They're naive, non-professional, obviously from a different time, not too distracting and there's a strange proportion of people who can't help but point out that they don't like it. What else could you want?<p>To go off on a parallel topic for a bit, I haven't used a desktop or a wallpaper for some years now and it's great. Both are a bad idea. The desktop is a magnet for sloppy organization. You'd be surprised just how much more organized and productive file system and shortcut usage gets if you turn off desktop icons. And a wallpaper is just distracting. I've never found a wallpaper that I didn't want to change after a while. I even tried minimal gradients. What ended up working perfect, as in I'll likely never change it, is a solid black wallpaper.<p>Concerning not using a wallpaper, functional benefits aside, someone might think that this would take away the bling of an expensive laptop, but that's exactly what I find appealing about it. This way you're treating the device, not as a status or fashion statement, but as a functional tool.
Looks like a collection of random contributions that were not evaluated for their aesthetic quality. For better examples of crowdsourced art see Fedora supplemental wallpapers: <a href="https://fedoramagazine.org/submissions-now-open-fedora-30-supplemental-wallpapers/" rel="nofollow">https://fedoramagazine.org/submissions-now-open-fedora-30-su...</a>.<p>Also, the GNU project appear to have capable designers: <a href="https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/" rel="nofollow">https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/</a>
It doesn't communicate very well. All this website says is: you don't pay anything, so you're getting a sh__tty quality. Plus you have no right to want anything more.<p>There are tons of good free high quality wallpapers on deviantart.com, and for those that aren't "free as in freedom", I think it's up to negotiation with the author of a particular wallpaper. Some of them will probably be delighted to be selected by gnu.org to be the producer of GNU-approved art.
The design of the website and of these wallpapers communicates this: we're better because we're free, who cares about the looks.<p>I do appreciate the GNU tools and whatnot, but it is hard to "convert" everyday users with the moral argument.
It looks just like never changed for 20 years. I've visited this page long time before, and still seems no serious effort for these except [this one](<a href="https://www.gnu.org/graphics/meditate.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.gnu.org/graphics/meditate.html</a>), which according to copyright notice have been there for 18 years.
Am I missing something with the onion wallpaper?
<a href="https://www.gnu.org/graphics/plant-onion.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.gnu.org/graphics/plant-onion.html</a><p>It seems to be more about actual onions than a tor thing?!<p>Edit:
Doh, reread the description "Gardeners and tor users..."
Thanks for the replies though.
this one look like a windows 95 program installer splash screen: <a href="https://www.gnu.org/graphics/meditate.png" rel="nofollow">https://www.gnu.org/graphics/meditate.png</a>
Gonna start using this one (<a href="https://www.gnu.org/graphics/I_run_GNU_by_GNUlancer.png" rel="nofollow">https://www.gnu.org/graphics/I_run_GNU_by_GNUlancer.png</a>) on my Windows PC at work