
Contributor", which Gabriele proposed. Those are not mutually
exclusive, of course.
Still, I'd probably not set up any requirements at all... if one
claims he's a Ruby Hacker, but didn't write a single line of code yet,
so what?
--
Christian Neukirchen <chneuk...@gmail.com> http://chneukirchen.org
Jon A. Lambert
> It results out of research, reasoning and rationality.
>
After a lot of the above and a few pints I came up with...
"Ruby: Don't take your love to town."
--
J Lambert
John W. Long
> BTW, I'm no expert on gems. I'm just going on what I've seen by googling
> the topic. I would be thrilled if someone pointed out that Rubies do
> actually occur in that shape.
It's called brilliant cut:
http://google.com/search?q=ruby+brilliant
Although what we are using is a simplified version of it.
David A. Black
In general, I don't think slogans should tell people that what they've
been doing until now is bad, joyless, not fun, etc. That's kind of
hostile.
James Britt
>
> In general, I don't think slogans should tell people that what they've
> been doing until now is bad, joyless, not fun, etc. That's kind of
> hostile.
Big agreement. Advocacy works best when it avoids put-downs and
comparisons (e.g. faster, better, more fun).
Say what Ruby is, not what other things are not.
James
Dr Balwinder S Dheeman
Ruby: Kill'em all[1], let the God save them!
Hope that helps ;)
--
Dr Balwinder Singh Dheeman Registered Linux User: #229709
CLLO (Chief Linux Learning Officer) Machines: #168573, 170593, 259192
Anu's Linux@HOME Distros: Ubuntu, Fedora, Knoppix
More: http://anu.homelinux.net/~bsd/ Visit: http://counter.li.org/
[1] All other scripting languages.
Gavin Kistner
> "Ruby: Don't take your love to town."
LOL :)
Thanks for this :)
Ryan Leavengood
>
> Big agreement. Advocacy works best when it avoids put-downs and
> comparisons (e.g. faster, better, more fun).
>
> Say what Ruby is, not what other things are not.
I agree. But in a sense the current slogan has implications like that:
Ruby: Programmers' Best Friend (unlike all those other conniving,
back-stabbing evil languages, who only want to hurt you)
I mean even if it is true... ;)
Ryan
David A. Black
I *knew* someone would mention that :-)
It still doesn't strike me as confrontational or challenging in the
same way. I can't analyze exactly why, but I think it's partly
because "best friend" is so clearly a metaphor, and fully affirmative,
whereas "Make programming fun again" (or whatever) is concrete and
actually says something negative about what the person has been doing.
Then again, for all I know people do react defensively to the "best
friend" thing too.
Paul Battley
> same way. I can't analyze exactly why, but I think it's partly
> because "best friend" is so clearly a metaphor, and fully affirmative,
> whereas "Make programming fun again" (or whatever) is concrete and
> actually says something negative about what the person has been doing.
>
> Then again, for all I know people do react defensively to the "best
> friend" thing too.
It is difficult. This, I think, is why marketing consultants are able
to earn a living. :-)
In general, one tends not to see advertising attacking a product's
opponents. I suspect this is because, by tainting one's competitors,
one casts the whole field in a poor light - and this includes the
product being promoted.
(Note, of course, that this doesn't seem to apply to politics, where
attacking the opponent is standard fare. Then again, this might work
because the electorate chooses the "least worst" from a group none of
whom it likes...)
Personally, my feeling is that "best friend" is a positive expression
- amongst all my programming language friends, Ruby is the best -
whereas "rediscover the joy of programming" (for example) suggests
that Ruby is just a good apple in a rotten barrel. The latter is
perhaps not the most flattering of implications.
Paul.
gabriele renzi
my exact thought, thanks for making it clear :)
James Britt
> Hi --
>
> On Thu, 12 May 2005, Ryan Leavengood wrote:
>
>> James Britt wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Big agreement. Advocacy works best when it avoids put-downs and
>>> comparisons (e.g. faster, better, more fun).
>>>
>>> Say what Ruby is, not what other things are not.
>>
>>
>> I agree. But in a sense the current slogan has implications like that:
>>
>> Ruby: Programmers' Best Friend (unlike all those other conniving,
>> back-stabbing evil languages, who only want to hurt you)
>
>
> I *knew* someone would mention that :-)
>
> It still doesn't strike me as confrontational or challenging in the
> same way. I can't analyze exactly why, but I think it's partly
> because "best friend" is so clearly a metaphor, and fully affirmative,
> whereas "Make programming fun again" (or whatever) is concrete and
> actually says something negative about what the person has been doing.
I agree, though I can see the implication that, if language R is your
_best_ friend, then languages P or J are merely _good_ friends. But
don't lend them big sums of money or expect them to show up after
promising to help you move, the bastards.
>
> Then again, for all I know people do react defensively to the "best
> friend" thing too.
See, on the other hand, that's part of the fun. :)
James
John W. Long
>> I agree. But in a sense the current slogan has implications like that:
>>
>> Ruby: Programmers' Best Friend (unlike all those other conniving,
>> back-stabbing evil languages, who only want to hurt you)
>
> I *knew* someone would mention that :-)
>
> It still doesn't strike me as confrontational or challenging in the
> same way. I can't analyze exactly why, but I think it's partly
> because "best friend" is so clearly a metaphor, and fully affirmative,
> whereas "Make programming fun again" (or whatever) is concrete and
> actually says something negative about what the person has been doing.
I've always thought that the phrase came from the common saying:
"Diamonds are a woman's best friend."
Am I wrong?
Yukihiro Matsumoto
In message "Re: Redesign 2005, Round Two"
on Thu, 12 May 2005 08:17:34 +0900, "John W. Long" <n...@johnwlong.com> writes:
|I've always thought that the phrase came from the common saying:
|
| "Diamonds are a woman's best friend."
|
|Am I wrong?
No. It is inspired from the song title.
matz.
Ilias Lazaridis
> Ilias Lazaridis, May 11:
>>Nikolai Weibull wrote:
>>>Mark Hubbart, May 11:
>
>>>>One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding fun".
>
>>>Then how about making the comment read “Ruby: Makes Programming
>>>Fun!”?,
>
>>a slogan.
>
>>Then collect the results on a wiki-page, thus anyone can review for
>>some time.
>
> please note:
>
> The new [slogan] will not [be] selected by democracy (vote).
>
> It results out of research, reasoning and rationality.
>
yes.
[marketing-]research, [marketing-]reasoning, [marketing-]rationality.
but: every community-member can present a slogan together with the right
unbeatable rationales.
[of course things are not as easy as with the "singleton class" to "x
class" rename, where a nearly absolute result can be expected.]
For the slogan, people should work-out the "requirements" first, like
"should imply simplicity" "should imply efficiecy" etc.
And of course: the main topic of _this_ thread is the design, not the
slogan.
So its not nice to write to much about the slogan, as the designers
expect feedback to the design, which they must 'fish out' of the many
off-topics, including mine which I finalize now.
.
John W. Long
--
John
Bill Guindon
> Which song?
Diamonds are a girl's best friend?
--
Bill Guindon (aka aGorilla)
James Britt
> I've always thought that the phrase came from the common saying:
>
> "Diamonds are a woman's best friend."
>
> Am I wrong?
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22*+is+*+best+friend%22
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22*+is+the+*+best+friend%22
James
Paul Battley
<mailing-lis...@rawuncut.elitemail.org> wrote:
> Paul Battley, May 11:
>
> > Personally, I rather like the "best friend" slogan on the current
> > redesign, although I think it should be "The programmer's best friend"
> > rather than "A ~".
>
> No, no. The indefinite is definitely the way to go,
I hadn't noticed the "diamonds are a girl's best friend" parallel up
until now. Now that it has been pointed out, however, I agree with
you: it should be the indefinite article.
Paul.
fl...@sanctacaris.net
>IMVVHO "Ruby: Fun Oriented Programming" is still the best :)
Oh no, please don't. That gives the impression of a bunch of happy losers, wobbling their ecstasied-up heads to the tune of techno music, pulling their puddings beneath the desk and never getting any decent work done.
Strategy is the art of using one's brain without letting anyone else know it. Working with Ruby *is* fun, therefore this aspect should be concealed, according to Sun Tzu. :-)
Seriously, I'd favour something that emphasizes productivity gains, because that's what decision makers are interested in. Maybe even something like "Ruby: The Japanese Secret of Productive Software Design". I know that's horribly inflated, but definitely an eye-catcher.
-- Ruediger Marcus
===
Chevalier Dr. Dr. Don Rüdiger Marcus Flaig MSc ScD PhD KCHT KSR CSM KEL MLJ MOC
Langgewann 28
D-69121 Heidelberg
Germany
Mail: <fl...@cirith-ungol.sanctacaris.net>
The number of feet in a yard is directly proportional to the success of the barbecue.
--
Diese E-Mail wurde mit http://www.mail-inspector.de verschickt
Mail Inspector ist ein kostenloser Service von http://www.is-fun.net
Der Absender dieser E-Mail hatte die IP: 129.206.124.135
benny
> Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon, I think it would be
> great to come up with some nice images to put on our own websites/blog.
> I'm not just thinking of "ruby powered" images but also something like
> "Ruby Developer", "I Love Ruby", "Ruby Contributor" and such on the
> lines of the mono gif[1]. What do people think of this?
>
> [1]
> http://www.mono-project.com/files/9/9f/Mono-contributor-static.gif
Since we are alluding to songs ("best friend") how about
"Ruby Soul" or "I'm a Ruby Soul" (=> Rubber Soul)
benny
vruz
>
> Diamonds are a girl's best friend?
No, that was...
women need Ruby like a fish needs a bycycle.
Nikolai Weibull
> women need Ruby like a fish needs a bycycle.
Um, are you saying that women can’t program, or just that they can’t
program in Ruby?,
nikolai
--
Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/!
Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden.
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}
Ben Giddings
> vruz, May 13:
>
> > women need Ruby like a fish needs a bycycle.
>
> Um, are you saying that women can’t program, or just that they can’t
> program in Ruby?,
I think he's saying that there are mutated fish out there that can't spell
but that desperately need two-wheeled transportation.
I, for one, welcome our new fish overlords. Might I offer you my Kona, oh
great sushi?
Or maybe it's just a commentary on how diamonds and other gemstones are
really pointless.
I hope it's not a shot at the fairer sex and their inability to hack Ruby,
cuz that's just not accurate.
*shrug*
Ben
Bill Guindon
If you read it like the original... "A woman needs a man like a fish
needs a bicycle."
It's a compliment. It's only us weak minded males who need Ruby, the
women out there can accomplish the same tasks, in the same time (or
less) using Cobol if they want.
> Ben
vruz
>
> Um, are you saying that women can't program, or just that they can't
> program in Ruby?,
no, I mean women are a blessing of freshness and delight in this
world, and they don't need any gemstone to be more elegant and
beautiful than they already are
:-)
Michel Martens
vruz
> If you read it like the original... "A woman needs a man like a fish
> needs a bicycle."
> It's a compliment. It's only us weak minded males who need Ruby, the
> women out there can accomplish the same tasks, in the same time (or
> less) using Cobol if they want.
thanks Bill.
now, for the sake of keeping this on-topic this is a pic I made that
hopefully helps with the Redesign process...
http://www.intertech.com.uy/rubyhome/ruby-home.png
gabriele renzi
> Logo proposal: http://tinyurl.com/8cyqp
I like this. I mean, do we really need a "ruby" image for ruby?
That P language had a Camel for years instead of something coming out of
an oyster :)
Mark Hubbart
Well, the camel was chosen because it's not the prettiest thing, but
it does good work and is adaptable. What embodies the same thing,
while being easier on the eye?
Or we could just go with a duck :)
cheers,
Mark
Joel VanderWerf
> Or we could just go with a duck :)
A duck sitting at a typewriter.
Neville Burnell
Robert McGovern
Hmm personally I find the faded white bars under the left hand text to
be distracting and slightly too arty.
Rob
Robert McGovern
> Logo proposal: http://tinyurl.com/8cyqp
That would be amusing, I can just imagine some of the questions it would raise.
Nikolai Weibull
> If you read it like the original... "A woman needs a man like a fish
> needs a bicycle." It's a compliment. It's only us weak minded males
> who need Ruby, the women out there can accomplish the same tasks, in
> the same time (or less) using Cobol if they want.
No, it’s not a compliment, and your interpretation is quite flawed. The
positive segregation you suggest is ludicrous. Do you actually suggest
that, by analogy, a fish can transport itself faster using a tricycle
than a human on a bicycle? That’s precisely what your interpretation
implies.
Women aren’t better programmers, just as they aren’t more well suited at
taking care of children,
Alan Garrison
A male or female duck?
/ducks :)
Nikolai Weibull
> Joel VanderWerf wrote:
> > Mark Hubbart wrote:
How about a sexless one, like Donald Duck?,
Martin Ankerl
http://www.the-trades.com/hprice/RubyInHerOwnTime.jpg
http://www.awantiques.com/Pics/DMrduck4.JPG
martinus
Michel Martens
> Here are my Logo suggestions:
> http://www.the-trades.com/hprice/RubyInHerOwnTime.jpg
+1
Bill Guindon
<mailing-lis...@rawuncut.elitemail.org> wrote:
> Bill Guindon, May 13:
>
> > If you read it like the original... "A woman needs a man like a fish
> > needs a bicycle." It's a compliment. It's only us weak minded males
> > who need Ruby, the women out there can accomplish the same tasks, in
> > the same time (or less) using Cobol if they want.
>
> No, it's not a compliment, and your interpretation is quite flawed. The
> positive segregation you suggest is ludicrous. Do you actually suggest
> that, by analogy, a fish can transport itself faster using a tricycle
> than a human on a bicycle? That's precisely what your interpretation
> implies.
It has nothing to do with how fast a fish can use a bicycle, it has to
do with the fact that a fish doesn't need a bicycle. Here's the
'real' original quote:
"A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle."
-- Gloria Steinem
The point is, she won't miss him, because she never needed him, and
can accomplish as much (if not more) without him. It was definitely
intended to be a complimentary statement, and goes back to one of the
first feminists.
> Women aren't better programmers, just as they aren't more well suited at
> taking care of children,
I never said they were (then again, I wouldn't say they aren't
either), I was just commenting on the quote.
> nikolai
Brian Schröder
<mailing-lis...@rawuncut.elitemail.org> wrote:
> Alan Garrison, May 13:
>
> > Joel VanderWerf wrote:
>
> > > Mark Hubbart wrote:
>
> > > > Or we could just go with a duck :)
>
> > > A duck sitting at a typewriter.
>
> > A male or female duck?
>
> How about a sexless one, like Donald Duck?,
> nikolai
>
Donald duck is definitely male - as daisy duck is female. Ernie and
Bert, that is another story, I'm not shure about their sex. (But they
are no ducks).
Sorry for the OT post,
regards,
Brian
--
http://ruby.brian-schroeder.de/
Stringed instrument chords: http://chordlist.brian-schroeder.de/
Robert McGovern
> > > A male or female duck?
> > How about a sexless one, like Donald Duck?,
>
> Bert, that is another story, I'm not shure about their sex. (But they
> are no ducks).
Ahhh in which case how about Ernie's rubber duckie? That was sexless
(as far as I remember) or the one used on the Hitchhikers Guide to the
Galaxy LP cover many many years ago.
Tanner Burson
fictional characters ;)
--
===Tanner Burson===
tanner...@gmail.com
http://tannerburson.com <---Might even work one day...
Nikolai Weibull
> On 13/05/05, Nikolai Weibull
> <mailing-lis...@rawuncut.elitemail.org> wrote:
> > Alan Garrison, May 13:
> > > Joel VanderWerf wrote:
> > > > Mark Hubbart wrote:
> > > > > Or we could just go with a duck :)
> > > > A duck sitting at a typewriter.
> > > A male or female duck?
> > How about a sexless one, like Donald Duck?,
> Donald duck is definitely male - as daisy duck is female.
It was a (lame) joke,
Tobias Luetke
On 5/10/05, James Britt <jam...@neurogami.com> wrote:
> gabriele renzi wrote:
> > Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon,
>
> How do you know that?
--
Tobi
http://www.snowdevil.ca - Snowboards that don't suck
http://www.hieraki.org - Open source book authoring
http://blog.leetsoft.com - Technical weblog
Austin Ziegler
> James Britt said:
> > I find the literal gem image boring and impractical (in contrast to Ruby
> > itself), and I may in fact be in the minority, but I don't know how I or
> > anyone would really know that.
> BTW, I'm no expert on gems. I'm just going on what I've seen by googling
> the topic. I would be thrilled if someone pointed out that Rubies do
> actually occur in that shape.
I have a friend who is a jeweller. She has told me that the diamond
cut is the most common cut, followed by the square cut.
-austin
--
Austin Ziegler * halos...@gmail.com
* Alternate: aus...@halostatue.ca
Nikolai Weibull
> On 5/13/05, Nikolai Weibull
> <mailing-lis...@rawuncut.elitemail.org> wrote:
> > Bill Guindon, May 13:
> > > If you read it like the original... "A woman needs a man like a
> > > fish needs a bicycle."
Wow, I misread this part of your message, sorry. I, however, still
stand by my point that the transliteration doesn’t cary this meaning and
that it can’t be read the way you suggest. Ruby has nothing to do with
men,
why the lucky stiff
> I have a friend who is a jeweller. She has told me that the diamond
> cut is the most common cut, followed by the square cut.
One more question for your jeweller friend, as I don't have one of my
own yet.
Which is: Would she recommend the Schneider loupe? I would like to
appraise some of my favorite source code and this feels like the right
way to do it. I am open to a Rodenstock of course (of course, of
course) but be warned that I find some magnifications completely
harrowing. I'm embarassed to say that I've never been past 4x. :blush
pudding: I've really no idea what is down there.
_why
Christian Neukirchen
> A duck floating 'zen master like' in front of a typewriter
That would go along great with http://www.gnu.org/graphics/meditate.html!
--
Christian Neukirchen <chneuk...@gmail.com> http://chneukirchen.org
Christian Neukirchen
Christian Neukirchen
> On 13/05/05, Nikolai Weibull
> <mailing-lis...@rawuncut.elitemail.org> wrote:
>
> Donald duck is definitely male - as daisy duck is female. Ernie and
> Bert, that is another story, I'm not shure about their sex. (But they
> are no ducks).
But Bernie and Ert? :-)
> Sorry for the OT post,
Same here. ;)
> regards,
>
> Brian