Like simias I think the classification of using "worst" on downplaying somebody else's work is a bit sad. There is absolutely brilliant software that is repres

Like simias I think the classification of using "worst" on downplaying somebody else's work is a bit sad. There is absolutely brilliant software that is represented by some of those logos, available for anybody for free. Programmers are most of the times not designers and in most commercial software you'll see that they hire a designer. What does the OP suggest for them to do then? They should not only work for free, but also spent money on hiring graphical designers? I'm betting that the GNU foundation will be very happy with your financial support on that (actually they applaud you for providing better imagery at the last line of that page) Help us complete the list Many GNU packages don't have logos—if you are skilled enough and willing to contribute logo for a package, please contact the package maintainers and show them your work. If approved, let us know at <webmasters@gnu.org> in order to add it to this page In an effort to actually give a bit of a positive reply, a lot of open icons that are better looking are available down here: http://openiconlibrary.sourceforge.net/ http://openiconlibrary.sourceforge.net/ You can see previews for apps that start with the letter G starting from here and there's an overlap with the logos on the referenced GNU page: http://openiconlibrary.sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./Icons/apps&600 http://openiconlibrary.sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./Icons/app...