You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> on 2013/05/28 00:22:29 UTC
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+Refinement
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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Chris Rot <ch...@gmail.com>.
Hi all. I mostly agree with Andrea's and other comments regarding my
version:
- 4 should only be used in the v4 Version splash screens etc. .
- "globe with birds" could be increased another bit, but not much;
otherwise I think the globe is too dominant.
- regarding "Apache" I have aligned it with "pen" under it. I also think
the p descender is not negative in my version and in any case like it more
as the capital form. So the only option for changement would be to make the
color darker or the font heavier. I have tried both, but I like my current
version and even in smallest sizes Apache to me is not less readable then
other variants, where Apache has the same proportion regarding OpenOffice.
- regarding the ligature ffi: like expressed in another thread I have done
the ff ligature manually in Inkscape, but I don't like the i point merged
in to the f and my distance "ff" to "i" was choosen carefully, but I'm open
to proposals how to design the ligature.ffi.
2013/5/30 Albino B Neto <bi...@apache.org>
> 2013/5/27 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>:
> > 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+Refinement
> >
> > 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.
>
> +1
>
> Vote of Kevin.
>
> Albino
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Albino B Neto <bi...@apache.org>.
2013/5/27 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>:
> 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+Refinement
>
> 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.
+1
Vote of Kevin.
Albino
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 6:22 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> 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+Refinement
>
> 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.
>
One week has passed. We've had some good discussion, and further
refined one of the logos. Personally I am seeing convergence of
opinion around one of the logos. However, some community members
expressed a preference for different logos from the survey (not the
top ones). One community member (Hagar) suggested not changing the
logo at all, and another one (Graham) wanted to go back to the
OpenOffice.org word mark and logo from OOo 3.3.0. So I'm not willing
to claim that there is consensus.
Also, my perception is that the discussion is not advancing, and minds
are unlikely to change with further discussion. So I'll start a
72-hour vote later today. Since we have more than one option for a
logo, I'll ask PMC members to list their ranked preferences. The
ballot will be scored via Instant Run-Off Voting (IRV) rules [1].
I'll include a "don't change the logo" option as well as a position
for a write-in choice. Everyone will have the opportunity to express
their preference.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
Regards,
-Rob
> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 6:22 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> 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+Refinement
>
> 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.
>
One week has passed. We've had some good discussion, and further
refined one of the logos. Personally I am seeing convergence of
opinion around one of the logos. However, some community members
expressed a preference for different logos from the survey (not the
top ones). One community member (Hagar) suggested not changing the
logo at all, and another one (Graham) wanted to go back to the
OpenOffice.org word mark and logo from OOo 3.3.0. So I'm not willing
to claim that there is consensus.
Also, my perception is that the discussion is not advancing, and minds
are unlikely to change with further discussion. So I'll start a
72-hour vote later today. Since we have more than one option for a
logo, I'll ask PMC members to list their ranked preferences. The
ballot will be scored via Instant Run-Off Voting (IRV) rules [1].
I'll include a "don't change the logo" option as well as a position
for a write-in choice. Everyone will have the opportunity to express
their preference.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
Regards,
-Rob
> 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: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 28/05/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
> 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+Refinement
> As you can see there is quite a bit of convergence on a design occurring.
This is just right for a product with an established brand. Good to see
that the process has brought nice results so far.
> So what next?
> I'd like to propose some next steps.
The plan is OK to me.
> A) Let's discuss the three designs on the mailing list for the next
> week. The discussion might lead to further refinement.
They are all rather good, but I quite like Chris' design: the heavier
font looks better than the (a bit too thin) one used by Samer and Kevin,
and the gray color looks more modern than the black we used to have.
Speaking of Chris' design...
- I would keep the version number ("4") only for the splash screen and
for the about box, but not for the main logo (I doubt we want to use it
on the website).
- "Apache" should be given more prominence: font size is OK, but the
font weight and color should match those of "Office". I find Samer's
"Apache" better than Chris' as for weight and color. Remember that we
want to be able to scale the logo also quite small, like the current
logo shown on that page.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Albino B Neto <bi...@apache.org>.
2013/5/27 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>:
> 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+Refinement
>
> 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.
+1
Vote of Kevin.
Albino
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi,
Kevin's "book birds" use perspective drawing techniques and converge on the horizon. They are going somewhere.
The standard gulls are more like two birds in the standard "wingman" formation. OpenOffice is your "wingman" to take you where you want to go.
Regards,
Dave
On May 28, 2013, at 10:12 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> @Kevin,
>
> It never occurred to me that those were flying books. Taking another look, it still doesn't work. If made more obviously as books, I'm not sure how that will occur as indicative of an office productivity suite. (I have no idea how birds in flight do that either, but it is probably better to avoid trying for a literal connection.)
>
> - Dennis
>
> Looking Closer:
>
> The first visual distraction for me is the difference in orientation. The foreground (larger) object is angled differently and it has a very different feel. I don't know why. (One might be that your large foreground object seems viewed from above, especially if it is supposed to be a book, whereas in the other forms, it is easier to see them as viewed from below -- I get it is totally an optical illusion that there is a particular viewpoint orientation, but that is how they occur to me on first glance.)
>
> The only way I can visualize the book notion is that I am seeing an unfolded piece of paper. If this is two facing pages of an open book, the problem is there is nothing to suggest the rest of the book.
>
> I think this goes to show that seeing a book at the abstracted level of this symbol is a definite stretch.
>
> "Your ideas taking flight" is a great catch-phrase though. That works with any of them. In that regard, the symbol Chris used has the advantage of the foreground wing extending beyond the edge of the orb. I tend to see that as being in front of the orb, although one can also consider that we are seeing them on the outside of a round aperture. My immediate subjective response is to see the flyers in front of the orb. I have no idea how consistent that is with the initial perception of others, if there is any consistency at all.
>
> As far as this kind of imagery goes, the flat symbol is an improvement on the orb in the current logo, which has the appearance of a button or globe standing on a surface.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Grignon [mailto:kevingrignon.oo@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 05:44 AM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Cc: marketing; dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
>
> Hello all,
>
> I wanted to share some design rationale for the gull/book pages enhancement in my logo.
>
> In my design I wanted to make the "gulls" into flying books. I made them broader and more active. I was going for the whole, "OpenOffice helps give my thoughts and ideas wings", versus "gills at sunset".
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Kevin
>
> [ ... ]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:32 AM, David Gerard <dg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 28 May 2013 18:12, Dennis E. Hamilton <de...@acm.org> wrote:
>
>> It never occurred to me that those were flying books. Taking another look, it still doesn't work. If made more obviously as books, I'm not sure how that will occur as indicative of an office productivity suite. (I have no idea how birds in flight do that either, but it is probably better to avoid trying for a literal connection.)
>
>
> Slightly tangential historical question, if anyone here remembers
> authoritatively:
>
> What was the origin of the OpenOffice.org gull motif, way back when?
>
> Is (or was) this documented anywhere?
>
The archives from the OpenOffice.org mailing lists are here:
http://openoffice.markmail.org
If you search for "gulls" you get first mention back in 2001. But the
conversation sounds like it is already a familiar idea by that point
in time.
-Rob
>
> - d.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:32 AM, David Gerard <dg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 28 May 2013 18:12, Dennis E. Hamilton <de...@acm.org> wrote:
>
>> It never occurred to me that those were flying books. Taking another look, it still doesn't work. If made more obviously as books, I'm not sure how that will occur as indicative of an office productivity suite. (I have no idea how birds in flight do that either, but it is probably better to avoid trying for a literal connection.)
>
>
> Slightly tangential historical question, if anyone here remembers
> authoritatively:
>
> What was the origin of the OpenOffice.org gull motif, way back when?
>
> Is (or was) this documented anywhere?
>
The archives from the OpenOffice.org mailing lists are here:
http://openoffice.markmail.org
If you search for "gulls" you get first mention back in 2001. But the
conversation sounds like it is already a familiar idea by that point
in time.
-Rob
>
> - d.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by David Gerard <dg...@gmail.com>.
On 28 May 2013 18:12, Dennis E. Hamilton <de...@acm.org> wrote:
> It never occurred to me that those were flying books. Taking another look, it still doesn't work. If made more obviously as books, I'm not sure how that will occur as indicative of an office productivity suite. (I have no idea how birds in flight do that either, but it is probably better to avoid trying for a literal connection.)
Slightly tangential historical question, if anyone here remembers
authoritatively:
What was the origin of the OpenOffice.org gull motif, way back when?
Is (or was) this documented anywhere?
- d.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by David Gerard <dg...@gmail.com>.
On 28 May 2013 18:12, Dennis E. Hamilton <de...@acm.org> wrote:
> It never occurred to me that those were flying books. Taking another look, it still doesn't work. If made more obviously as books, I'm not sure how that will occur as indicative of an office productivity suite. (I have no idea how birds in flight do that either, but it is probably better to avoid trying for a literal connection.)
Slightly tangential historical question, if anyone here remembers
authoritatively:
What was the origin of the OpenOffice.org gull motif, way back when?
Is (or was) this documented anywhere?
- d.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Rob Weir <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 31, 2013, at 4:31 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Rob Weir <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On May 30, 2013, at 6:30 PM, Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Hagar Delest <
> hagar.delest@laposte.net
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Le 30/05/2013 22:53, Rob Weir a écrit :
> >>>>
> >>>> I think the important thing is to realize that long-standing
> >>>>> OpenOffice users, like you and me, have strong opinions and
> >>>>> perceptions on this that are not necessarily reflective of the views
> >>>>> of the broader user base. We're too close and too familiar with the
> >>>>> old logo. So I discount your views on this just as I discount my
> own.
> >>>>> I look more toward the survey for an unbiased view.
> >>>>
> >>>> OK but we should allow the users to decide if they want to keep the
> >>>> current logo. If it's not among the other candidates, it denies this
> >> right
> >>>> to the users.
> >>>>
> >>>> I thought the current logo was among the surveyed logos...?
> >>
> >> The current logo is not really eligible since we have no vector source
> >> for it. It was a quick hack for AOO 3.4.0 using a composited bitmap.
> >> But it doesn't work with the full range of uses we need the logo for.
> >>
> >> Of course if anyone wants to make an vector version of the old logo,
> >> using a free font, etc., then we can certainly consider it. That was
> >> always a possibility, though it didn't seen to interest any designer.
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >
> > My feeling is that we put out this survey to actually find out what the
> > responders liked. It is certainly true that many of us really LIKE the
> > existing logo. But I think that we should respect the outcome of the
> > survey.
> > There seemed to be a consensus both for the flat logo and the thinner
> > letters
>
> I'm wondering if it is worth creating some processed versions of the
> top logos to validate how well they handle expected transformations
> like:
>
> 1. Rendered at 1-bit color (non dithered black & white) like a silk
> screened tee-shirt image might have.
>
> 2. Rendered monochrome dithered,such as in newsprint.
>
> 3. Rendered smaller to see still distinctive / recognizable
>
> 4. Rendered larger to verify quality of vector paths
>
> 5. Rendered on an off-white background rather than pure white to check
> contrast. (Our blog for example is not pure white)
>
> 6. Render with color filter to reflect common color blindness
> varieties to confirm image still is coherent.
>
> These are all transformations we can expect in real use, so it will
> good to pick a logo that preserves it's character and recognition
> under such transformations.
>
> There may be other such technical checks that the designers would be
> more familiar with.
>
> -Rob
>
These are probably useful to do, esp #3, 4, and 6 I would think.
>
> > .
>
> > I think doing the survey and honoring the results is a good way to keep
> > Apache OpenOffice relevant.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>> Don
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > ------------
> > MzK
> >
> > "You can't believe one thing and do another.
> > What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
> > -- Leonard Peltier
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"You can't believe one thing and do another.
What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
-- Leonard Peltier
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Rob Weir <ra...@gmail.com>.
On May 31, 2013, at 4:31 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Rob Weir <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 30, 2013, at 6:30 PM, Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Hagar Delest <hagar.delest@laposte.net
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Le 30/05/2013 22:53, Rob Weir a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> I think the important thing is to realize that long-standing
>>>>> OpenOffice users, like you and me, have strong opinions and
>>>>> perceptions on this that are not necessarily reflective of the views
>>>>> of the broader user base. We're too close and too familiar with the
>>>>> old logo. So I discount your views on this just as I discount my own.
>>>>> I look more toward the survey for an unbiased view.
>>>>
>>>> OK but we should allow the users to decide if they want to keep the
>>>> current logo. If it's not among the other candidates, it denies this
>> right
>>>> to the users.
>>>>
>>>> I thought the current logo was among the surveyed logos...?
>>
>> The current logo is not really eligible since we have no vector source
>> for it. It was a quick hack for AOO 3.4.0 using a composited bitmap.
>> But it doesn't work with the full range of uses we need the logo for.
>>
>> Of course if anyone wants to make an vector version of the old logo,
>> using a free font, etc., then we can certainly consider it. That was
>> always a possibility, though it didn't seen to interest any designer.
>>
>> -Rob
>
> My feeling is that we put out this survey to actually find out what the
> responders liked. It is certainly true that many of us really LIKE the
> existing logo. But I think that we should respect the outcome of the
> survey.
> There seemed to be a consensus both for the flat logo and the thinner
> letters
I'm wondering if it is worth creating some processed versions of the
top logos to validate how well they handle expected transformations
like:
1. Rendered at 1-bit color (non dithered black & white) like a silk
screened tee-shirt image might have.
2. Rendered monochrome dithered,such as in newsprint.
3. Rendered smaller to see still distinctive / recognizable
4. Rendered larger to verify quality of vector paths
5. Rendered on an off-white background rather than pure white to check
contrast. (Our blog for example is not pure white)
6. Render with color filter to reflect common color blindness
varieties to confirm image still is coherent.
These are all transformations we can expect in real use, so it will
good to pick a logo that preserves it's character and recognition
under such transformations.
There may be other such technical checks that the designers would be
more familiar with.
-Rob
> .
> I think doing the survey and honoring the results is a good way to keep
> Apache OpenOffice relevant.
>
>
>>
>>> Don
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------
> MzK
>
> "You can't believe one thing and do another.
> What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
> -- Leonard Peltier
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Rob Weir <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 30, 2013, at 6:30 PM, Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Hagar Delest <hagar.delest@laposte.net
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Le 30/05/2013 22:53, Rob Weir a écrit :
> >>
> >> I think the important thing is to realize that long-standing
> >>> OpenOffice users, like you and me, have strong opinions and
> >>> perceptions on this that are not necessarily reflective of the views
> >>> of the broader user base. We're too close and too familiar with the
> >>> old logo. So I discount your views on this just as I discount my own.
> >>> I look more toward the survey for an unbiased view.
> >>
> >> OK but we should allow the users to decide if they want to keep the
> >> current logo. If it's not among the other candidates, it denies this
> right
> >> to the users.
> >>
> >> I thought the current logo was among the surveyed logos...?
> >
>
> The current logo is not really eligible since we have no vector source
> for it. It was a quick hack for AOO 3.4.0 using a composited bitmap.
> But it doesn't work with the full range of uses we need the logo for.
>
> Of course if anyone wants to make an vector version of the old logo,
> using a free font, etc., then we can certainly consider it. That was
> always a possibility, though it didn't seen to interest any designer.
>
> -Rob
>
My feeling is that we put out this survey to actually find out what the
responders liked. It is certainly true that many of us really LIKE the
existing logo. But I think that we should respect the outcome of the
survey.
There seemed to be a consensus both for the flat logo and the thinner
letters.
I think doing the survey and honoring the results is a good way to keep
Apache OpenOffice relevant.
>
> > Don
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"You can't believe one thing and do another.
What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
-- Leonard Peltier
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Rob Weir <ra...@gmail.com>.
On May 30, 2013, at 6:30 PM, Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>wrote:
>
>> Le 30/05/2013 22:53, Rob Weir a écrit :
>>
>> I think the important thing is to realize that long-standing
>>> OpenOffice users, like you and me, have strong opinions and
>>> perceptions on this that are not necessarily reflective of the views
>>> of the broader user base. We're too close and too familiar with the
>>> old logo. So I discount your views on this just as I discount my own.
>>> I look more toward the survey for an unbiased view.
>>
>> OK but we should allow the users to decide if they want to keep the
>> current logo. If it's not among the other candidates, it denies this right
>> to the users.
>>
>> I thought the current logo was among the surveyed logos...?
>
The current logo is not really eligible since we have no vector source
for it. It was a quick hack for AOO 3.4.0 using a composited bitmap.
But it doesn't work with the full range of uses we need the logo for.
Of course if anyone wants to make an vector version of the old logo,
using a free font, etc., then we can certainly consider it. That was
always a possibility, though it didn't seen to interest any designer.
-Rob
> Don
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>wrote:
> Le 30/05/2013 22:53, Rob Weir a écrit :
>
> I think the important thing is to realize that long-standing
>> OpenOffice users, like you and me, have strong opinions and
>> perceptions on this that are not necessarily reflective of the views
>> of the broader user base. We're too close and too familiar with the
>> old logo. So I discount your views on this just as I discount my own.
>> I look more toward the survey for an unbiased view.
>>
>
> OK but we should allow the users to decide if they want to keep the
> current logo. If it's not among the other candidates, it denies this right
> to the users.
>
> I thought the current logo was among the surveyed logos...?
Don
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>.
Le 30/05/2013 22:53, Rob Weir a écrit :
> I think the important thing is to realize that long-standing
> OpenOffice users, like you and me, have strong opinions and
> perceptions on this that are not necessarily reflective of the views
> of the broader user base. We're too close and too familiar with the
> old logo. So I discount your views on this just as I discount my own.
> I look more toward the survey for an unbiased view.
OK but we should allow the users to decide if they want to keep the current logo. If it's not among the other candidates, it denies this right to the users.
Hagar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net> wrote:
> Le 28/05/2013 00:55, Dennis E. Hamilton a écrit :
>
>> PS: Interesting that we've come around to a close variant of the current
>> logo.
>
>
> Well, rather disappointing I would say. So much energy lost for just so few
> changes...
I don't think it was wasted effort if we gained knowledge.
> Perhaps it tells that there was no need to change the logo at all.
>
> Le 28/05/2013 20:39, Donald Whytock a écrit :
>
>> So the flat orb is likely to be the new standard? Will the round orb then
>> be deliberately retired?
>
>
> Are we sure about this?
> If there is a last round, will the round orb be part of the candidates?
>
> My feeling is that there are some improvements (dark gray color instead of
> black). But switching to a flat logo would be quite a step backward. The orb
> is the only modern aspect in the whole AOO visual identity.
>
Reading the comments from the survey I get exactly the opposite
impression, that the flat logo is seen as more modern, clean and
attractive than the 3D ray-traced style. I mean comments like these
for logo #34 (Chris's one):
"Very calm and cool logo, without any overwhelming design. Perfect for
the target market."
"Simple and clean"
"Simple but attractive."
"Clean and modern."
"Still fits well, like a leather jacket."
"Good follow on to the present"
"Nice! simple and printable"
"Excellent !! Simple. Colors are muted. Natural evolution from
current 3.0 logo, and improves on 3.0 logo."
"Simple but strong"
"good combo of previous tries. Typeface is good, birds simple but strong"
"Simple graphic with continuity in design, text attractive and easily readable."
"Nice, light, open feel."
"Simplicity is good."
"Great font and colour scheme, simple but very effective"
""Classic""
"This is a perfect logo; it's clean and modern. It can also be good
for a Windows 8 app."
"simple, feels good, memorable"
"Sometimes, the simplest solution is the best one."
"Simple, straightforward, all in the continuity (which may refer to
the absolute compatibility of OO files overtime)."
Of course, some thought it was "bland and boring".
I think the important thing is to realize that long-standing
OpenOffice users, like you and me, have strong opinions and
perceptions on this that are not necessarily reflective of the views
of the broader user base. We're too close and too familiar with the
old logo. So I discount your views on this just as I discount my own.
I look more toward the survey for an unbiased view.
Regards,
-Rob
> Hagar
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>.
Le 28/05/2013 00:55, Dennis E. Hamilton a écrit :
> PS: Interesting that we've come around to a close variant of the current logo.
Well, rather disappointing I would say. So much energy lost for just so few changes...
Perhaps it tells that there was no need to change the logo at all.
Le 28/05/2013 20:39, Donald Whytock a écrit :
> So the flat orb is likely to be the new standard? Will the round orb then
> be deliberately retired?
Are we sure about this?
If there is a last round, will the round orb be part of the candidates?
My feeling is that there are some improvements (dark gray color instead of black). But switching to a flat logo would be quite a step backward. The orb is the only modern aspect in the whole AOO visual identity.
Hagar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamilton@acm.org
> wrote:
> The only way I can visualize the book notion is that I am seeing an
> unfolded piece of paper. If this is two facing pages of an open book, the
> problem is there is nothing to suggest the rest of the book.
>
It could be bookish with the addition of a "cover" -- a widened dark V
underneath the bird. But of course then you lose the birdishness.
Alternately, extend the wing tips into scroll spirals. But that risks
failing at bookishness AND birdishness.
So the flat orb is likely to be the new standard? Will the round orb then
be deliberately retired?
Don
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi,
Kevin's "book birds" use perspective drawing techniques and converge on the horizon. They are going somewhere.
The standard gulls are more like two birds in the standard "wingman" formation. OpenOffice is your "wingman" to take you where you want to go.
Regards,
Dave
On May 28, 2013, at 10:12 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> @Kevin,
>
> It never occurred to me that those were flying books. Taking another look, it still doesn't work. If made more obviously as books, I'm not sure how that will occur as indicative of an office productivity suite. (I have no idea how birds in flight do that either, but it is probably better to avoid trying for a literal connection.)
>
> - Dennis
>
> Looking Closer:
>
> The first visual distraction for me is the difference in orientation. The foreground (larger) object is angled differently and it has a very different feel. I don't know why. (One might be that your large foreground object seems viewed from above, especially if it is supposed to be a book, whereas in the other forms, it is easier to see them as viewed from below -- I get it is totally an optical illusion that there is a particular viewpoint orientation, but that is how they occur to me on first glance.)
>
> The only way I can visualize the book notion is that I am seeing an unfolded piece of paper. If this is two facing pages of an open book, the problem is there is nothing to suggest the rest of the book.
>
> I think this goes to show that seeing a book at the abstracted level of this symbol is a definite stretch.
>
> "Your ideas taking flight" is a great catch-phrase though. That works with any of them. In that regard, the symbol Chris used has the advantage of the foreground wing extending beyond the edge of the orb. I tend to see that as being in front of the orb, although one can also consider that we are seeing them on the outside of a round aperture. My immediate subjective response is to see the flyers in front of the orb. I have no idea how consistent that is with the initial perception of others, if there is any consistency at all.
>
> As far as this kind of imagery goes, the flat symbol is an improvement on the orb in the current logo, which has the appearance of a button or globe standing on a surface.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Grignon [mailto:kevingrignon.oo@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 05:44 AM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Cc: marketing; dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
>
> Hello all,
>
> I wanted to share some design rationale for the gull/book pages enhancement in my logo.
>
> In my design I wanted to make the "gulls" into flying books. I made them broader and more active. I was going for the whole, "OpenOffice helps give my thoughts and ideas wings", versus "gills at sunset".
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Kevin
>
> [ ... ]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
@Kevin,
It never occurred to me that those were flying books. Taking another look, it still doesn't work. If made more obviously as books, I'm not sure how that will occur as indicative of an office productivity suite. (I have no idea how birds in flight do that either, but it is probably better to avoid trying for a literal connection.)
- Dennis
Looking Closer:
The first visual distraction for me is the difference in orientation. The foreground (larger) object is angled differently and it has a very different feel. I don't know why. (One might be that your large foreground object seems viewed from above, especially if it is supposed to be a book, whereas in the other forms, it is easier to see them as viewed from below -- I get it is totally an optical illusion that there is a particular viewpoint orientation, but that is how they occur to me on first glance.)
The only way I can visualize the book notion is that I am seeing an unfolded piece of paper. If this is two facing pages of an open book, the problem is there is nothing to suggest the rest of the book.
I think this goes to show that seeing a book at the abstracted level of this symbol is a definite stretch.
"Your ideas taking flight" is a great catch-phrase though. That works with any of them. In that regard, the symbol Chris used has the advantage of the foreground wing extending beyond the edge of the orb. I tend to see that as being in front of the orb, although one can also consider that we are seeing them on the outside of a round aperture. My immediate subjective response is to see the flyers in front of the orb. I have no idea how consistent that is with the initial perception of others, if there is any consistency at all.
As far as this kind of imagery goes, the flat symbol is an improvement on the orb in the current logo, which has the appearance of a button or globe standing on a surface.
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Grignon [mailto:kevingrignon.oo@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 05:44 AM
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Cc: marketing; dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Hello all,
I wanted to share some design rationale for the gull/book pages enhancement in my logo.
In my design I wanted to make the "gulls" into flying books. I made them broader and more active. I was going for the whole, "OpenOffice helps give my thoughts and ideas wings", versus "gills at sunset".
Thoughts?
Kevin
[ ... ]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
@Kevin,
It never occurred to me that those were flying books. Taking another look, it still doesn't work. If made more obviously as books, I'm not sure how that will occur as indicative of an office productivity suite. (I have no idea how birds in flight do that either, but it is probably better to avoid trying for a literal connection.)
- Dennis
Looking Closer:
The first visual distraction for me is the difference in orientation. The foreground (larger) object is angled differently and it has a very different feel. I don't know why. (One might be that your large foreground object seems viewed from above, especially if it is supposed to be a book, whereas in the other forms, it is easier to see them as viewed from below -- I get it is totally an optical illusion that there is a particular viewpoint orientation, but that is how they occur to me on first glance.)
The only way I can visualize the book notion is that I am seeing an unfolded piece of paper. If this is two facing pages of an open book, the problem is there is nothing to suggest the rest of the book.
I think this goes to show that seeing a book at the abstracted level of this symbol is a definite stretch.
"Your ideas taking flight" is a great catch-phrase though. That works with any of them. In that regard, the symbol Chris used has the advantage of the foreground wing extending beyond the edge of the orb. I tend to see that as being in front of the orb, although one can also consider that we are seeing them on the outside of a round aperture. My immediate subjective response is to see the flyers in front of the orb. I have no idea how consistent that is with the initial perception of others, if there is any consistency at all.
As far as this kind of imagery goes, the flat symbol is an improvement on the orb in the current logo, which has the appearance of a button or globe standing on a surface.
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Grignon [mailto:kevingrignon.oo@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 05:44 AM
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Cc: marketing; dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Hello all,
I wanted to share some design rationale for the gull/book pages enhancement in my logo.
In my design I wanted to make the "gulls" into flying books. I made them broader and more active. I was going for the whole, "OpenOffice helps give my thoughts and ideas wings", versus "gills at sunset".
Thoughts?
Kevin
[ ... ]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Kevin Grignon <ke...@gmail.com>.
Hello all,
I wanted to share some design rationale for the gull/book pages enhancement in my logo.
In my design I wanted to make the "gulls" into flying books. I made them broader and more active. I was going for the whole, "OpenOffice helps give my thoughts and ideas wings", versus "gills at sunset".
Thoughts?
Kevin
On May 28, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Kadal Amutham <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 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+Refinement
>>>
>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Kevin Grignon <ke...@gmail.com>.
Hello all,
I wanted to share some design rationale for the gull/book pages enhancement in my logo.
In my design I wanted to make the "gulls" into flying books. I made them broader and more active. I was going for the whole, "OpenOffice helps give my thoughts and ideas wings", versus "gills at sunset".
Thoughts?
Kevin
On May 28, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Kadal Amutham <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 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+Refinement
>>>
>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 6/4/13 10:47 AM, Chris Rot wrote:
> We could change the font for Apache to a sligtly thicker variant, but I
> would prefer to not have to much dominant words: Apache OpenOffice is long
> and my first proposal started only with the "globe with birds" and Office.
> I would like to retain some of the idea to have a short word brand or at
> least not dominant additional words.
> Regarding Rob's comments I can't speak much about the past from my
> experience, but I consider also the OOo brand interesting because shorter
> then "AOO":
> http://www.openoffice.org/documentation/HOW_TO/word_processing/Word-to-OOo_html_408582ff.png
I agree and we should not stress the word Apache in the context of
OpenOffice. OpenOffice is the brand, Apache OpenOffice is the project
under the ASF and we highlight this in certain places.
Think about other Apache project, nobody talk about Apache subversion
but simply subversion, nobody talks about Apache flex but simply flex.
Just my 2 cents
Juergen
>
> OpenToAnyDecision ;-)
>
>
> 2013/6/2 Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>
>
>> On 30/05/2013 Chris Rot wrote:
>>
>>> I have removed v4 and added variants overview PNG/PDF in
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
>>> Stage+2+Logo+Refinement<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Stage+2+Logo+Refinement>
>>> :
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/download/**
>>> attachments/31821474/2013-05_**Apache_OpenOffice_Logo-**
>>> Proposal_ChrisR_2-refinement_**incl-v4_Versions.png<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/31821474/2013-05_Apache_OpenOffice_Logo-Proposal_ChrisR_2-refinement_incl-v4_Versions.png>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/download/**
>>> attachments/31821474/2013-05_**Apache_OpenOffice_Logo-**
>>> Proposal_ChrisR_2-refinement_**incl-v4_Versions.pdf?version=**
>>> 1&modificationDate=**1369935586121<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/31821474/2013-05_Apache_OpenOffice_Logo-Proposal_ChrisR_2-refinement_incl-v4_Versions.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1369935586121>
>>>
>>
>> I still quite like it, even though I would probably have preferred to keep
>> the lighter grey in "Office" (but if we move to personal preferences, of
>> course everyone has his own).
>>
>> It is still an issue that at 33% (more or less the size of the website
>> banner) "Apache" is barely readable. Could we circumvent the issue by using
>> a specific "pixel-perfect" design, rather than a resize, for the site
>> banner? I mean something with the same size of http://www.openoffice.org/*
>> *images/AOO_logos/OOo_Website_**v2_copy.png<http://www.openoffice.org/images/AOO_logos/OOo_Website_v2_copy.png>that is very close to a resize of your bigger logo, but has some very fine
>> tweaks, added to that version only, that make "Apache" more readable at
>> that size. So basically: a resize with a bit of post-processing so that it
>> looks great at that size too.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrea.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@**openoffice.apache.org<ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.**apache.org<ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Chris Rot <ch...@gmail.com>.
We could change the font for Apache to a sligtly thicker variant, but I
would prefer to not have to much dominant words: Apache OpenOffice is long
and my first proposal started only with the "globe with birds" and Office.
I would like to retain some of the idea to have a short word brand or at
least not dominant additional words.
Regarding Rob's comments I can't speak much about the past from my
experience, but I consider also the OOo brand interesting because shorter
then "AOO":
http://www.openoffice.org/documentation/HOW_TO/word_processing/Word-to-OOo_html_408582ff.png
OpenToAnyDecision ;-)
2013/6/2 Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>
> On 30/05/2013 Chris Rot wrote:
>
>> I have removed v4 and added variants overview PNG/PDF in
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
>> Stage+2+Logo+Refinement<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Stage+2+Logo+Refinement>
>> :
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/download/**
>> attachments/31821474/2013-05_**Apache_OpenOffice_Logo-**
>> Proposal_ChrisR_2-refinement_**incl-v4_Versions.png<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/31821474/2013-05_Apache_OpenOffice_Logo-Proposal_ChrisR_2-refinement_incl-v4_Versions.png>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/download/**
>> attachments/31821474/2013-05_**Apache_OpenOffice_Logo-**
>> Proposal_ChrisR_2-refinement_**incl-v4_Versions.pdf?version=**
>> 1&modificationDate=**1369935586121<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/31821474/2013-05_Apache_OpenOffice_Logo-Proposal_ChrisR_2-refinement_incl-v4_Versions.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1369935586121>
>>
>
> I still quite like it, even though I would probably have preferred to keep
> the lighter grey in "Office" (but if we move to personal preferences, of
> course everyone has his own).
>
> It is still an issue that at 33% (more or less the size of the website
> banner) "Apache" is barely readable. Could we circumvent the issue by using
> a specific "pixel-perfect" design, rather than a resize, for the site
> banner? I mean something with the same size of http://www.openoffice.org/*
> *images/AOO_logos/OOo_Website_**v2_copy.png<http://www.openoffice.org/images/AOO_logos/OOo_Website_v2_copy.png>that is very close to a resize of your bigger logo, but has some very fine
> tweaks, added to that version only, that make "Apache" more readable at
> that size. So basically: a resize with a bit of post-processing so that it
> looks great at that size too.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@**openoffice.apache.org<ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.**apache.org<ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
>
>
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 30/05/2013 Chris Rot wrote:
> I have removed v4 and added variants overview PNG/PDF in
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Stage+2+Logo+Refinement
> :
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/31821474/2013-05_Apache_OpenOffice_Logo-Proposal_ChrisR_2-refinement_incl-v4_Versions.png
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/31821474/2013-05_Apache_OpenOffice_Logo-Proposal_ChrisR_2-refinement_incl-v4_Versions.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1369935586121
I still quite like it, even though I would probably have preferred to
keep the lighter grey in "Office" (but if we move to personal
preferences, of course everyone has his own).
It is still an issue that at 33% (more or less the size of the website
banner) "Apache" is barely readable. Could we circumvent the issue by
using a specific "pixel-perfect" design, rather than a resize, for the
site banner? I mean something with the same size of
http://www.openoffice.org/images/AOO_logos/OOo_Website_v2_copy.png that
is very close to a resize of your bigger logo, but has some very fine
tweaks, added to that version only, that make "Apache" more readable at
that size. So basically: a resize with a bit of post-processing so that
it looks great at that size too.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Chris Rot <ch...@gmail.com>.
I have removed v4 and added variants overview PNG/PDF in
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Stage+2+Logo+Refinement
:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/31821474/2013-05_Apache_OpenOffice_Logo-Proposal_ChrisR_2-refinement_incl-v4_Versions.png
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/31821474/2013-05_Apache_OpenOffice_Logo-Proposal_ChrisR_2-refinement_incl-v4_Versions.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1369935586121
2013/5/30 Samer Mansour <sa...@gmail.com>
> If the PMC likes my logo but wants something tweaked, I can do so.
> But I would leave the tweaking up to the PMC, especially because they might
> be ok with a Logo as is.
>
> Samer
>
>
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 28 May 2013 21:07:28 Rob Weir wrote:
> > >> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>
> > 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.
> > >
> > > Likewise, oh well those are the breaks, priorities must needs win out.
> > >
> > >
> > >> 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/
> > >
> > > Excellent, thank you. Why were Lucas Filho's concepts not included?
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27846912/Concepts_LucasFilho02.png
> > >
> >
> > Human error? Though the survey was vetted on the dev list and ample
> > opportunity given to object if anyone thought something was missing.
> > In fact some other logos were missing and the designers noticed this
> > and told me. The process certainly is biased toward the interests of
> > active community members.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> > 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".
> > >
> > > Without a specific demographic defined and no filtering on respondents
> > then they
> > > are to all intents and purposes random. You could define them as
> > "Community"
> > > but concievably anyone who owns a computer could be called part of that
> > > community as soon as they make an effort to interract with the project.
> > >
> > > The only non-random element is that they all knew about OO before doing
> > the
> > > survey which pretty much puts most of them outside the demographic that
> > we
> > > need to reach.
> > >
> >
> > Fortunately we also included demographic questions so we can filter
> > results and look at differences in a more fine-grained way, e.g., long
> > term OpenOffice users versus those who are not users, by gender, by
> > age, by country, etc.
> >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> > 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.
> > >
> > > Indeed, so therefore from a marketing POV the survey/poll was
> > meaningless in
> > > terms of the branding needs. A number of us (Not just me as you seem
> to
> > be
> > > inferring later in this reply) stated early on, that a Vote is a bad
> way
> > to
> > > select a brand. As I probably pointed out back then, we produce a
> > consumer
> > > product. Our users are not developers or techs and the "User Community"
> > is far
> > > larger than the "Project Community". If we were to make a comparison
> > with the
> > > High Street then we are a B2C operation rather than a B2B which most
> > other
> > > Open Source projects, certainly those here in the ASF, tend to be.
> > >
> >
> > We did not vote on a logo. We had a preference polll to gauge
> > perception on the proposals from ordinary users. This data was
> > gathered objectively, analyzed objectively and the analysis is being
> > used objectively. How the logo appears to "random" people is
> > relevant information. The comments especially are relevant. It is
> > good that we know which logo is too close to the emblem of a European
> > political party, which one is derived from an Icelandic radio station,
> > which ones are unlucky in Chinese, and which one looks to some like a
> > "flying penis". Without the survey these relevant items might have
> > been missed. But in no case is the survey treated like a vote and
> > determine the outcome by itself. It is just an additional data point
> > to feed into a deliberative process. If it was a vote we'd be done
> > by now.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> On the other hand "continuity" is a value just as "new beginning" is a
> > >> value.
> > >
> > > Definitely, I agree that continuity is a value but mainly in a
> shrinking
> > or
> > > static market. We however are in an expanding market and to retain
> > relevance
> > > in a growth market requires a brand that is fresh and dynamic.
> > >
> > >>There is nothing wrong per se with expressing continuity by
> > >> having a logo that is a more modern take on the classic logo.
> > >>
> > >> .
> > >
> > > If that were true, then the orb would be gone. The Orb is not
> "classic",
> > > Stella knocked that one up as part of a refresh post Oracle takeover.
> > It's
> > > not classic in fact it just reminds me of the whole Oracle screw up.
> > > The "Classic" logo as I have pointed out in the past ad nauseam is 14
> > > characters in Camel case: OpenOffice.org, THAT is not available to us.
> > The truly
> > > recognisable classic part of our branding has been stripped from us by
> > short
> > > sighted Apache policies.
> > >
> >
> > The gulls and the color and "OpenOffice" (camel case even) are parts
> > of the continuity.
> >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> <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?
> > >
> > >
> > > Heh, not everyone else, there have been other voices of reason, but
> > they're
> > > probably too polite and are easily ignored. Those people with
> marketing
> > > knowledge on this list are few and far between and thus are easily
> > drowned out
> > > by the clamour of those who see marketing as "Puffery" or just an
> > annoyance.
> > >
> >
> > Noted: everyone that agrees with you is silent.
> >
> >
> > > The Linkert scale is purely about subjectivity so any response
> generated
> > by
> > > the survey is going to be subjective, that's not an observation, that
> is
> > fact.
> > >
> >
> > It is an objective measure of the subjective perceptions of
> > respondents. Public perception of the logo is a relevant fact.
> >
> > > From a marketing perspective, and purely about brand recognition if you
> > were
> > > going to use the linkert scale as a guide then take out all the middle
> > > responses and throw them away. For our purposes they are meaningless.
> > They
> > > are a non reaction, in other words boring. You would be left with
> those
> > that
> > > excited a reaction whether negative or positive.
> > >
> >
> > This was in the report, in this chart, though looking at only Strong
> Likes:
> >
> > http://survey.openoffice.org/reports/aoo40-logo-poll/strong-likes.png
> >
> > (I don't think the Strong Dislikes take us in the right direction.)
> >
> > > The data is then revealing: For instance the respondents are negative
> > types
> > > making 2.5 times more strong dislikes votes as strong likes. The logo
> > that
> > > generated the most strong likes (No4) only got around ten percent of
> > > respondents voting for a strong like. That tells me that few of these
> > logos
> > > have any of the sort of impact that would be needed to generate
> > significant
> > > increase in brand recognition.
> > >
> > > At the other end of the scale however No37 generated a strong reaction
> in
> > > close to 50% of respondents. That's what I call significant. However,
> > it's
> > > red and orange, colours which are known to generate reaction and high
> > > interest. 37 was also square so it was more in your face given the
> > > previously mentioned inequities with regard to image sizing. Given
> also
> > the
> > > demographic of the respondents it was also the one that was most
> unlike
> > the
> > > present logo so there was always going to be a bias, as you've already
> > noted
> > > above, toward the encumbent and also likely to generate the most
> negative
> > > response.
> > >
> >
> > 37 had the largest number of Strong Dislike scores. The comments on
> > this logo were very negative as well. It would certainly be noticed,
> > but I'm not sure that the associations would support the brand.
> >
> > > Most significantly however our present logo seemed to generate a
> "shrug"
> > level
> > > of enthusiasm being 35th on the list for generating a response. Very
> > much a
> > > Ho-Hum response, with only around ten percent of respondents
> registering
> > a
> > > strong reaction whether Like or Dislike. This means our Brand doesn't
> > even
> > > excite our own community which is the most significant indicator for
> the
> > need
> > > for change and in fact in just under 4400 responses our present logo
> only
> > > generated 250 odd more Strong likes than 37 which has the most strong
> > > dislikes.
> > >
> >
> > I think we want to consider the base rate of responses and look at
> > deviations from that. In any survey with a neutral middle choice
> > there will be a tendency for respondents to pick that. I did
> > another charts, not included in the report, to eliminate the neutral
> > scores, looking instead at (Like + Strong Like) - (Dislike + Strong
> > Dislike), but the results don't change much.
> >
> > >
> > > Marketing's main goal should be to increase brand recognition amongst
> > users
> > > outside the present user base. To do this, one thing we should do is
> > excite
> > > our present users, word of mouth is the best form of marketing. If
> this
> > > survey highlights anything it is a disturbing level of indifference.
> > >
> >
> > Note that the report does show the scores of those who are OpenOffice
> > users versus those who are not:
> >
> > http://survey.openoffice.org/reports/aoo40-logo-poll/users-notusers.png
> >
> > As noted in the report there were some logos that placed higher in one
> > group or another, but at the top of the scale the preferences were
> > stable. I do agree that the primary audience is for those who are not
> > yet users. And if there were large differences in that chart then I'd
> > be more concerned. But the data doesn't show a difference here.
> >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> 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.
> > >
> > > No real point, my preference is based on different criteria to the
> > others, the
> > > survey used a linkert scale which is designed to be purely subjective.
> > > As has been noted before, a vote is the worst way to choose a brand
> > because it
> > > will always tend towards the bland. No point in contributing to a
> flawed
> > > process.
> > >
> >
> > Fortunately we did not vote on a logo, as explained above. The PMC
> > will pick the logo, and the results of the user preference poll is one
> > data point for their consideration. Your views, your opinions, of
> > course, are also input into the process.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > > Also I have in the past noted on this list the criteria that good
> > branding
> > > needs to fulfill, at this point none of the above fulfill those
> criteria.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > GL
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >>
> > >> -Rob
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Samer Mansour <sa...@gmail.com>.
If the PMC likes my logo but wants something tweaked, I can do so.
But I would leave the tweaking up to the PMC, especially because they might
be ok with a Logo as is.
Samer
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 28 May 2013 21:07:28 Rob Weir wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>
> 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.
> >
> > Likewise, oh well those are the breaks, priorities must needs win out.
> >
> >
> >> 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/
> >
> > Excellent, thank you. Why were Lucas Filho's concepts not included?
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27846912/Concepts_LucasFilho02.png
> >
>
> Human error? Though the survey was vetted on the dev list and ample
> opportunity given to object if anyone thought something was missing.
> In fact some other logos were missing and the designers noticed this
> and told me. The process certainly is biased toward the interests of
> active community members.
>
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> > 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".
> >
> > Without a specific demographic defined and no filtering on respondents
> then they
> > are to all intents and purposes random. You could define them as
> "Community"
> > but concievably anyone who owns a computer could be called part of that
> > community as soon as they make an effort to interract with the project.
> >
> > The only non-random element is that they all knew about OO before doing
> the
> > survey which pretty much puts most of them outside the demographic that
> we
> > need to reach.
> >
>
> Fortunately we also included demographic questions so we can filter
> results and look at differences in a more fine-grained way, e.g., long
> term OpenOffice users versus those who are not users, by gender, by
> age, by country, etc.
>
> >
> >>
> >> > 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.
> >
> > Indeed, so therefore from a marketing POV the survey/poll was
> meaningless in
> > terms of the branding needs. A number of us (Not just me as you seem to
> be
> > inferring later in this reply) stated early on, that a Vote is a bad way
> to
> > select a brand. As I probably pointed out back then, we produce a
> consumer
> > product. Our users are not developers or techs and the "User Community"
> is far
> > larger than the "Project Community". If we were to make a comparison
> with the
> > High Street then we are a B2C operation rather than a B2B which most
> other
> > Open Source projects, certainly those here in the ASF, tend to be.
> >
>
> We did not vote on a logo. We had a preference polll to gauge
> perception on the proposals from ordinary users. This data was
> gathered objectively, analyzed objectively and the analysis is being
> used objectively. How the logo appears to "random" people is
> relevant information. The comments especially are relevant. It is
> good that we know which logo is too close to the emblem of a European
> political party, which one is derived from an Icelandic radio station,
> which ones are unlucky in Chinese, and which one looks to some like a
> "flying penis". Without the survey these relevant items might have
> been missed. But in no case is the survey treated like a vote and
> determine the outcome by itself. It is just an additional data point
> to feed into a deliberative process. If it was a vote we'd be done
> by now.
>
>
> >
> >>
> >> On the other hand "continuity" is a value just as "new beginning" is a
> >> value.
> >
> > Definitely, I agree that continuity is a value but mainly in a shrinking
> or
> > static market. We however are in an expanding market and to retain
> relevance
> > in a growth market requires a brand that is fresh and dynamic.
> >
> >>There is nothing wrong per se with expressing continuity by
> >> having a logo that is a more modern take on the classic logo.
> >>
> >> .
> >
> > If that were true, then the orb would be gone. The Orb is not "classic",
> > Stella knocked that one up as part of a refresh post Oracle takeover.
> It's
> > not classic in fact it just reminds me of the whole Oracle screw up.
> > The "Classic" logo as I have pointed out in the past ad nauseam is 14
> > characters in Camel case: OpenOffice.org, THAT is not available to us.
> The truly
> > recognisable classic part of our branding has been stripped from us by
> short
> > sighted Apache policies.
> >
>
> The gulls and the color and "OpenOffice" (camel case even) are parts
> of the continuity.
>
> >
> >>
> >> <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?
> >
> >
> > Heh, not everyone else, there have been other voices of reason, but
> they're
> > probably too polite and are easily ignored. Those people with marketing
> > knowledge on this list are few and far between and thus are easily
> drowned out
> > by the clamour of those who see marketing as "Puffery" or just an
> annoyance.
> >
>
> Noted: everyone that agrees with you is silent.
>
>
> > The Linkert scale is purely about subjectivity so any response generated
> by
> > the survey is going to be subjective, that's not an observation, that is
> fact.
> >
>
> It is an objective measure of the subjective perceptions of
> respondents. Public perception of the logo is a relevant fact.
>
> > From a marketing perspective, and purely about brand recognition if you
> were
> > going to use the linkert scale as a guide then take out all the middle
> > responses and throw them away. For our purposes they are meaningless.
> They
> > are a non reaction, in other words boring. You would be left with those
> that
> > excited a reaction whether negative or positive.
> >
>
> This was in the report, in this chart, though looking at only Strong Likes:
>
> http://survey.openoffice.org/reports/aoo40-logo-poll/strong-likes.png
>
> (I don't think the Strong Dislikes take us in the right direction.)
>
> > The data is then revealing: For instance the respondents are negative
> types
> > making 2.5 times more strong dislikes votes as strong likes. The logo
> that
> > generated the most strong likes (No4) only got around ten percent of
> > respondents voting for a strong like. That tells me that few of these
> logos
> > have any of the sort of impact that would be needed to generate
> significant
> > increase in brand recognition.
> >
> > At the other end of the scale however No37 generated a strong reaction in
> > close to 50% of respondents. That's what I call significant. However,
> it's
> > red and orange, colours which are known to generate reaction and high
> > interest. 37 was also square so it was more in your face given the
> > previously mentioned inequities with regard to image sizing. Given also
> the
> > demographic of the respondents it was also the one that was most unlike
> the
> > present logo so there was always going to be a bias, as you've already
> noted
> > above, toward the encumbent and also likely to generate the most negative
> > response.
> >
>
> 37 had the largest number of Strong Dislike scores. The comments on
> this logo were very negative as well. It would certainly be noticed,
> but I'm not sure that the associations would support the brand.
>
> > Most significantly however our present logo seemed to generate a "shrug"
> level
> > of enthusiasm being 35th on the list for generating a response. Very
> much a
> > Ho-Hum response, with only around ten percent of respondents registering
> a
> > strong reaction whether Like or Dislike. This means our Brand doesn't
> even
> > excite our own community which is the most significant indicator for the
> need
> > for change and in fact in just under 4400 responses our present logo only
> > generated 250 odd more Strong likes than 37 which has the most strong
> > dislikes.
> >
>
> I think we want to consider the base rate of responses and look at
> deviations from that. In any survey with a neutral middle choice
> there will be a tendency for respondents to pick that. I did
> another charts, not included in the report, to eliminate the neutral
> scores, looking instead at (Like + Strong Like) - (Dislike + Strong
> Dislike), but the results don't change much.
>
> >
> > Marketing's main goal should be to increase brand recognition amongst
> users
> > outside the present user base. To do this, one thing we should do is
> excite
> > our present users, word of mouth is the best form of marketing. If this
> > survey highlights anything it is a disturbing level of indifference.
> >
>
> Note that the report does show the scores of those who are OpenOffice
> users versus those who are not:
>
> http://survey.openoffice.org/reports/aoo40-logo-poll/users-notusers.png
>
> As noted in the report there were some logos that placed higher in one
> group or another, but at the top of the scale the preferences were
> stable. I do agree that the primary audience is for those who are not
> yet users. And if there were large differences in that chart then I'd
> be more concerned. But the data doesn't show a difference here.
>
> >
> >>
> >> 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.
> >
> > No real point, my preference is based on different criteria to the
> others, the
> > survey used a linkert scale which is designed to be purely subjective.
> > As has been noted before, a vote is the worst way to choose a brand
> because it
> > will always tend towards the bland. No point in contributing to a flawed
> > process.
> >
>
> Fortunately we did not vote on a logo, as explained above. The PMC
> will pick the logo, and the results of the user preference poll is one
> data point for their consideration. Your views, your opinions, of
> course, are also input into the process.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
> > Also I have in the past noted on this list the criteria that good
> branding
> > needs to fulfill, at this point none of the above fulfill those criteria.
> >
> > Cheers
> > GL
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 May 2013 21:07:28 Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> 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.
>
> Likewise, oh well those are the breaks, priorities must needs win out.
>
>
>> 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/
>
> Excellent, thank you. Why were Lucas Filho's concepts not included?
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27846912/Concepts_LucasFilho02.png
>
Human error? Though the survey was vetted on the dev list and ample
opportunity given to object if anyone thought something was missing.
In fact some other logos were missing and the designers noticed this
and told me. The process certainly is biased toward the interests of
active community members.
>
>
>
>>
>> > 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".
>
> Without a specific demographic defined and no filtering on respondents then they
> are to all intents and purposes random. You could define them as "Community"
> but concievably anyone who owns a computer could be called part of that
> community as soon as they make an effort to interract with the project.
>
> The only non-random element is that they all knew about OO before doing the
> survey which pretty much puts most of them outside the demographic that we
> need to reach.
>
Fortunately we also included demographic questions so we can filter
results and look at differences in a more fine-grained way, e.g., long
term OpenOffice users versus those who are not users, by gender, by
age, by country, etc.
>
>>
>> > 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.
>
> Indeed, so therefore from a marketing POV the survey/poll was meaningless in
> terms of the branding needs. A number of us (Not just me as you seem to be
> inferring later in this reply) stated early on, that a Vote is a bad way to
> select a brand. As I probably pointed out back then, we produce a consumer
> product. Our users are not developers or techs and the "User Community" is far
> larger than the "Project Community". If we were to make a comparison with the
> High Street then we are a B2C operation rather than a B2B which most other
> Open Source projects, certainly those here in the ASF, tend to be.
>
We did not vote on a logo. We had a preference polll to gauge
perception on the proposals from ordinary users. This data was
gathered objectively, analyzed objectively and the analysis is being
used objectively. How the logo appears to "random" people is
relevant information. The comments especially are relevant. It is
good that we know which logo is too close to the emblem of a European
political party, which one is derived from an Icelandic radio station,
which ones are unlucky in Chinese, and which one looks to some like a
"flying penis". Without the survey these relevant items might have
been missed. But in no case is the survey treated like a vote and
determine the outcome by itself. It is just an additional data point
to feed into a deliberative process. If it was a vote we'd be done
by now.
>
>>
>> On the other hand "continuity" is a value just as "new beginning" is a
>> value.
>
> Definitely, I agree that continuity is a value but mainly in a shrinking or
> static market. We however are in an expanding market and to retain relevance
> in a growth market requires a brand that is fresh and dynamic.
>
>>There is nothing wrong per se with expressing continuity by
>> having a logo that is a more modern take on the classic logo.
>>
>> .
>
> If that were true, then the orb would be gone. The Orb is not "classic",
> Stella knocked that one up as part of a refresh post Oracle takeover. It's
> not classic in fact it just reminds me of the whole Oracle screw up.
> The "Classic" logo as I have pointed out in the past ad nauseam is 14
> characters in Camel case: OpenOffice.org, THAT is not available to us. The truly
> recognisable classic part of our branding has been stripped from us by short
> sighted Apache policies.
>
The gulls and the color and "OpenOffice" (camel case even) are parts
of the continuity.
>
>>
>> <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?
>
>
> Heh, not everyone else, there have been other voices of reason, but they're
> probably too polite and are easily ignored. Those people with marketing
> knowledge on this list are few and far between and thus are easily drowned out
> by the clamour of those who see marketing as "Puffery" or just an annoyance.
>
Noted: everyone that agrees with you is silent.
> The Linkert scale is purely about subjectivity so any response generated by
> the survey is going to be subjective, that's not an observation, that is fact.
>
It is an objective measure of the subjective perceptions of
respondents. Public perception of the logo is a relevant fact.
> From a marketing perspective, and purely about brand recognition if you were
> going to use the linkert scale as a guide then take out all the middle
> responses and throw them away. For our purposes they are meaningless. They
> are a non reaction, in other words boring. You would be left with those that
> excited a reaction whether negative or positive.
>
This was in the report, in this chart, though looking at only Strong Likes:
http://survey.openoffice.org/reports/aoo40-logo-poll/strong-likes.png
(I don't think the Strong Dislikes take us in the right direction.)
> The data is then revealing: For instance the respondents are negative types
> making 2.5 times more strong dislikes votes as strong likes. The logo that
> generated the most strong likes (No4) only got around ten percent of
> respondents voting for a strong like. That tells me that few of these logos
> have any of the sort of impact that would be needed to generate significant
> increase in brand recognition.
>
> At the other end of the scale however No37 generated a strong reaction in
> close to 50% of respondents. That's what I call significant. However, it's
> red and orange, colours which are known to generate reaction and high
> interest. 37 was also square so it was more in your face given the
> previously mentioned inequities with regard to image sizing. Given also the
> demographic of the respondents it was also the one that was most unlike the
> present logo so there was always going to be a bias, as you've already noted
> above, toward the encumbent and also likely to generate the most negative
> response.
>
37 had the largest number of Strong Dislike scores. The comments on
this logo were very negative as well. It would certainly be noticed,
but I'm not sure that the associations would support the brand.
> Most significantly however our present logo seemed to generate a "shrug" level
> of enthusiasm being 35th on the list for generating a response. Very much a
> Ho-Hum response, with only around ten percent of respondents registering a
> strong reaction whether Like or Dislike. This means our Brand doesn't even
> excite our own community which is the most significant indicator for the need
> for change and in fact in just under 4400 responses our present logo only
> generated 250 odd more Strong likes than 37 which has the most strong
> dislikes.
>
I think we want to consider the base rate of responses and look at
deviations from that. In any survey with a neutral middle choice
there will be a tendency for respondents to pick that. I did
another charts, not included in the report, to eliminate the neutral
scores, looking instead at (Like + Strong Like) - (Dislike + Strong
Dislike), but the results don't change much.
>
> Marketing's main goal should be to increase brand recognition amongst users
> outside the present user base. To do this, one thing we should do is excite
> our present users, word of mouth is the best form of marketing. If this
> survey highlights anything it is a disturbing level of indifference.
>
Note that the report does show the scores of those who are OpenOffice
users versus those who are not:
http://survey.openoffice.org/reports/aoo40-logo-poll/users-notusers.png
As noted in the report there were some logos that placed higher in one
group or another, but at the top of the scale the preferences were
stable. I do agree that the primary audience is for those who are not
yet users. And if there were large differences in that chart then I'd
be more concerned. But the data doesn't show a difference here.
>
>>
>> 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.
>
> No real point, my preference is based on different criteria to the others, the
> survey used a linkert scale which is designed to be purely subjective.
> As has been noted before, a vote is the worst way to choose a brand because it
> will always tend towards the bland. No point in contributing to a flawed
> process.
>
Fortunately we did not vote on a logo, as explained above. The PMC
will pick the logo, and the results of the user preference poll is one
data point for their consideration. Your views, your opinions, of
course, are also input into the process.
Regards,
-Rob
> Also I have in the past noted on this list the criteria that good branding
> needs to fulfill, at this point none of the above fulfill those criteria.
>
> Cheers
> GL
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Tuesday 28 May 2013 21:07:28 Rob Weir wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> 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.
Likewise, oh well those are the breaks, priorities must needs win out.
> 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/
Excellent, thank you. Why were Lucas Filho's concepts not included?
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27846912/Concepts_LucasFilho02.png
>
> > 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".
Without a specific demographic defined and no filtering on respondents then they
are to all intents and purposes random. You could define them as "Community"
but concievably anyone who owns a computer could be called part of that
community as soon as they make an effort to interract with the project.
The only non-random element is that they all knew about OO before doing the
survey which pretty much puts most of them outside the demographic that we
need to reach.
>
> > 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.
Indeed, so therefore from a marketing POV the survey/poll was meaningless in
terms of the branding needs. A number of us (Not just me as you seem to be
inferring later in this reply) stated early on, that a Vote is a bad way to
select a brand. As I probably pointed out back then, we produce a consumer
product. Our users are not developers or techs and the "User Community" is far
larger than the "Project Community". If we were to make a comparison with the
High Street then we are a B2C operation rather than a B2B which most other
Open Source projects, certainly those here in the ASF, tend to be.
>
> On the other hand "continuity" is a value just as "new beginning" is a
> value.
Definitely, I agree that continuity is a value but mainly in a shrinking or
static market. We however are in an expanding market and to retain relevance
in a growth market requires a brand that is fresh and dynamic.
>There is nothing wrong per se with expressing continuity by
> having a logo that is a more modern take on the classic logo.
>
> .
If that were true, then the orb would be gone. The Orb is not "classic",
Stella knocked that one up as part of a refresh post Oracle takeover. It's
not classic in fact it just reminds me of the whole Oracle screw up.
The "Classic" logo as I have pointed out in the past ad nauseam is 14
characters in Camel case: OpenOffice.org, THAT is not available to us. The truly
recognisable classic part of our branding has been stripped from us by short
sighted Apache policies.
>
> <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?
Heh, not everyone else, there have been other voices of reason, but they're
probably too polite and are easily ignored. Those people with marketing
knowledge on this list are few and far between and thus are easily drowned out
by the clamour of those who see marketing as "Puffery" or just an annoyance.
The Linkert scale is purely about subjectivity so any response generated by
the survey is going to be subjective, that's not an observation, that is fact.
>From a marketing perspective, and purely about brand recognition if you were
going to use the linkert scale as a guide then take out all the middle
responses and throw them away. For our purposes they are meaningless. They
are a non reaction, in other words boring. You would be left with those that
excited a reaction whether negative or positive.
The data is then revealing: For instance the respondents are negative types
making 2.5 times more strong dislikes votes as strong likes. The logo that
generated the most strong likes (No4) only got around ten percent of
respondents voting for a strong like. That tells me that few of these logos
have any of the sort of impact that would be needed to generate significant
increase in brand recognition.
At the other end of the scale however No37 generated a strong reaction in
close to 50% of respondents. That's what I call significant. However, it's
red and orange, colours which are known to generate reaction and high
interest. 37 was also square so it was more in your face given the
previously mentioned inequities with regard to image sizing. Given also the
demographic of the respondents it was also the one that was most unlike the
present logo so there was always going to be a bias, as you've already noted
above, toward the encumbent and also likely to generate the most negative
response.
Most significantly however our present logo seemed to generate a "shrug" level
of enthusiasm being 35th on the list for generating a response. Very much a
Ho-Hum response, with only around ten percent of respondents registering a
strong reaction whether Like or Dislike. This means our Brand doesn't even
excite our own community which is the most significant indicator for the need
for change and in fact in just under 4400 responses our present logo only
generated 250 odd more Strong likes than 37 which has the most strong
dislikes.
Marketing's main goal should be to increase brand recognition amongst users
outside the present user base. To do this, one thing we should do is excite
our present users, word of mouth is the best form of marketing. If this
survey highlights anything it is a disturbing level of indifference.
>
> 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.
No real point, my preference is based on different criteria to the others, the
survey used a linkert scale which is designed to be purely subjective.
As has been noted before, a vote is the worst way to choose a brand because it
will always tend towards the bland. No point in contributing to a flawed
process.
Also I have in the past noted on this list the criteria that good branding
needs to fulfill, at this point none of the above fulfill those criteria.
Cheers
GL
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> 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
>> > info@thevitalportal.com
>> > 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" <ke...@gmail.com>
>> > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> > Cc: "marketing" <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>,
>> > dev@openoffice.apache.org 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 <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>> >>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
>> >>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>>
>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
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
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.
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.
A good example happened a while back with the OpenSuSE community. Novell
changed the way it created and distributed promo DVDs. The task; to market
and distribute OS 11.3, was given to a company in Germany whose name escapes
me at the moment. Up til then the packaging had been blacks, greys and dark
greens. The new guys brightened up the packaging, put photos of happy looking
people on the sleeve and generally went all out to be funky and aim at the 16
- 35 market. It caused a hell of a shit fight, the devs and many of the
community objected loudly. So I took it and the previous version (mostly
grey with a little bit of green with black pin stripes) to a Software Freedom
Day event and asked people who knew nothing about the software, which one
they would choose to take, NOT which one they "liked" better but which they
would take home with them. Almost without exception they chose the funky
11.3, even those that were outside the target market preferred the 11.3
version. From my own aesthetic POV I preferred the look of the 11.1 & 11.2
packaging but I wasn't the target market. The 11.3 packaging however had
impact and it attracted it's target audience and that was the Objective.
>
> One of the important aspects is to get a new maintainable and fresh
> image source (svg) and variations that we can use for different use cases.
>
> Nobody said that we have to invent something completely new.
Of course nobody said we HAVE to change it, I, personally, would have
preferred that we had made that assertion, rather than spending a lot of time
and effort on NOT changing it. Lucas Filho's proposals for instance, were very
good, especially the "Warpaint" idea. It had controversial potential about it
that could have given us column space and attracted a lot of attention.
Kevin's stacked pages motif was also great and I think that could have been
explored further.
The above two had the additional tick in that they were original.
>The brand is well known, the logo is well known, ...
The most recognisable part of the OOo brand was a line of text: 14 characters
in camel case:
OpenOffice.org.
It had the advantage that it was instantly recognisable in the middle of a
page of text, which given that it is an internet brand rather than a high
street brand is a huge thing.
That has changed completely it is now Apache Open Office. People used to
complain that the old name was long and clumsy and so we make it longer and
clumsier and without the distinctive word shape but somehow dropping the .org
made this alright, the problem is now we just have three words that blur into
the background of a pageful of characters. We had one very small brand
distinction and now we don't even have that, killed by "Nothing is in
stone..." Apache bureaucracy.
The logo is only known to our present user base, it has little, if any,
recognition outside that demographic and there is little reason to assume that
this will change if the branding simply staggers on as it is. Certainly it
will be difficult to hang a "rebranding" campaign off it. "Ladies and Gentlemen,
the big announcement today is that it's all the same as yesterday..." I can
feel the excitement generating in the market already! :/
The critical thing is brand recognition, outside our present user base, our
brand recognition is practically zero and that would still be higher than our
Logo recognition. (If you have any reputable market research that refutes
this I would love to see it.)
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.
Cheers
GL
>
> Juergen
>
> > Plan Your Work and Work Your Plan
> > with The Vital Portal
> >
> > Alphonso Whitfield
> > info@thevitalportal.com
> > 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" <ke...@gmail.com>
> > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> > Cc: "marketing" <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>,
> > dev@openoffice.apache.org 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 <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
> >>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
> >>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Samer Mansour <sa...@gmail.com>.
I didn't check if the font I used had a ff or ffi character.
I played with the characters in inkscape to adjust the dot height and f
spacing manually, as well as I tightened up the other characters in the
word mark.
That could be adjusted further.
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Graham Lauder <yo...@apache.org> 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
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> A good example happened a while back with the OpenSuSE community. Novell
> changed the way it created and distributed promo DVDs. The task; to market
> and distribute OS 11.3, was given to a company in Germany whose name
> escapes
> me at the moment. Up til then the packaging had been blacks, greys and
> dark
> greens. The new guys brightened up the packaging, put photos of happy
> looking
> people on the sleeve and generally went all out to be funky and aim at the
> 16
> - 35 market. It caused a hell of a shit fight, the devs and many of the
> community objected loudly. So I took it and the previous version (mostly
> grey with a little bit of green with black pin stripes) to a Software
> Freedom
> Day event and asked people who knew nothing about the software, which one
> they would choose to take, NOT which one they "liked" better but which they
> would take home with them. Almost without exception they chose the funky
> 11.3, even those that were outside the target market preferred the 11.3
> version. From my own aesthetic POV I preferred the look of the 11.1 & 11.2
> packaging but I wasn't the target market. The 11.3 packaging however had
> impact and it attracted it's target audience and that was the Objective.
>
> >
> > One of the important aspects is to get a new maintainable and fresh
> > image source (svg) and variations that we can use for different use
> cases.
> >
> > Nobody said that we have to invent something completely new.
>
> Of course nobody said we HAVE to change it, I, personally, would have
> preferred that we had made that assertion, rather than spending a lot of
> time
> and effort on NOT changing it. Lucas Filho's proposals for instance, were
> very
> good, especially the "Warpaint" idea. It had controversial potential
> about it
> that could have given us column space and attracted a lot of attention.
> Kevin's stacked pages motif was also great and I think that could have been
> explored further.
> The above two had the additional tick in that they were original.
>
>
> >The brand is well known, the logo is well known, ...
>
> The most recognisable part of the OOo brand was a line of text: 14
> characters
> in camel case:
>
> OpenOffice.org.
>
> It had the advantage that it was instantly recognisable in the middle of a
> page of text, which given that it is an internet brand rather than a high
> street brand is a huge thing.
>
> That has changed completely it is now Apache Open Office. People used to
> complain that the old name was long and clumsy and so we make it longer and
> clumsier and without the distinctive word shape but somehow dropping the
> .org
> made this alright, the problem is now we just have three words that blur
> into
> the background of a pageful of characters. We had one very small brand
> distinction and now we don't even have that, killed by "Nothing is in
> stone..." Apache bureaucracy.
>
> The logo is only known to our present user base, it has little, if any,
> recognition outside that demographic and there is little reason to assume
> that
> this will change if the branding simply staggers on as it is. Certainly it
> will be difficult to hang a "rebranding" campaign off it. "Ladies and
> Gentlemen,
> the big announcement today is that it's all the same as yesterday..." I
> can
> feel the excitement generating in the market already! :/
>
> The critical thing is brand recognition, outside our present user base, our
> brand recognition is practically zero and that would still be higher than
> our
> Logo recognition. (If you have any reputable market research that refutes
> this I would love to see it.)
>
>
> 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.
>
> Cheers
>
> GL
>
> >
> > Juergen
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > > Plan Your Work and Work Your Plan
> > > with The Vital Portal
> > >
> > > Alphonso Whitfield
> > > info@thevitalportal.com
> > > 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" <ke...@gmail.com>
> > > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> > > Cc: "marketing" <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>,
> > > dev@openoffice.apache.org 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 <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
> > >>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
> > >>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
> > >>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > >>>
> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > >>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Graham Lauder <yo...@apache.org>.
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
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.
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.
A good example happened a while back with the OpenSuSE community. Novell
changed the way it created and distributed promo DVDs. The task; to market
and distribute OS 11.3, was given to a company in Germany whose name escapes
me at the moment. Up til then the packaging had been blacks, greys and dark
greens. The new guys brightened up the packaging, put photos of happy looking
people on the sleeve and generally went all out to be funky and aim at the 16
- 35 market. It caused a hell of a shit fight, the devs and many of the
community objected loudly. So I took it and the previous version (mostly
grey with a little bit of green with black pin stripes) to a Software Freedom
Day event and asked people who knew nothing about the software, which one
they would choose to take, NOT which one they "liked" better but which they
would take home with them. Almost without exception they chose the funky
11.3, even those that were outside the target market preferred the 11.3
version. From my own aesthetic POV I preferred the look of the 11.1 & 11.2
packaging but I wasn't the target market. The 11.3 packaging however had
impact and it attracted it's target audience and that was the Objective.
>
> One of the important aspects is to get a new maintainable and fresh
> image source (svg) and variations that we can use for different use cases.
>
> Nobody said that we have to invent something completely new.
Of course nobody said we HAVE to change it, I, personally, would have
preferred that we had made that assertion, rather than spending a lot of time
and effort on NOT changing it. Lucas Filho's proposals for instance, were very
good, especially the "Warpaint" idea. It had controversial potential about it
that could have given us column space and attracted a lot of attention.
Kevin's stacked pages motif was also great and I think that could have been
explored further.
The above two had the additional tick in that they were original.
>The brand is well known, the logo is well known, ...
The most recognisable part of the OOo brand was a line of text: 14 characters
in camel case:
OpenOffice.org.
It had the advantage that it was instantly recognisable in the middle of a
page of text, which given that it is an internet brand rather than a high
street brand is a huge thing.
That has changed completely it is now Apache Open Office. People used to
complain that the old name was long and clumsy and so we make it longer and
clumsier and without the distinctive word shape but somehow dropping the .org
made this alright, the problem is now we just have three words that blur into
the background of a pageful of characters. We had one very small brand
distinction and now we don't even have that, killed by "Nothing is in
stone..." Apache bureaucracy.
The logo is only known to our present user base, it has little, if any,
recognition outside that demographic and there is little reason to assume that
this will change if the branding simply staggers on as it is. Certainly it
will be difficult to hang a "rebranding" campaign off it. "Ladies and Gentlemen,
the big announcement today is that it's all the same as yesterday..." I can
feel the excitement generating in the market already! :/
The critical thing is brand recognition, outside our present user base, our
brand recognition is practically zero and that would still be higher than our
Logo recognition. (If you have any reputable market research that refutes
this I would love to see it.)
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.
Cheers
GL
>
> Juergen
>
> > Plan Your Work and Work Your Plan
> > with The Vital Portal
> >
> > Alphonso Whitfield
> > info@thevitalportal.com
> > 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" <ke...@gmail.com>
> > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> > Cc: "marketing" <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>,
> > dev@openoffice.apache.org 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 <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
> >>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
> >>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
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.
One of the important aspects is to get a new maintainable and fresh
image source (svg) and variations that we can use for different use cases.
Nobody said that we have to invent something completely new. The brand
is well known, the logo is well known, ...
Juergen
>
>
> Plan Your Work and Work Your Plan
> with The Vital Portal
>
> Alphonso Whitfield
> info@thevitalportal.com
> 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" <ke...@gmail.com>
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Cc: "marketing" <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>, dev@openoffice.apache.org
> 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 <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
>>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> 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+Refinement
>>>>
>>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Alphonso Whitfield III <aw...@vital-inet.com>.
I agree with Kadal looks like more of the same.
Plan Your Work and Work Your Plan
with The Vital Portal
Alphonso Whitfield
info@thevitalportal.com
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" <ke...@gmail.com>
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Cc: "marketing" <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>, dev@openoffice.apache.org
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 <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 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+Refinement
>>>
>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
My totally-subjective responses of course, ...
Interesting. I find the use of all caps a little jarring. It's also something Apache doesn't usually do. Caps here suggests there is some technical significance to the use of all caps and it has Apache and OpenOffice feel separated.
The alignment in Chris's version seems to avoid the descender problem. and I notice you have one version with a shorter extender on the "p" and that could help as well.
- Dennis
PS: I agree that the "4" should not be part of the logo. That looks like a great form for use with version-specific materials though (splash/start screens, documentation covers, etc.).
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Grignon [mailto:kevingrignon.oo@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 05:46 AM
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Cc: marketing; dev@openoffice.apache.org
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 <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 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+Refinement
>>>
>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
My totally-subjective responses of course, ...
Interesting. I find the use of all caps a little jarring. It's also something Apache doesn't usually do. Caps here suggests there is some technical significance to the use of all caps and it has Apache and OpenOffice feel separated.
The alignment in Chris's version seems to avoid the descender problem. and I notice you have one version with a shorter extender on the "p" and that could help as well.
- Dennis
PS: I agree that the "4" should not be part of the logo. That looks like a great form for use with version-specific materials though (splash/start screens, documentation covers, etc.).
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Grignon [mailto:kevingrignon.oo@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 05:46 AM
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Cc: marketing; dev@openoffice.apache.org
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 <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 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+Refinement
>>>
>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Alphonso Whitfield III <aw...@vital-inet.com>.
I agree with Kadal looks like more of the same.
Plan Your Work and Work Your Plan
with The Vital Portal
Alphonso Whitfield
info@thevitalportal.com
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" <ke...@gmail.com>
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Cc: "marketing" <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>, dev@openoffice.apache.org
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 <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 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+Refinement
>>>
>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Kevin Grignon <ke...@gmail.com>.
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 <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 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+Refinement
>>>
>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Kevin Grignon <ke...@gmail.com>.
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 <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 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+Refinement
>>>
>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 5:35 AM, Kevin Grignon <ke...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I propose we get feedback on second round and identify what aspects of
> each we like.
>
> Let's converge on a design which reflects the best if each.
>
> Regards,
> Kevin
>
hmmm...I like the gulls in Kevin's designs better. To me, they denote a bit
more movement and action than the other one.
Of the two from Kevin, I like lettering on the first one with lower case
"Apache" but I think it would l might like a darker presentation of Apache
like Samer's design. I could support an upper case APACHE as well though.
I think the grey Apache with the black "Office" is a nice contrast.
I would totally exclude the "4" in any logo choice..
>
> On May 28, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Kadal Amutham <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
> >>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
> >>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> 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+Refinement
> >>>
> >>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"You can't believe one thing and do another.
What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
-- Leonard Peltier
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Kevin Grignon <ke...@gmail.com>.
Hello All,
I propose we get feedback on second round and identify what aspects of each we like.
Let's converge on a design which reflects the best if each.
Regards,
Kevin
On May 28, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Kadal Amutham <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 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+Refinement
>>>
>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Kevin Grignon <ke...@gmail.com>.
Hello All,
I propose we get feedback on second round and identify what aspects of each we like.
Let's converge on a design which reflects the best if each.
Regards,
Kevin
On May 28, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Kadal Amutham <vk...@gmail.com> 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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 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+Refinement
>>>
>>> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Alphonso Whitfield III <aw...@vital-inet.com>.
I agree with Kadal...
Plan Your Work and Work Your Plan
with The Vital Portal
Alphonso Whitfield
info@thevitalportal.com
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: "Kadal Amutham" <vk...@gmail.com>
To: "marketing" <ma...@openoffice.apache.org>
Cc: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 10:10:23 PM
Subject: Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
> > Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
> > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
> > 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+Refinement
> >
> > 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Kadal Amutham <vk...@gmail.com>.
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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
> > Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
> > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
> > 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+Refinement
> >
> > 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Kadal Amutham <vk...@gmail.com>.
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 <da...@comcast.net> 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:robweir@apache.org]
> > Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
> > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
> > 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+Refinement
> >
> > 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
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:robweir@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
> 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+Refinement
>
> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
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:robweir@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
> 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+Refinement
>
> 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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
[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.
- Dennis
PS: Interesting that we've come around to a close variant of the current logo.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
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+Refinement
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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 28/05/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
> 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+Refinement
> As you can see there is quite a bit of convergence on a design occurring.
This is just right for a product with an established brand. Good to see
that the process has brought nice results so far.
> So what next?
> I'd like to propose some next steps.
The plan is OK to me.
> A) Let's discuss the three designs on the mailing list for the next
> week. The discussion might lead to further refinement.
They are all rather good, but I quite like Chris' design: the heavier
font looks better than the (a bit too thin) one used by Samer and Kevin,
and the gray color looks more modern than the black we used to have.
Speaking of Chris' design...
- I would keep the version number ("4") only for the splash screen and
for the about box, but not for the main logo (I doubt we want to use it
on the website).
- "Apache" should be given more prominence: font size is OK, but the
font weight and color should match those of "Office". I find Samer's
"Apache" better than Chris' as for weight and color. Remember that we
want to be able to scale the logo also quite small, like the current
logo shown on that page.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
[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.
- Dennis
PS: Interesting that we've come around to a close variant of the current logo.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; marketing@openoffice.apache.org
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+Refinement
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: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.apache.org