[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Google
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: Feedback from Distrowatch



On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 08:08 -0300, Davi Garcia wrote:
>> > Just a little reminder, Fedora was around BEFORE Facebook. If there is
>> > anyone who should change their logo, it's Facebook, not us.
>>
>> I definitely agree with that.
>
> +1
>
> I see no reason at all to change our logo. It's perfect the way it is.

If it is confused with other logos from a similar product space then
it isn't perfect. It may well be no fault of the logo but it is a
problem.

> If someone thought it was a Facebook plug-in.. well...

If a lot of someones think it is related to Facebook then it is a
problem worth thinking about before it gets completely out of control.
We have seen other hints that this confusion exists in the past as
well.

Admitting we have a brand problem which seems to be related to some
similar aspects that exist in our logo and in Facebook's logo doesn't
mean we need to abandon our logo. Are there other ways available to us
to mitigate this confusion? Perhaps advertising Fedora more widely so
more people are exposed to our brand more often? Perhaps something
else?

John
-- 
marketing mailing list
marketing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing



[Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Legacy Announce]     [Home]     [Kernel List]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Red Hat 9 Bible]     [Red Hat 9 Mailing List]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux