From: Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
Date: 2007-11-03T06:59:25+09:00
Subject: Re: the result of Ruby official logo contest

On 11/2/07, Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 09:03:00PM +0900, Austin Ziegler wrote:
> > Ugh. That's the worst. I don't know why people think that Web 2.0
> > logos would be a good idea here. Talk about dating yourself quickly
> > ... to 2006.
> Ignore the surroundings and fluff for a moment.  The core image is
> simple, elegant, versatile, and easily slotted into any general-purpose
> application of a logo (favicons, t-shirts, stickers, websites, et
> cetera).  It doesn't require major modifications to suit it well to
> different purposes, and with only minor additions or tweaks can be
> adjusted to fit the standards of hipness for any marketing era.

I think the sharp-angled, lying-on-its-drunken-side four-tone ruby in
that logo is neither elegant or versatile. I'd argue about simple;
simplistic, maybe.

It doesn't look any better than the ubiquitous "beta star" you see on
Web 2.0 sites.

I believe that this so-called "better logo" would need as much work
(or more) to be acceptable.

> Sound familiar?

Yeah. All of those positive attributes don't apply to the logo you like.

-austin
-- 
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com * http://www.halostatue.ca/
               * austin@halostatue.ca * http://www.halostatue.ca/feed/
               * austin@zieglers.ca