This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: New GCC logotype development. (Was:Re: New GCC logotype version 1.6 (Sorry, I forgot to attach the image).)
- From: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
- To: boxforsr at inbox dot ru
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 11 Jan 05 16:36:30 EST
- Subject: Re: New GCC logotype development. (Was:Re: New GCC logotype version 1.6 (Sorry, I forgot to attach the image).)
I think it is quite clear to understand. I present a better
solution. Something that is better than the current logo is supposed to
answear "Why to change the logo". "Because it is better" - is the answear.
Let me try. One way to try to understand what people are asking you
is to answer the question "in what way is it better?". What criteria
are you using to judge the "quality" of the logo?
You haven't simply taken the existing design and made it "better" in some
objective way, but have made a different design.
The purpose of a logo is to assist in the "marketing" of the thing the
logo refers to. You can't design a logo in isolation without understanding
the marketing aspects of the logo.
What you are being asked is to explain in a few sentences your philosophy
of what the logo should repesent and contrast that with the philosophy
represented by the current logo.
Looking narrowly at the "quality" of the logo is not relevant.