This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: New logo gone vectorised. (SVG format)

On Jan 12, 2005, at 12:23 PM, Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote:

Ian Lance Taylor wrote:

The hypothetical new logo should represent the compiler.  It should
ideally represent what the compiler does, and what it aspires to do,
albeit perhaps in highly symbolized form.  It should be recognizable,
look good in several different sizes on computer screens, look good in
black and white, look good on a T-shirt or a book cover.  It should
inspire people and give them confidence.  It should feed the hungry
and create world peace.  It should be only 1K.  That is what I would
like to see in a logo.

Anyone interested in designing a logo for an open source, community
project should check out what Boost is doing right now. They are
replacing their old, fairly unrecognizable logo with a new one, and
recently theres been tons of discussion on what the new one should be:
< BoostLogo>.

The Boost mailing list archives contain all sorts of very useful
information for anyone interested in creating a successful logo (search
for logo).  Besides some very valuable informations, theres a whole lot
of nonsense, and a whole lot of excellent examples of why most
organizations don't let computer scientists and engineers design logos
in the first place.

I'm not convinced we need a new logo; the existing GCC logo seems fine to me, and I think we've got more pressing issues. I'd rather have a new register allocator, a new C parser, and a new parse tree representation.

But *if* we were designing a new logo for GCC, my inclination would be to go in the direction of something even more stylized and abstract, something withe even simpler shapes and even less directly related to animals or compilers, than what we've got. I'm just looking at some of the memorable logos that I see in my office around me: the Addison Wesley logo, three triangles arranged in a pattern; MIT Press's logo, a pattern of seven vertical bars; the Java logo, a stylized coffee cup; EDG's logo, a simple stylized light bulb; Apple's logo, a simple shape with a little bit of 3d shading. (Apple's logo is actually the most complicated I can see around me; it's the only one that uses subtle gradations of color. But then, we all know that my employer thinks different.)

I also agree that we're the wrong group of people to do this and that *if* we decide we need a new logo we would do well to get some advice on goals from marketing and branding professionals. I'm sure there are some friendly people in those communities who would be interested in doing a good deed for the FSF.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]