On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Graham Lauder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tuesday 28 May 2013 15:00:47 Jürgen Schmidt wrote: >> On 5/28/13 2:48 PM, Alphonso Whitfield III wrote: >> > I agree with Kadal looks like more of the same. >> >> And that is not necessarily bad. We got feedback from 5000 users and it >> seems that the majority like the logo we have and why not simply keeping >> the main idea and do only some refresh. > > Where is that data, I can't find it, it doesn't seem to be on the wiki with > the > logo stuff >
Hi Graham, Thanks for checking in. I'm sorry you were not able to be involved earlier over the several months that we've been working on a new logo. We had 40 proposals, did a survey and now we're refining the highest scoring submissions. If you want to get caught up on what we've all been working on, a good start would be the blog post here: https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/results_of_apache_openoffice_4 Note also the link to the more detailed report: http://survey.openoffice.org/reports/aoo40-logo-poll/ > When you say "Not necessarily bad", by what criteria do you judge this, the > aesthetic sensibilities of 5000 random respondents. I'm sorry I missed the > survey so I have no idea of what was in it. > We prefer to call them "users", just like we call those who comment on the list "community members" rather than "random posters". > People like it because it's familiar, however it fulfills none of the > requirements of a brand relaunch. I doesn't signal a new beginning, just > says "same old, same old". Besides which, choosing a logo by "Vote" is going > to purely subjective without any thought being given to the practical needs of > the brand, especially that of the marketing side of things, without any > thought to the Brand as a whole. > Since the respondents to the survey were primarily current OpenOffice users it is natural that the results would be biased toward continuity. On the other hand "continuity" is a value just as "new beginning" is a value. There is nothing wrong per se with expressing continuity by having a logo that is a more modern take on the classic logo. . . . <snip> . . . > > > The PMC needs, like any good management team, to ignore the subjective and > make a decision on purely objective criteria: Impact, uniqueness, story. > > If this was a decision being made by a marketing department run by me, the > toss up would be between Lucas's "Warpaint", his feather in orb, Kevin's > feather in Orb but with perhaps a more quill type motif. I also would look at > Robin Fowler's feather motif in 16 as a quill, it's simple shape has > scaleability advantages. > It might make sense for you to express a preference for a single logo, or submit an alternative choice, and then argue for your "objective" criteria rather than merely asserting that you along are gifted with true insight here and everyone else is merely blindly following personal subjective taste. Remember, each of us could call our views objective as well. But where would that get us? In any case, I'll be sure to put an "other" choice in the ballot for the vote, so you can express choices other than the ones on the wiki currently. Regards, -Rob > Cheers > > GL > >> >> Juergen > > > > > >> >> > Plan Your Work and Work Your Plan >> > with The Vital Portal >> > >> > Alphonso Whitfield >> > [email protected] >> > Vital >> > 912-816-2595 >> > Skype: vital.i.net >> > >> > Visit us at: >> > The Vital Portal >> > >> > The Vital Portal On facebook >> > >> > Visit our Google Community >> > >> > Join our Vital Portal Webinars at: >> > The Vital Portal WebEx Meeting Center . >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > >> > From: "Kevin Grignon" <[email protected]> >> > To: [email protected] >> > Cc: "marketing" <[email protected]>, >> > [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 8:46:29 AM >> > Subject: Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection >> > >> > I like the darker font colour for Apache, but prefer all caps as it >> > supports a more balanced layout. The descender or long leg of the Apache >> > letter "p" when rendered in lowercase causes tension as it stabs the >> > openOffice logo type. >> > >> > Thoughts? >> > >> > Kevin >> > >> > On May 28, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Kadal Amutham <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Looks like we are retaining almost the current logo with some small >> >> changes >> >> >> >> With Warm Regards >> >> >> >> V.Kadal Amutham >> >> 919444360480 >> >> 914422396480 >> >> >> >> On 28 May 2013 04:51, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On May 27, 2013, at 3:55 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: >> >>>> [This was cross-posted, so I'm not clear what list was intended. Makes >> >>> >> >>> tracking the discussion difficult.] >> >>> >> >>>> I'll bite: >> >>>> >> >>>> I prefer Chris's latest. The weight of the lettering is more powerful. >> >>> >> >>> I think the "Apache" should not be so thin. The form used by Samer works >> >>> better. I also think down-scaling will work better in this case. >> >>> >> >>>> As far as the orb goes, Chris's could be a tad larger, but not by much. >> >>> >> >>> I prefer the orientation of the foreground bird to Kevin's, which has a >> >>> more threatening feel in my subjective experience. >> >>> >> >>> These are good observations. >> >>> >> >>> I would like to see it with an "ffi" ligature. >> >>> >> >>> I think we should leave the 4 out. Others have mentioned that 4 is an >> >>> unlucky number is some cultures. Perhaps we have compromise and have >> >>> both >> >>> versioned and un-versioned logo designs. If so then I think a treatment >> >>> like "Version 4.0" in grey and blue might work. >> >>> >> >>> Regards, >> >>> Dave >> >>> >> >>>> - Dennis >> >>>> >> >>>> PS: Interesting that we've come around to a close variant of the >> >>>> current >> >>> >> >>> logo. >> >>> >> >>>> -----Original Message----- >> >>>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] >> >>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM >> >>>> To: [email protected]; [email protected] >> >>>> Subject: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection >> >>>> >> >>>> What we've done so far: >> >>>> >> >>>> 1) Called for logo submissions from the community >> >>>> >> >>>> 2) Many designers responded and we received 40 submissions. There was >> >>>> a lot of "cross-fertilization" of ideas, as designers saw what others >> >>>> had come up with, what worked, and borrowed ideas. >> >>>> >> >>>> 3) We did a survey of user responses to the 40 logo submissions. Over >> >>>> 5000 users offered their ratings and written comments. >> >>>> >> >>>> 4) Publish report and blog post on the results of the logo survey. >> >>>> >> >>>> 5) Invited the designers of the top-rated logos to read over the >> >>>> survey comments and refine their designs and submit an updated >> >>>> version. >> >>>> >> >>>> That's where we are now. The updated logos (three of them) are on the >> >>> >> >>> wiki now: >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Stage+2+Logo+Refine >> >>> ment>>> >> >>>> As you can see there is quite a bit of convergence on a design >> >>>> occurring. >> >>>> >> >>>> So what next? >> >>>> >> >>>> I'd like to propose some next steps. >> >>>> >> >>>> A) Let's discuss the three designs on the mailing list for the next >> >>>> week. The discussion might lead to further refinement. >> >>>> >> >>>> B) If at the end of the week there is consensus on a single design >> >>>> we'll go with that one. >> >>>> >> >>>> C) If at the end of the week there is not consensus on a single >> >>>> design, and the discussion is not leading us closer toward consensus, >> >>>> then we'll have a 72-hour vote of PMC members to pick the logo. >> >>>> >> >>>> Regards, >> >>>> >> >>>> -Rob >> >>>> >> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >>> >> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
