Reading through the first bits of SDL's and the official Allegro website.

SDL's front page, first paragraph:

That is a pretty good description.
The first four points apply to Allegro 5 as well.

Second to last paragraph:

So here we have platforms, languages, license. Very precise, concise info.

Allegro 5's official website, first paragraph:

In comparison to SDL, this could see improvement. This is especially due to Allegro 4 and 5 being treated together in the first paragraph. Note that Allegro 4 is even mentioned before Allegro 5, therefore becoming the first thing mentioned on the whole page...

While saying it is "primarily for C and C++ developers" is technically true, SDL's way of saying the same thing is cleverer, because it doesn't appear to be a limitation.

"Open source" is also true, but it could also mean that Allegro is GPLed, which it isn't.

"game programming". Hmm. While this may be the primary motivation behind it, its scope is wider than that. Anyone wanting to create an OpenGL window cross-platform for whatever reason could use it. Also, there is nothing in the code tying it to games (as probably opposed to engines).
SDL's way of saying it is again smarter, because they describe what it actually does "low level access to ... graphics hardware" while stating that it is widely used for games later.

Let's also take a look at the introduction page:

This is much better already. But it's a separate page.

I like the last point.

IMHO "low level access to audio, keyboard, mouse, joystick and graphics hardware" sounds much more appealing to newbies than "handle common, low-level tasks such as creating windows, accepting user input, loading data, drawing images, playing sounds, etc. and generally abstracting away the underlying platform".

What if you want a fullscreen game and don't even know you have to "create a window"?
Not to mention that - while it is technically more accurate - it just sounds more boring.

IMHO we should have the platforms in there, but of course they aren't, because you have to decide whether you want Allegro 5 or 4 first. As said already, this shouldn't be the case.

Further down:

To start the paragraph with describing a limitation is unfortunate here, because 2D graphics primitives are actually a feature (on top of native OpenGL and Direct 3D).

No offense meant at anyone, but I thought I'd demonstrate precisely what I mean.

We could just copy SDL's text and replace "SDL" with "Allegro 5", but we probably shouldn't do this.

I propose to:

• Merge front page and introduction page

• Write a new text for this page, which should mention everything the SDL folks mention on their page: short, attractive definition; platforms; languages; license

• Put (legacy) Allegro 4 on an extra page, where we could also describe the library's long and proud history, its origins dating back to the Atari ST and the glorious old days of DJGPP.

• We could link to this page from the front page at the bottom (Allegro is ... "with a proud and long history dating back to" ? 1992? (link).

Besides what the SDL folks do, we should probably also mention these points on the new front page:

• Is not an engine => more freedom and flexibility, higher performance (I guess )

• can be used alongside 3D API (e.g. OpenGL, Direct3D, and higher level libraries), while Allegro handles the other tasks

• Anything else? List of features?

I would have tried to write a new text myself if I had more time available, which isn't the case right now.

Comments?

I'd be up for contributing in a small way if I could; not sure how I could help but I can do basic graphic work or maybe some writing, or any basic donkey work really, spell checking or information gathering, would like to be more involved. Let's not forget that whilst the allegro library itself has been kicking all other libraries in the nuts since DJGPP and RHIDE, the community here is one of, if not the best online, in my hokum opinion.

Hmm, looks cool. Whats with the stuff in the curlies?

@ Dizzuy egg: if you don't know what to do, then I suggest you work on cleaning up the wiki. There's tons of pages that need to be updated, so I think you might fine a few you can contribute to.

@Polychromos:

I like the ideas for improving the web site text.

I like the text part of that logo, but the curly braces (suggesting C programming, I guess?) seem a bit too "generic" . How can we emphasize, perhaps though the use of some kind of icon, that Allegro is for low level graphics/game/multimedia applications through the logo?

Maybe the inside of the braces could be arranged to look like a game pad on a screen, surrounded by a earphone. Or such???

You shouldn't try to put too much into a logo. I think Allegro5 does simply too much to express it all at once. The idea behind this was the abstraction, which I feel is the main feature. But you're probably right that it should also try to show allegro's "area of work", i. e. graphics etc.

At least it's a starting point. I like the text part, too

Another idea:

{"name":"608426","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/e\/b\/eb47698cacc1b0e41a70e3c1bd2bc5fc.png","w":436,"h":156,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/e\/b\/eb47698cacc1b0e41a70e3c1bd2bc5fc"}

Edit: Yes, you can express all that Allegro does in a logo

@Dizzy: This wasn't entirely serious of course. "Allegro" in binary could be an idea, but I'm too tired to figure it out now.

Are you referring to this? It's just the text "Allegro", in italics... made in about 5 seconds on some web-based logo creator 15 years ago

Well, the fact there is NO actual logo may be something... ...but...also

elias is quite cliear and spot on, refresh THAT image can only be good.

I like Polybios' proposal (well his soulmate's one actually), but I'd put the curly braces around allegro (as in a.cc "logo") or to the right, like in a "strictier" C syntax mockup.

And I'm hoping the search for a logo is something for the LIBRARY and not restriceted to a.cc only, as Edgars points out a.cc is "simply" the community behind the library but...as I have read on gamedev, there's some feeling of "official" in this site for newcomers.

Hardly ever useful in this way, as I already said there's need for a current community website; as it stands there is a TON of things that need maintenance (and do not receive it) for no practical reason...all that could be removed with no harm.

I Agree 100%, this happen to me a darn LOT (outside the programming field as well) and I understand but:

...not necessarily ok, but let's not expect Allegro to be plug-and-play more than it can be, it's still a low level library and AT LEAST requires you to understand how to link an external library to an executable (or at least what doest it mean )

On this very topic, we should add some general references about this in the wiki for people looking for help, to general porgramming resources and a bit if in-house explanation, that could go a long way with not that much effort. Anyone agrees?

What about just the letters?

{"name":"608427","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/b\/6\/b62b4342ba951c69db90f40c6bb7e7a9.png","w":374,"h":164,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/b\/6\/b62b4342ba951c69db90f40c6bb7e7a9"}

It is a free font called SciFly, if anyone wants to experiment further.

If the new logo is literally the old logo with a different font, I'm voting against it . In my opinion, it needs to have an alligator on it.