On Wednesday 02 November 2005 18:30, Jorg Heymans wrote: > Agreed, but a new logo when we release 2.2 or 3.0 would be highly > desirable from a marketing point of view. The current one is starting to > show its age IMO.
The reason that you drink Coca-Cola, smoke Marlboro, drive Mercedes and buy Sony camcorders, is decades of focused "branding". Part of the branding are logotypes, which by coincidence doesn't change, just because the company feels it needs to re-invent itself or have a new model/product out. Logotype changes are rare and extremely expensive from a marketing point of view. Example; A company in Sweden changed name from "LM Ericsson" to "Ericsson" and did a logotype change, from the original 1800s something to a new one, in the 1980s, since they wanted to re-invent themselves to be more "consumer oriented". Massive discontent among the swedish population, since the company was known there as "EllEm". I think it took about 8-10years for that to settle in, and a massive bill of marketing to back it up. Software in general, and OSS in particular is perhaps too new to understand and harness these mechanisms, but we can see strong awareness from Microsoft, Intel and even Linux around these concerns. Don't throw away assets that can't easily be replaced. Cheers
