Rockbox Logo...

[iPodFoo]

What about if the rockbox design was used for Windows? I would be turned off by it to be honest.

I think something simple and more contempory would be a good thing.

For example, the Windows logo is the coloured window pane thing, apple is, well, obviously a stylised apple, linux has the penguin character and so on. Theyre all identifiyable without words and very simple. Obviously a bit of marketing gets it "out there". But I think a good project like rockbox deserves a good logo to siginify its "coolness"  But then thats just me coming from a design background

lowlight:

Maybe we could slow down the boot process to display the logo longer, that way nobody will miss it.

The logo wouldnt have to be only at bootup, could use it for the menu. I put a logo for the background of the menus in all my wps themes.

[Llorean]

Well, so far nobody has presented a suggested symbolic logo, tending to opt for the textual ones. The closest still contain text elements.

If it were to go in that direction (a symbol representing the project) it could even very well coexist with the existing logo. More of a mascot image. BSD Daemon, Linux's Tux, etc. Any cute little critters seem appropriate?

[rasher]

Well, so far nobody has presented a suggested symbolic logo, tending to opt for the textual ones. The closest still contain text elements.

If it were to go in that direction (a symbol representing the project) it could even very well coexist with the existing logo. More of a mascot image. BSD Daemon, Linux's Tux, etc. Any cute little critters seem appropriate?

I'll again express my favour of the "Rockbox H300 experimental" (http://www.misticriver.net/showthread.php?t=35654) logo. Not the entire logo - but the small "R" that looks like it's part of a cube. It's in my opinion pretty good, but I don't understand why it's upside down.

[mightybrick]

Well, so far nobody has presented a suggested symbolic logo, tending to opt for the textual ones. The closest still contain text elements.

If it were to go in that direction (a symbol representing the project) it could even very well coexist with the existing logo. More of a mascot image. BSD Daemon, Linux's Tux, etc. Any cute little critters seem appropriate?

I'll again express my favour of the "Rockbox H300 experimental" (http://www.misticriver.net/showthread.php?t=35654) logo. Not the entire logo - but the small "R" that looks like it's part of a cube. It's in my opinion pretty good, but I don't understand why it's upside down.

Could it be that the upside down R is actually a box with a musical quarter note?  That's what it looks like to me.  I actually think it's pretty sharp-looking.  Very clever, concise, and well representative of Rockbox.

[haibane]

Well, so far nobody has presented a suggested symbolic logo, tending to opt for the textual ones. The closest still contain text elements.

If it were to go in that direction (a symbol representing the project) it could even very well coexist with the existing logo. More of a mascot image. BSD Daemon, Linux's Tux, etc. Any cute little critters seem appropriate?

Great idea. Its not that I have anything against the current logo, it just doesn't look right on my ipod screen. Not to say the ipod logo should be there. We could always do a guy holding a boom box over one shoulder.

[LinusN]

Really, it's just a logo.

Now, perhaps that's where our opinions clash. To me, and the other project leaders, the logo *is* important. Like I said in an earlier post:

The whole point of a logo is the element of recognition. When you see the logo, there should be no doubt what it represents. Just like the Coke logo, or McDonald's for that matter.

I'd say that the Rockbox logo is excellent in this respect. What is the point of changing it?

If McDonalds would change their yellow M to something else, they would lose a LOT. It's not that the yellow M is beautiful, but everyone recognizes it.

That is the point of a logo.

[Febs]

More fundamentally, however, I have yet to see anyone articulate any good reason why the existing logo should be replaced.  (I don't consider 'I like this other logo better' to be a good reason. )

The whole purpose of this thread is to illustrate that there are people who personally don't like the logo - that much is clear.  Why should specific rationale be articulated to you?

I think that you should be approaching it from the opposite perspective.  If you can't articulate a good reason to change it, then why should we consider doing so?

If someone comes up with a cool logo everyone likes and can agree on, just change it.  

Linus nailed it exactly.  A logo does not need to be "cool."  It needs to be recognizable and something that is associate in the mind of the public with the product.   The current logo serves that function.  Unless we're marketing Rockbox to the men of Gondor or the elves of Lothlorien, I don't see how the logo that you support has anything whatsoever to do with Rockbox, so while it may look "cool," it does not serve the function that a logo needs to serve.

If we were ever to decide that we need a symbolic logo, then I agree with Rasher that the graphic on the left side of this logo should get serious consideration:



In my mind, it has 4 things going for it:

-it is a box
-the quarter note (crotchet for those of you who are British) implies music
-the quarter note also forms a stylized "R"
-it is unique and could come to be identified with Rockbox.

[hotwire]

While I am for the most part content with the logo, I think that rather than a replacement, a "streamlining" of the existing logo might be a good idea.  (think a la slashdot renovations a few months back).  I do acknowledge to that end the feelings posted above that rockbox is not a polished finished product, and hence the present logo well represents that (it does), but as well a lot of logos out there have taken on a very minimalist approach.

Just the same, the status quo is fine with me.

[Yotto]

The "notebox" logo has two other things going for it.  First, it is square (Apple, McDonalds, Windows logos all fit nicely on a square.  it's aesthetically pleasing) and it does not have the the Rockbox name in it (again, the 3 examples that have been used in this thread all share that as well).  Yes, I know the Windows logo says "Microsoft Windows" under it in many cases, but it's not needed.  You see the logo, you think Windows.  You see the arches (They don't even call it "the M"), you think McDonalds.  That's branding.

Now, if we could integrate the box into the current logo...

[JdGordon]

i personally think your all on drugs or something if you see a R in that square.. all i see is a C.. maybe with a bit of prompting an R could be made out... but the C is definatly easier to see...

/me votes keep the logo... again

[LurkAzusa]

Use an eighth note and you'll have your R

[Benway]

For the record, I personnaly find the current logo amateurish and unattractive.
In comparison, the Logo proposed by Febs is lightyears ahead.
Just my 2c.

[Yotto]

i personally think your all on drugs or something if you see a R in that square.. all i see is a C.. maybe with a bit of prompting an R could be made out... but the C is definatly easier to see...

If you rotate it as in the left, or even better as in the right, it's extremely obvious.

In fact, I kind of like the "R" on the right.  Someone with more talent than I could possibly make similar letters for the OCK.  Or maybe use the darker part for the O, and do another cube for the CK or something.  Dunno.

/you votes keep the logo... again

In the end, I agree, though this logo is the closest I've come to reconsidering.

[aegis]

O.K., I've spoken once but the logo is important, I guess.

First of all, I do like current logo, however I remember my first reaction ("OMG, so old school"). Now when I got used to I say "hurray, so old school. It does differentiate!" and I think it's a quite important thing for a logo.

The design itself is quite professional, I think - nice balance (size, placement) of particular letters, great funky violin/treble clef (though a heavyrocking bass clef would be something I would expect more  8-) ). What really makes a difference are old school, warm "dirty pastel" colours - you don't see it too often nowadays and with fitting letters they make the effect. It's hard to take this logo dead seriously but I do prefer it over coldish, pseudoprofessional ones.

Re: proposals - I think Llorean hit the point precisely - too much of revolution has been proposed while none of old users wants to change the logo badly. It's not bad, everybody got used to, so a rapid change of identity is a no-go.

If you want to fix something (like a proposed guy with a boom box) please think about evolution, not revolution. Take a look at the Rockbox girl by Julius from iPod experimental builds. http://solutions-i.org/julius/rockbox/rockboxlogo.320x98x16.bmp

It's _different_ but when I saw it I had no doubts it's my tuned Rockbox (not only because of the old logo here and there... ). She simply has a quite similar (but somehow braver) "personality" of the current logo, similar pastel colours (although brighter) and hand-written image. Take a look on the blue colour which has been added and fits somehow.

That's in my opinion how the changes should be made, if someone really needs to. Try the evolution: experiment first with one or a few elements: change the colours, add or tweak something etc. Black shape of a percussionist with the current logo in the background? Or the whole band? Rockier letters? Another colour scheme, fitting better one's WPS? That would be probably far easier to get accepted.

The logo has its spirit already and I wouldn't like to lose it.

Nobody said the current version is perfect. Some experiments, like these with "block" letters and images (page 3) and "industrial" design are pretty interesting for me. It's only my thought what would be more acceptable - probably not only for myself. :]

Hail to all rockboxers and artists!  8-)

[Bagder]

think about evolution, not revolution

Very well spoken.