incubator-ooo-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Graham Lauder <>
Subject Re: Aoo logo draft
Date Wed, 07 Dec 2011 01:01:19 GMT
On Wednesday 07 Dec 2011 10:32:22 Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi -

Hi Dave,

> Sorry about the top-post.
> We are getting close to - within a couple of weeks to migrating the
> website - which will have the legacy logo.
> At the same time there will be pointers to the project page. We need to
> have a different logo and branding to show some distinction.
> I think a version of Drew's logo is a good place to start with the
> Project's Logo.
> I can agree with the desire to have a whole branding strategy, but I think
> we need to move and there is no time for a competition.
> In my favorite sport - Ultimate Frisbee - it is time to huck it long and
> see if it is caught.

In Rugby that's kick it high up and under see where it bounces.  :)

However, this sort of action occurs when things are getting desperate.  We're 
not desperate yet and nothing good ever came of rushing into something without 
good reasoning. 

> Another way - there are three threads for branding.
> (1) Legacy 3.3 and below w/ website - keeps current brand.
> (2) Project w/ incubator podling site and probable
> TLP - needs to be different from Legacy. (3) AOO 4.0 Branding - needs big
> marketing and branding strategy.
> Does this make sense?

 To my way of thinking, given where we are right now, the reasons for a new 
face out weigh the reasons for keeping the old one.  

I'll reitterate something that I have harped on about for a number of years.

Marketing OOo is a completely different beast from traditional marketing.

There are a number of reasons:

First OOo is an Internet product, the majority of people get their OOo via 
download and the vast majority heard about it either by internet search, 
magazine articles or word of mouth.  A miniscule number heard of it through 
advertising or a high level cross media paid marketing campaign.  (Although 
there was a graphic campaign run on buses in Seattle once which was very cool 
on the oppositions back doorstep,  :)  though not sure how effective that was, 
we never got feedback.  But well done the Sun guys.) 

Now despite some protestations to the contrary, the Internet is a textual 
medium So our strongest branding element is a string of text  14 characters 
long in camel case **.  Do a search on google for that string of 
characters... I got 25.9 million hits.  Do the same for OpenOffice Logo in 
image search and I get around 2 million but past the sixth page the actual 
logo features hardly at all.

We do not, and have never had, a sufficient marketing budget (and for a global 
brand, it's substantial) to lift our logo recognition.  Brand recognition has 
always been our achilles heel, but in terms of that, the character string is 
by far our most recognisable branding element, because we exist in a textual 
medium.  Wacking the Apache name on the front has substantially diluted that, 
it's like MacDonalds suddenly changing the colour and the font of the big M.  
We didn't choose this, but given the inflexible rules it's the baton we've 
been handed,. so we have to run with it. 

However, on every cloud there is a silver lining, we get to launch a whole new 
and improved product with a fresh look and a fresh name.

The present Logo hardly registers on the consciousness outside the community, 
so getting a new logo now is not likely to affect brand recognition by 
anything other than a miniscule amount and is more likely in fact to increase 
it at this juncture.  

The critical factor is that we only get to do this once.  It's not like code 
where if something doesn't work, we'll try something else.  We can't relaunch 
the project multiple times until we get it right.  This is a oncer.  

This moment will define the project in the market for the forseeable future.   
I would love to have a budget so that we could actually shape the message to 
suit ourselves, but that is unlikely.  

We do not have the advantage of a huge, on the ground, community of advocates 
that LO has, so we have to get the media onside and to do that we have to have 
a story worth publishing.  We need to create the story now.  We have the basis 
already, all we need to do is add to it so the it creates excitement and a 

New owners, a vibrant community of hackers and users, new look and image and a 
raft of revolutionary features aimed at toppling the monopolist into second 
place in the Office Suite space.  

That's our story, we have to mean it and we have to look like we mean it..
Do it now, start as we mean to go on. 


> Regards,
> Dave
> On Dec 5, 2011, at 4:11 AM, Graham Lauder wrote:
> > On Sunday 04 Dec 2011 04:04:54 drew wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2011-12-03 at 16:50 +1300, Graham Lauder wrote:
> >>> On Friday 02 Dec 2011 21:31:45 drew wrote:
> >>>> Howdy Eric,
> >>>> 
> >>>> On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 08:52 +0100, eric b wrote:
> >>>>> Apologies, I forgot :
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Thank you very much for your proposal
> >>>> 
> >>>> <snip>
> >>>> Your welcome and thanks also.
> >>>> 
> >>>>> Instead of changing everything, I'd suggest to define a complete
> >>>>> graphic chart ? I mean new colors, new applications logos, and so
> >>>>> on : invite Designers, and people who have ideas to participate.
> >>>> 
> >>>> hmm, my take on the conversation was that there was a user for a
> >>>> graphic specific to the project and not necessarily to the product,
> >>>> that is what was in my head when prompted.
> >>>> 
> >>>> So with specifics to the graphic I whipped up, one thing I'm not
> >>>> satisfied with is the color change to the text 'Open' I'll work on
> >>>> that later today.
> >>>> 
> >>>> In general, I believe you are absolutely correct this project would
> >>>> benefit from some 'real' designer(s) getting involved. (maybe this
> >>>> will help spur some one..)
> >>>> 
> >>>> For specific elements of the application changing, including the logo
> >>>> used there, this proposal does not mean I think they should be
> >>>> changed, at least not at the moment - that level of change would,
> >>>> IMO, best be held off on till some of the above human resources speak
> >>>> up.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Anyway, it's getting rather late now - will try to work on that color
> >>>> issue after I get some sleep.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Best wishes,
> >>>> 
> >>>> //drew
> >>> 
> >>> Eric is right however, first we need to define a colour pallet, font
> >>> face, bugs and general style.  Define also dimensions and proportions
> >>> and white space for the various use cases. (print, web, promotional
> >>> gear etc)   This should all be laid out in a style guide.  Any fonts
> >>> used should be available under appropriate licenses as well.
> >> 
> >> Howdy Graham, eric, others,
> >> 
> >> I do understand and agree with the concerns, but the fact remains that
> >> there is a need at this moment for a logo specific to _this_ project.
> >> 
> >> My best attempt was made to create new artwork which conforms to the
> >> design principles as described in the branding guidelines
> >> documentation.
> >> 
> >> This is one of the reasons I've avoided commenting on calls for mascots,
> >> feathers and the like, though I did put up an example which included an
> >> example which did expand the color space, yesterday.
> >> 
> >> Today I've uploaded the actual proposal files, found as before on the
> >> AOO community wiki at:
> >>
> >> 
> >> Please note that I've added information on the M+ font family used to
> >> generate the source image.
> >>
> >> ide lines_draft
> >> 
> >> I believe the font license poses no barriers to use in this project, and
> >> English version of the license can be found here:
> >>
> >> nse
> >> 
> >> I am happy to answer questions on the work and respond to
> >> concerns/requests, particularly as regards seamlessly fitting into the
> >> current branding of existing artwork.
> >> 
> >> Thanks for your interest and feedback,
> >> 
> >> //drew
> > 
> > My feeling at this point is that it would be preferable to start as we
> > mean to go on.  As has been pointed out to me on numerous occasions this
> > is not the old OOo project.  True, we are in incubating and not yet a
> > TLP, however it seems that we should be marketing the project as if we
> > were, so that it can be seen what we look like once we do become a TLP.
> > Therefore I think we need to look at the branding with a long term
> > perspective.
> > 
> > Whatever release is put out  by this podling, from now on will be an
> > Apache release under Apache license and branding should reflect that.
> > 
> > The name isn't a hell of a lot different, other than the Apache lead, so
> > the new brand needs to reflect that this is a new beginning for a new
> > project that just happens to be based on the old OOo code that retains
> > some of the old name.
> > 
> > The old logo and branding is now past tense we need a reboot to see us
> > into the future.
> > 
> > Retaining the old branding or even something like it simply reinforces
> > the view that the project stuttered and stopped and is now staggering
> > back to life but is now way back down the track with the "competition"
> > having continued at full pace.
> > 
> > We are in the situation now, given the time lapse, of being seen as
> > irrelevant.  The only way to counter that is to come back to the market
> > refreshed and announcing to the world that we are still with the
> > frontrunners by being bold and brazen with good code, innovative
> > features and a bold new look.  This is the only chance we will have to
> > do this, once we're back in people's consciousness any changes to the
> > branding will have to be incremental and small.
> > 
> > Cheers
> > GL
> > 
> > PS:  Normally I despise "Brand Competitions" with a decision by vote and
> > I still do.  However a Competition may be the best bet at this juncture,
> > however we need to use marketing best practice here.  If we decide on a
> > competition my suggestion is to get the community (Dev list) vote down
> > to top five by transferable vote or we have consensus.
> > 
> > Those people in the community who wish to be involved in marketing (this
> > list) then remove two more by consensus. Then all of those people take
> > the remaining three variations and survey end users in good old
> > fashioned market research.
> > 
> > The other option is the Apache way, "Those that do the work  make the
> > decision." Those on this list create the branding elements and we work it
> > over until we have a consensus.
> > 
> > PPS:  Obviously contributors will need to have signed an ICLA to have
> > artwork considered.
> > 
> > G

View raw message