Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora Is Looking For Your Feedback On A New Logo

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    Isn't Fedora owned by RedHat anyway?
    Still is much like CentOS and CoreOS which are owned by Red Hat. Very similar to say Honda<->Acura, Toyota<->Lexus, Ford<->Lincoln as an example.
    Last edited by finalzone; 01-11-2019, 12:38 PM.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
      Not particularly. Like SJW's, they fly in, shit everywhere, then fly away.
      And what do you think you did to this thread?

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by DanL View Post

        And what do you think you did to this thread?
        I wouldn't depend on the guy you're talking to being terribly skilled at self-awareness. Introspection as a thing other than a language feature seems lost on some people.

        Comment


        • #44
          Candidate 1

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by mairin View Post

            The problem is the thick lines you have added make it into a stencil. There's a bunch of reasons why a stencil type of shape is something we want to avoid. If you search for 'stencil' on my blog post you'll see them or I can copy/paste them here if you'd like.
            I'm seeing 3 reasons, 1 of which is being repeated in my brief search

            1. It's not clean
            2. The cuts make it different from the original design by implying separation, which changes it more than you'd like
            3. It's militaristic.

            I don't really agree with any of these points, and it seems to be what a lot of people would actually like to see.
            1. Clean up the curve on those cuts and I don't see how this is any less clean than the other designs

            2. Going with the stencil actually preserves the original design as much as is possible with 1 color, and the cuts simply demarcate the change in color that's already there in the original. Furthermore both elements are preserved and the focus remains on the f as in the original. These other designs are respectfully far more radical changes as they effective abolish the f from the design or turn it into a p in spite of you attempting to preserve it, and simply performing a visual comparison of the three next to the original would result in almost everyone saying that the stencil modification is the closest.

            3. Is skype's modern logo militaristic? I certainly don't think so.

            Originally posted by mairin
            No, it actually is a technical one. Have you ordered branded swag before? Often many items are specifically marked as one-color only. There's a number of reasons why specific products are only recommended to be branded one color, but, some the vendor will just not do in more than one color. I am not a full brand catalog personalization expert, but I imagine based on the different surfaces and shapes (e.g. a curved cup, whatever) it may be particularly challenging to align the multiple screens required for more than one color so to control quality the vendors only allow single color designs on specific branded objects.

            I have actually ordered swag, and we have been limited in item choice because our logo is not one-colorable.
            Not on the level of ordering for a group, but I've ordered custom gear before and I've been on the receiving end of enough swag to know that most companies don't really have this problem, and Microsoft as an extreme goes 5 color even on their pens, and will go 6 color on lanyards, and they have pretty much anything you could think of branded. The only thing I've seen before that is strictly one color is metal etching but I don't think that's what you're after here.

            Comment


            • #46
              I think the biggest thing to consider is a color scheme change. Like a lighter forest green infinity across a darker blue background but not too dark. Maybe some lighter highlighting on some edges of the infinity symbol, to maybe make it pop more. Candidate 2 seems the best to me. Kind of like the older logo more.

              Sometimes I think things should use monochromatic gradients, utilitarian. Like a really light gray infinity knot across a dark gray background maybe with some even lighter gray near white logo highlighting on some edges.

              Graphics and color schemes can be a pain to deal with.

              Honestly for the most part it all looks fine.
              Last edited by creative; 01-11-2019, 06:37 PM.

              Comment


              • #47
                @29 --

                I'm not going to quote you entirely; your response is too lengthy; excess verbiage is no substitute for a valid reason, or for valid reasoning.
                I'll just remark that you say a lot--you say most everything except why the logo needs to be changed.
                Have you read the number of comments, just on this forum, stating that the existing logo is preferred to any suggested change? Do these comments even make a difference, or is your mind already 'made up' that the logo must be changed?

                I will, as I'm certain we all will, ask you to defend the one pesky little problem which exists with your logic, to wit:

                "...When the logo we're using now was first introduced to replace the original one, there was a *ton* of opposition to it..."

                ...and yet you adopted it anyway, obviously for some VERY good reason(s). Please enlighten us as to the very good reasons why this existing logo, which was SO good as to be adopted in the face of "...a *ton* of opposition to it..." is now no longer worthy of being your standard bearer. You might also explain why all those "...representative messages..." (which you include in Comment #29 to refute my earlier comment about the simplistic beauty of the current logo) were NOT considered sufficient to suppress the adoption of the current logo, but now they are considered to be unquestionably sufficient and necessary for the adoption of a new logo.

                Your comment(s) are awaited. We all are in dire need of a lesson in valid logic; it is such a rare commodity these days.

                Comment


                • #48
                  @29 --

                  We're all still eagerly awaiting your response...

                  @47.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Marketing need a reason to exist. Is all I can think of.

                    While the 10 oldest logos are dated. Most could be put into Scalable Vector Formats and be fine.

                    http://time.com/2904290/10-oldest-company-logos/

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by rukur View Post
                      Marketing need a reason to exist. Is all I can think of.

                      While the 10 oldest logos are dated. Most could be put into Scalable Vector Formats and be fine.

                      http://time.com/2904290/10-oldest-company-logos/
                      Absolutely beautiful, rukur; you have gotten to the heart of the matter, the undeniable truth, and--believe me--the reason and the only reason. Take it from someone who was in the corporate world for many years and who saw this kind of horsesh*t go on time after time.

                      Why else do you think we haven't heard back from Fedora?

                      If you always remember this one simple truth, "Most people don't have any real work to do", this will go a long way towards explaining garbage like this. Good man.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X