After finishing the article I still don't understand what were the reasons to scorn Tux. Maybe OP should have given an example of a good mascot for the readers to get the point.
I'm still quite happy with Tux though, it's a sober mascot that's very simple/minimal, and is easily recognizable.
A negative rant from a domain named after a slang term for urine about a logo for an operating system. What was the point in this article? I certainly couldn't find one.
I love this rant with a passion. For me, Tux is the embodiment of the flat out refusal of the linux community at the time to even consider UX or graphic design. At a time when beating Windows on these areas was actually feasible, the OSS community preferred to stop at features, functional, no matter how well or badly done. My favorite example, which the author also quotes, is that the only decent OSS game people were able to come up with was a mario clone with Tux. Graphics? Why would we, we have Tux.
I really like how Ubuntu turned this around and showed people that a usable linux is possible.
