> > a more thorough > description of their reaction including specific points about > their grievances with the current crop of logos.
OK, BIG disclaimer, since I think I've started coming off as more of an asshole than I really am in real life: I LOVE the fact that we got so many logos and I appreciate all the submissions and I acknowledge that many of the submissions are incredibly well designed and show a much better eye for design than I have. Whew, ok, with that out of the way... Just to add my own critique to the top 3 logos that won the popular vote. My biggest issue is that I just don't see much symbolism in any of them. #42 is certainly pretty, and it will work well in a number of contexts, but it doesn't really mean anything to me. I get that it's an X, and I like what the X can stand for (cross platform, fleX). Otherwise I guess the X is made up of "flexible" rubber-band-like material, so that kind of fits with the name "Flex". But none of those things really hit it for me. Glancing at the logo I don't get a sense of meaning, I just get a sense that it's a designer's pretty thing. It's shiny and it's not going to offend anyone (which is why I voted for it when it was between that one and #49). I've already voiced my concerns about #49, which is that the most obvious symbolism that I see is negative (this has been discussed quite a bit in other threads). And as for #40, I find it incredibly generic and boring. That logo could be the logo for any random generic company. Put that logo next to Altria (formerly Philip Morris) or some pharmaceutical company, or some huge personality-less IT company (Oracle, Deloitte, etc) and it would look right at home. Because it just simply doesn't mean anything (at least to me). So that's my criticism of the top-voted logos. Unfortunately I didn't vote in the first round since I had entries in, but if I were to have voted I would have largely picked an entirely different set for my top 3. But c'est la vie.
