>From the outset I should explained some of the rationale behind this. A good logo design is one where the mark and text work well together, but are flexible enough to be reconfigured or seen alone while still being recognizable. I think the Mesos mark is recognizable on its own, and the stylized M definitely adds that feature to the text. There may be times when we choose to only display the mark (such as a sticker), or the text (such as a slide or in print). Both should be recognizable.
The designer looked into thicker fonts during the earlier stages of the design and they added significant weight that did not look good at the sizes we'll want to display on the web. And bumping up the size of the font overpowers the mark and doesn't maintain the same balance that it currently does. Keep in mind that the white background is only one version of how the logo can and will be used in the wild -- for example, I have other iterations that include a black and white version for print, and one that uses a dark blue background: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7xrvnsg810pbn0s/Screen%20Shot%202013-06-26%20at%2010.39.20%20PM.pngthat I am quite partial to. Dave On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:37 PM, Benjamin Hindman <[email protected]>wrote: > I prefer uppercase. Have we looked at slightly thicker font? > > I think the stylized M adds more complexity. Would we prefer people to > just use the icon? Or if the word has some style can they use the word > without the icon? Will one catch on over the other? I'd prefer to keep it > simple. > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Dave Lester > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> It's great to hear feedback about the designs; I hope the end product is >> something we can all be proud of and want to see Mesos stickers on our >> laptops in a month's time. >> >> I agree with Ben and Yan's description of what the lowercase vs uppercase >> may say. >> >> As Ben described, the mark doesn't lend itself well to a lowercase/round >> design given its angular form. I had this mocked up, and you can see it: >> >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/7fg9fvkwyxtg4z7/Screen%20Shot%202013-06-26%20at%2010.12.43%20PM.pngI >> don't think lowercase is a great option at this point. >> >> With uppercase, are we cool with the stylized M? I personally think it >> looks cool / clean. >> >> Dave >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Benjamin Mahler >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >> > My take would be on the design implications. Lowercase letters use round >> > lines, uppercase letters use straight lines. With our logo, which uses >> only >> > straight lines (triangles), an uppercase font will fit better (at least >> the >> > M and E). Granted if the logo were more rounded, like openstack or >> hadoop, >> > it might make sense. But I do think it would be a good idea to mock up >> the >> > alternatives to get a feel for this. :) >> > >> > Uppercase and lowercase definitely have a different feel as Yan >> mentioned. >> > For a cluster scheduler framework, my vote would be for uppercase. >> > >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Yan Xu <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> Agree. I think generally: >> >> Lowercases: informal, laid-back and friendly >> >> Uppercases: official and strong >> >> >> >> Maybe the former is more preferable? >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Jiang Yan Xu <[email protected]> @xujyan <http://twitter.com/xujyan> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:55 PM, John Sirois <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > Since when has mesos followed the latest way! >> >> > >> >> > That said, lowercase might look good. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Vinod Kone <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > What do people think about lowercase vs uppercase. I personally >> prefer >> >> > the >> >> > > former. Looking around the web, that seems to be the latest way? >> >> > > >> >> > > http://www.openstack.org/ >> >> > > http://cloudstack.apache.org/ >> >> > > http://hadoop.apache.org/ >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Dave Lester < >> >> [email protected] >> >> > > >wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > > > Based upon feedback I received, a minor tweak to the logo font >> was >> >> made >> >> > > > from what we previously voted on -- note the letter M which >> looks a >> >> bit >> >> > > > more stylized and modern. It makes the text a bit more >> distinctive >> >> and >> >> > > > stylized, IMHO. The distinctive mark and colors remain the same. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/8n39vi57qkoydxt/Screen%20Shot%202013-06-26%20at%202.34.23%20PM.png >> >> > > > >> >> > > > I anticipate that others are fine with this modification, so I'd >> >> like >> >> > to >> >> > > > use lazy consensus to approve the change. If you disagree with >> the >> >> > > change, >> >> > > > please respond within 72 hours. Otherwise, I'll push forward with >> >> it! >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Dave >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > John Sirois >> >> > 303-512-3301 >> >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> > >
