Mailing List Archive

On Mon, 7 Aug 1995, Rob Hartill wrote:
> Powered by Apache :-)

"Apache Enhanced" "Optimized for Apache 0.8.8" "You must be using Apache
to view these pages!" Ooops....

Yeah, I like it. Randy, want to make a small icon?

Brian

--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
brian@organic.com brian@hyperreal.com http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/

On Mon, 7 Aug 1995, Rob Hartill wrote:

> How about if we all put a little apache feather icon at the bottom of
> our main pages which links to apache.org/ ?

Yes, I like this idea.

Interesting, this issue was just recently discussed on the machttp-talk
mailing list, and "This site is powered by WebSTAR" images are now
available (see http://datapig.concom.com/truffles/powered_by.html).
Something similar for Apache would be nice. Smaller, though.

> If we make the icon available from apache.org, people will surely
> pick it up and add it to their pages.

Yes. I will. Am I 'people'?

> It'd be voluntary, I wouldn't want to impose this on anyone.

How about we recode the server to add

<hr>
<a href="http://www.apache.org/">
<img src="http://www.apache.org/pbapache.gif" alt="Powered by Apache!">
</a>

To the end of every HTML page it serves... :)

> Powered by Apache :-)

Defenitely.

--/ Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us> /--------/ Lefler on IRC
----------------------------/ <http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/>
The viewpoints expressed above are entirely false, and in no way
represent Alexei Kosut nor any other person or entity. /--------------

>
> How about if we all put a little apache feather icon at the bottom of
> our main pages which links to apache.org/ ?
>
> If we make the icon available from apache.org, people will surely
> pick it up and add it to their pages.
>
> It'd be voluntary, I wouldn't want to impose this on anyone.
>
>
>
> Powered by Apache :-)

Great idea! I'll see if I can pull a small icon together.
I attempted this quite awhile back when trying to come up with
something that could be output on errors. I was not pleased with
the results.

I'll give this a go tonight.

> > Powered by Apache :-)

> Great idea! I'll see if I can pull a small icon together.
> I attempted this quite awhile back when trying to come up with
> something that could be output on errors. I was not pleased with
> the results.
>
> I'll give this a go tonight.

My non-artistic skills came up with,

http://www.apache.org/images/powered_by.gif

Which looks like http://www.apache.org/newindex2.html in action.


Hmm, probably too big. Xpaint isn't really cut out for this task.


rob

On Mon, 7 Aug 1995, Rob Hartill wrote:

> http://www.apache.org/images/powered_by.gif

[...]

> Hmm, probably too big. Xpaint isn't really cut out for this task.

I agree... it's a bit too bulky.

While I'm not an artist either, I'm stuck in the graphic design situation
often enough that I know how to use Photoshop to make things look good,
so I came up with

http://www.dal.net/apache_pb.gif

With a sample of actual user use at http://www.dal.net/

I think it looks good. Anyone else have any opinions? It's only 2871
bytes, so not terribly large. Which is a good thing.

Maybe we should ship whatever image we come up with in the distribtion's
/icons/ directory. That way, people have it.

--/ Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us> /--------/ Lefler on IRC
----------------------------/ <http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/>
The viewpoints expressed above are entirely false, and in no way
represent Alexei Kosut nor any other person or entity. /--------------

> http://www.dal.net/apache_pb.gif
>
> With a sample of actual user use at http://www.dal.net/
>
> I think it looks good. Anyone else have any opinions? It's only 2871
> bytes, so not terribly large. Which is a good thing.

I like it! I've attempted to make a smaller version using only black
and have managed to keep it down around 1k. That's the only drawback
I see with your image.

Very nice.

You can take a look at what I came up with at:

http://www.apache.org/newindex.html (don't worry... no black) :-)

> > http://www.dal.net/apache_pb.gif
> >
> > With a sample of actual user use at http://www.dal.net/
> >
> > I think it looks good. Anyone else have any opinions? It's only 2871
> > bytes, so not terribly large. Which is a good thing.

This is my favorite by far, worth the size in my opinion. I put it on
Hyperreal's and the Apache web site, and am pushing it to be on ours (I'm
not in charge when it comes to content on our site, just the mechanics :)
I'll ask Justin if he can put it on links.net....

Brian

--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
brian@organic.com brian@hyperreal.com http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/

If you add the "Powered By Apache" icon to your page(s), remember to
make it into a link to www.apache.org.

On Mon, 7 Aug 1995, Randy Terbush wrote:

> I like it! I've attempted to make a smaller version using only black
> and have managed to keep it down around 1k. That's the only drawback
> I see with your image.

Well, I don't agree that 2877 bytes is too large, and I see that other
people agree with me, as my image has begun popping up in places.
(thanks!)

However, if you really feel it's too large, I created a 1024 byte version
(ok, so it's not technically under 1k, but it's pretty close), at
http://www.dal.net/apb.gif. It's the same as apache_pb.gif, but the
kerning is a tad tighter, and it uses 11 colors (dithered) instead of
168. I don't think it looks quite as nice, but if you want it, there it
is...

--/ Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us> /--------/ Lefler on IRC
----------------------------/ <http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/>
The viewpoints expressed above are entirely false, and in no way
represent Alexei Kosut nor any other person or entity. /--------------

> On Mon, 7 Aug 1995, Randy Terbush wrote:
>
> > I like it! I've attempted to make a smaller version using only black
> > and have managed to keep it down around 1k. That's the only drawback
> > I see with your image.
>
> Well, I don't agree that 2877 bytes is too large, and I see that other
> people agree with me, as my image has begun popping up in places.
> (thanks!)

Including my site...

> However, if you really feel it's too large, I created a 1024 byte version
> (ok, so it's not technically under 1k, but it's pretty close), at
> http://www.dal.net/apb.gif. It's the same as apache_pb.gif, but the
> kerning is a tad tighter, and it uses 11 colors (dithered) instead of
> 168. I don't think it looks quite as nice, but if you want it, there it
> is...

I agree with you. I prefer your first image. My size concern was only
to satisfy some people who seem to have a problem with 800 bytes.
Actually reducing the physical size of your image makes quite a
difference and it is still quite viewable. Nice work!

Hmm...

Brian Behlendorf pointed out to me a problem with my apache_pb.gif: It
uses 168 colors, which could be a problem on computers that can only
display 256 colors at once - this doesn't leave very many colors left
over for other images on the page. Which can be a problem.

So I've created a new image, at http://www.dal.net/apache_pb2.gif, which
uses only 32 colors. It's 2326 bytes, for those who care about such
things. And unlike apb.gif, it actually looks pretty good. Maybe ever
better than apache_pb.gif.

So I'd like to suggest that apache_pb.gif be replaced with my new one
where appropriate (esp on the Apache page) - they look almost identical*,
so no one will notice the difference.

Also, it should probably go into the icons directory of the next Apache
release, so it's easily accessable for webmasters to use.

Comments?

* Note that the new one is 1 pixel shorter, so adjust HEIGHT attributes as
appropriate. It's the same width.

--/ Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us> /--------/ Lefler on IRC
----------------------------/ <http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/>
The viewpoints expressed above are entirely false, and in no way
represent Alexei Kosut nor any other person or entity. /--------------

On Tue, 8 Aug 1995, Rob Hartill wrote:
> > Brian Behlendorf pointed out to me a problem with my apache_pb.gif: It
> > uses 168 colors, which could be a problem on computers that can only
> > display 256 colors at once - this doesn't leave very many colors left
> > over for other images on the page. Which can be a problem.
>
> http://www.apache.org/images/apache_pb3.gif
>
> is nearly half the size and has 14 fewer colours.
>
> Looks identical, but I'm colourblind.

There's some weirdnesses around the C and the H....

Hey, gang, instead of blabbering on here on this list, let's be a little
more efficient - please upload any and all contenders for the title of
"official" apache logo to /httpd/incoming on hyperreal.com, and on Friday
we can set up a form where everyone can vote for their favorite, and we
pick the top two from that. Okay?

Brian


--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
brian@organic.com brian@hyperreal.com http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/

On Tue, 8 Aug 1995, Rob Hartill wrote:

> http://www.apache.org/images/apache_pb3.gif
>
> is nearly half the size and has 14 fewer colours.
>
> Looks identical, but I'm colourblind.

Seems rather garbagy too me, especially around the edges of the C and the
H.

I mean... really... does anyone out here *really* care about 1000 bytes
here or there? I made the 32 color version because Brian had a legitamite
concern about 256-color displays, but I don't think we should try and
squeeze it into the smallest file we can for just that reason.

Of course, I could be wrong.

--/ Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us> /--------/ Lefler on IRC
----------------------------/ <http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/>
The viewpoints expressed above are entirely false, and in no way
represent Alexei Kosut nor any other person or entity. /--------------

> Hmm...
>
> Brian Behlendorf pointed out to me a problem with my apache_pb.gif: It
> uses 168 colors, which could be a problem on computers that can only
> display 256 colors at once - this doesn't leave very many colors left
> over for other images on the page. Which can be a problem.

http://www.apache.org/images/apache_pb3.gif

is nearly half the size and has 14 fewer colours.

Looks identical, but I'm colourblind.


enjoy.

On Wed, 9 Aug 1995, Robert S. Thau wrote:
>
> Seriously, I think this is a little too little to be seriously worried
> about, but with much larger images, I would take the problem more
> seriously....

I'm afraid you've gone over your quota on the use of the word
"seriously", sir... try these ones out:

5 -rw-r--r-- 1 taob staff 4098 Aug 9 22:49 pba-taob-256.gif
3 -rw-r--r-- 1 taob staff 2518 Aug 9 22:48 pba-taob-64.gif

Both are found in http://aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw/~taob/Images/.
You can see the 256-colour one on http://aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw/.
--
Brian ("Though this be madness, yet there is method in't") Tao
taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw <-- work ........ play --> taob@io.org

Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 22:28:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us>

I mean... really... does anyone out here *really* care about 1000 bytes
here or there? I made the 32 color version because Brian had a legitamite
concern about 256-color displays, but I don't think we should try and
squeeze it into the smallest file we can for just that reason.

Of course, I could be wrong.

\begin{Devil's advocacy}
For people stuck on the wrong end of a 14.4K SLIP line, the effective
data delivery rate is probably on the order of 1K/sec, after serial
start/stop/parity bits and TCP overhead. An extra seconds's delay can
be significant if it comes up at the wrong time.
\end{Devil's advocacy}

Seriously, I think this is a little too little to be seriously worried
about, but with much larger images, I would take the problem more
seriously....

rst

> On Tue, 8 Aug 1995, Rob Hartill wrote:

> > http://www.apache.org/images/apache_pb3.gif
> >
> > is nearly half the size and has 14 fewer colours.
> >
> > Looks identical, but I'm colourblind.

> Seems rather garbagy too me, especially around the edges of the C and the
> H.

> I mean... really... does anyone out here *really* care about 1000 bytes
> here or there? I made the 32 color version because Brian had a legitamite
> concern about 256-color displays, but I don't think we should try and
> squeeze it into the smallest file we can for just that reason.

I'm so offended, I'm going to jump off a bridge.. as-if (*)

Looks fine to me, but the only point of apache_pb3.gif was that you
don't need 32 colours, or even the 18 it uses. Merging close colours
reduces the colourmap significantly, but at little/no loss to the
images. Often it improves the clarity of images. For small images, it's
the colourmap which takes up most of the space.
I got bored when I reached 18 colours, I'm sure it could have been fewer.

As Rob T pointed out, this is all trivial stuff.. not worth arguing or
voting on. The current image is fine, lets just squeeze all the unecessary
colours out if it.


rob

(*) "as-if" is touted to become the next "Not !" catchphrase. It comes
from the movie "Clueless", which I've had no difficulty avoiding so far.