Rockbox General > Rockbox General Discussion
Rockbox Logo...
LinusN:
--- Quote from: MrMEC on November 03, 2006, 03:07:40 PM ---Really, it's just a logo.
--- End quote ---
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:
--- Quote ---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?
--- End quote ---
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:
--- Quote from: MrMEC on November 03, 2006, 03:07:40 PM ---
--- Quote from: Febs on November 03, 2006, 02:36:24 PM ---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. )
--- End quote ---
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?
--- End quote ---
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?
--- Quote ---If someone comes up with a cool logo everyone likes and can agree on, just change it.
--- End quote ---
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
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version