[Webteam] "Powered by Squeak" logo needed?
Brad Fuller
brad at sonaural.com
Wed Dec 7 23:16:49 CET 2005
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
More information about the Webteam
mailing list