On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:46 AM, RGB ES <rgb.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2012/10/24 Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> > > > Alexandro Colorado wrote: > > > > On 10/23/12, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > >> > >>> Exactly. And this means we cannot use Alexandro's SVG since it is not a > >>> 100% reproduction of the bitmap by Michael Acevedo (the orb is > perfectly > >>> > >> Who made Michael Acevedo the offical artist of AOO? If we are going to > >> have a 'new' logo that automatically disqualify using MA logo > >> > > > > Nobody made Michael Acevedo the official artist, but a mailing list vote > > approved his logo as the Apache OpenOffice logo for the 3.4.x series (at > > that time, we believed that the version after 3.4.x would be 4.x). So, > > again: for 3.4 and all official communication in 3.4 the reference logo > is > > that one, and not something that is 95% similar to it or that tweaks > > colors/fonts. We must be consistent. This is the reason why we cannot use > > your SVG version now. > > > > But it is understood, as Graham wrote, that this is a temporary solution. > > For future releases we are free to adopt any new logo, having a > similarity > > to the current one anywhere between 0% and 100%, and since we are not > under > > pressure at the moment we can explore possibilities for a full > rebranding: > > logo, site, palette, icons... If we go for a full rebranding, it is good > to > > make it coincident with the 4.0 release since it would be easier to > > communicate and less suspicious to users. > > > > +1. > > 4.0 is the time for a full rebranding, not before. Of course we need to > start with this sooner than later, but IMO it is not urgent. > > Regards > Ricardo >
Disagree completely, a rebrand is not a trivial matter, that can be knocked up in a weekend. We are marketing a consumer space product and therefore a lot of preparation needs to be done including researching our endusers. Right now the Marketing, Art and UX people in the project are a miniscule in number. It has been difficult to inspire people to join the project because it was seen as "same old, same old". A whole lot of developers trying desperately not to change anything right down to keeping the old Oracle Logo. Whether this impression is right or wrong is not the point, to get people excited we need to get moving on the process so that people can see that there is something in the project worth putting some work into. Rob asked an excellent question some time back "Where are the next 100 million users coming from" I've asked the same question myself in the past, as have others. Ian Lynch took the bull by the horns and took it to the educationalists in the US and schools in the EU, Drew (IIRC, my memory is rubbish correct me if I'm wrong) went after Librarians. There are other avenues but at the end of the day we need the consumers talking about the product. Joe Brockmeier did a session on Marketing OSS at LCA a few years back, I asked him the same question or at least a variation on the theme. His short answer was "You've got almost a monopoly in the Linux space, so what the hell are you doing here? But in any case you have get the great unwashed to talk about it, and to do that give 'em something shiny and new." We have something shiny and new! Now what we have to do is package it like it is shiny and new and that is not something that you do in five minutes. I would rather be ready months early for the launch of 4.0 than have a last minute panic that ends in a half baked result. We want people talking about the new brand not sniggering about a lost opportunity. The 4.0 branding will define this project and the product for years to come and should therefore be done with an effort that reflects that responsibility. The next 100 million will thank us for the effort or stay away in droves if we look as if we didn't bother too much. Cheers GL > > > > > > Regards, > > Andrea. > > >
