incubator-ooo-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: Aoo logo draft
Date Tue, 06 Dec 2011 21:32:22 GMT
Hi -

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.

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?


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, so
>>>> 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.
>> 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:
>> 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