[Webteam] "Powered by Squeak" logo needed?

[Brad Fuller]

Jason Rogers wrote:

>On 12/7/05, Brad Fuller <brad at sonaural.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>Is a logo something that the community thinks would be good? I haven't
>>heard any chatter about it. Kind of a marketing, thing, no?
>>    
>>
>
>Even if not a logo, it would be nice to acknowledge that the site is
>powered by Smalltalk in some fashion or another -- and I personally
>would think that it would be even nicer to show that we are powered by
>Squeak specifically.  It shows we are "eating our own dog food."
>  
>
Yeah... good point.  I agree... especially show that it's Squeak 
specifically.

AFA the logo, when a specific image is used in a logo, people identify 
the image with the organization and it's skills, reputation, etc.
That's why paying attention to a particular image is an important 
consideration.
As a recent example: my personal opinion is that, although the Squeak 
Foundation logo is cool, it's different than the original mouse logo (or 
any derivative) and that poses a possible identity separation for people 
from the historical Squeak community. The result is that the logo 
separates the "Foundation" from the Squeak community.  Sometimes that is 
on purpose. Maybe it was for them, I don't know.

It's really not that big a deal, I was just wondering if any discussion 
or thought was put into an image. My opinion is that the traditional 
mouse logo has a strong identity and should be used in some form for all 
(or most) Squeak endeavors. The balloon is quite cool, but it is 
identified with all smalltalks, not just Squeak.

brad