Rockbox Logo...

[gevaerts]

And you saw it coming.. heres my version - put in the context of a new web page
http://www.unco.co.nz/legacy/work/rockbox/rockbox1.jpg

Your logo may be polished, but in my humble opinion that's all it is. The current one looks much better.

[LambdaCalculus]

I'm sorry, but I think that logo is very un-Rockbox.

[MarcGuay]

The site design is nice and shows a lot of potential for improvements in the keep-it-simple-stupid department, but I have to agree that the logo itself left me a bit cold.  A for effort.

[Chronon]

4) I realise that open source is normally a case of standing on the shoulders of giants but when you use and or propose an image like this http://pijulius.blogspot.com/2006/06/rockbox-bootloader-with-fullscreenlogo.html you should at least credit the origins? http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&safe=off&q=hed+kandi+image&btnG=Search+Images

I just want to point out that this was never under consideration as an official logo.  It has only ever appeared in unofficial builds created by individuals.  Any official logo will have to be compatible with GPL (v2 or greater), as far as I understand.

[ZincAlloy]

I really like that web design. Clear and straight forward. And the logo is kinda.... grooovy! 

I don't see any indication of "music" in that logo at all. It's more or less all box, no rock.

don't you see the sound waves emanating from the box?

[AlexP]

I quite like the design, I don't like the logo

[Strife89]

Agreed; the overall design of the page looks wonderful, but the logo just turns me off.

I think a yellow speaker would look better as a logo.

[hayden]

Here's an evolution version (yes, sometimes evolution has leaps and bounds too) using the r/note/box of an earlier poster modified so it isn't read upside down.

To save some uber-geeks time, the binary reads "rockbox rocks" when read as ascii

Have included a legibility comparison at the bottom - to demonstrate the main reason why I avoided the draughting lines of the original

http://www.unco.co.nz/legacy/work/rockbox/rockbox2.jpg

On another point I think this post forum should be stickied because:
1) Its a conversation which will continue to rear its head the more popular/broad the project becomes
2) It would help give people who want to make a design-based contribution some background information ie things definitively rejected... the badger did get rejected right?
3) Designing 'cold' like this is difficult so it helps to get to know the personality of rockbox - the apparent contradictions like a treble clef (classical?) with the word "rock" and so on.

[JdGordon]

yeah that logo looks better..
dont like the grey though

[bascule]

Here's an evolution version (yes, sometimes evolution has leaps and bounds too) using the r/note/box of an earlier poster modified so it isn't read upside down.

I really like that one. However, as you've noticed, Rockbox is not a democracy and there seems little appetite from those who could change it to do so.

[Llorean]

We prefer not to sticky topics here. There's just too many topics that one could argue *could* be stickied, it makes more sense to expect people to just follow the guidelines and run a quick search or two on their area of interest.

It would be also good to remember that the people you most need to convince are the people who really like the original image. The line "think evolution, not revolution" means "We're more likely to prefer ones inspired by and closely related to the current one." Saying "Well, sometimes evolution makes jumps" just means to us "I don't really like your current image so I'm going to make something completely different and call it evolution."

And, as to your legibility test, why exactly are we scaling the full website header image down to ridiculously small sizes, exactly? (PS: It looks to me like your scaling is done by a poor algorithm, look in the top left corner of this page to see a similarly scaled one to your medium image, but with a lot less ugliness, and I suspect both our and your image would look better with better scaling).

As to the treble clef, in a widespread non-technical sense the treble clef is considered more or less symbolic of music in general, and so suitable as being very recognizable. As, obviously, we are not about a container made of stone.

[hayden]

We prefer not to sticky topics here. There's just too many topics that one could argue *could* be stickied, it makes more sense to expect people to just follow the guidelines and run a quick search or two on their area of interest.

ok fair enough

It would be also good to remember that the people you most need to convince are the people who really like the original image. The line "think evolution, not revolution" means "We're more likely to prefer ones inspired by and closely related to the current one." Saying "Well, sometimes evolution makes jumps" just means to us "I don't really like your current image so I'm going to make something completely different and call it evolution."
And, as to your legibility test, why exactly are we scaling the full website header image down to ridiculously small sizes, exactly? (PS: It looks to me like your scaling is done by a poor algorithm, look in the top left corner of this page to see a similarly scaled one to your medium image, but with a lot less ugliness, and I suspect both our and your image would look better with better scaling).

Obviously no one on the rockbox team has asked for design concepts so this situation is different to a normal design process - my personal reason for throwing my 2c into the logo ring was that (even though the current logo is loved like a child) there are reasons to be critical of it.

If i had to state only a few things I would say (and this is for future endevours because i'm blowing my 2 cent budget here)
1) the treble clef gets lost at small (forum id) sizes. (perhaps more than a simple note)
2) the tagline is lost quickly - even with a better algorhythm than the one I was using
3) the space between the 'o' & 'x' isn't very well defined
4) unsure whether the code on the right hand side is secondary - or just additional texture or part of logo

a case in point: ford
http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/can_ford_afford_a_redesign.php
this is an argument for both evolution and revolution.

- the oldest clearly had some problems first jump was radical
- since then has been carefully maintained with minor tweaks
- looks like they are going with another radical jump soon?


on a closing note:
Keep up the great work all - work like you're doing + active forums help keep the community vibrant.
Looking forward to version 3.1!

hayden

[yapper]

I'd be curious to see some indication of how well loved the current logo is.

[Llorean]

Do you have a numeric scale for love, or were you just looking for a chorus of voices to say "I like it better than anything that's been suggested so far"?

[yapper]

Maybe something a bit more objective, like a poll to seek opinions of the current logo versus the most recent offering by hayden.

Voting options could include "new is better than old", "old is better than new", "like both", "like neither" and the obligatory "I prefer not to answer"