Worrying attitudes to the branding of the D language

Tue Jul 1 10:53:27 PDT 2014

On Tuesday, 1 July 2014 at 17:45:02 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote:
> There is currently an effort made by w0rp to redesign the D 
> website. This is a good thing and i applaud his efforts. The 
> website really does need an overhaul. However i find it 
> extremely alarming that there is a casual disregard for any 
> sort of consistency of the D brand.
>
> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/mmoxalewsvwcgeaasvri@forum.dlang.org
>
> Here are some quotes:
>
> On Saturday, 31 May 2014 at 19:49:22 UTC, w0rp wrote:
>> * The logo is something I quickly put together with InkScape. 
>> Look at it as "please insert better logo here."
>
> On Sunday, 1 June 2014 at 10:03:09 UTC, w0rp wrote:
>> Branding does need to be worked on. Speaking of the site I'm 
>> working on... I would love to see something like the current D 
>> logo, but flatter.
>
> On Monday, 30 June 2014 at 21:23:59 UTC, David Gileadi wrote:
>> My opinion is that the redesign preserves the spirit of the 
>> current logo while fitting in well with the flatter look. I 
>> think someone who sees the one logo will recognize the other 
>> in it (unlike some of the recent proposed logos).
>
>> On Sunday, 29 June 2014 at 22:15:48 UTC, w0rp wrote:
>> The old logo is a bit too fat and round to fit with the new 
>> design, so I'd like something which is obviously still the 
>> same brand, but looks a bit flatter.
>
> On Tuesday, 1 July 2014 at 08:58:38 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>> Doing logo restyling together with web site update is not 
>> unheard of. Why do you see this a big deal? As long as it is 
>> recognizable and not fundamentally different of course. Having 
>> logo that simply does not fit into new design is worse.
>
> On Tuesday, 1 July 2014 at 10:04:50 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
>> I'd say your zeal is a bit misdirected. "Professional" brands 
>> are relaunched all the time.
>
> On Tuesday, 1 July 2014 at 10:53:56 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> Some companies also use different versions of their logo for 
>> different purposes. One on the website, one on print and so on.
>
> On Tuesday, 1 July 2014 at 12:38:39 UTC, w0rp wrote:
>> Generally for the logo, I'm looking for someone who does know
>> what they are doing with Inkscape or similar tools to produce
>> something which fits instead.
>
> These quotes are from people who are terribly misguided and 
> lack any sort of sensibilty about what branding means and it's 
> impact on perceptions of products. They show a complete lack of 
> understanding what the brand is for and what it represents. 
> Especially when dealing with users perceptions.

You could have been less insulting while sharing your thoughts.

>
> Yes logo changes do occur but they can be incredibly hurtful 
> for companies and products if they don't get it exactly right. 
> All logo changes of established entities should be managed with 
> utmost care and respect. Simply by changing the icon for which 
> you are recognised internationally, you pay an immediate cost 
> of non recognition but it's the perception of users that create 
> the biggest fallout.
>
> Change for change sake is madness and something which should be 
> considered very carefully. The current D logo has spread and is 
> now associated with D. It appears on the website, t-shirts, 
> slides, videos, etc. Heck i even use it for all the evangelism 
> i do at work.
>
> Before writing software i spent 20 years working as a 
> professional graphic artist and the attitudes above not only 
> incense me but make me dispair. D is a language i care about 
> and use daily and to see this totally unprofessional side of 
> the community leaves me speechless.
>
> * D is a brand, whether you like it or not
> * The logo is the essence of that brand
> * D has a history of poorly managed change
> * D's community has been destroyed once before (Tango)
> * D has the preception of unreliability
> * D is not seen as a professional offering
> * D is perceved as half finished
>
> This is something we need to remedy and updating the website is 
> a good first step. Changing the logo however is not! Changing 
> the logo is adding to the history of D's poorly managed change 
> in a period when we are starting to see real interest and usage.
>
> People need to have the perception that the brand is strong and 
> that the product is stable. The logo reflects this. The logo is 
> an icon of D as a product. Just casually tossing it aside is 
> allowing further extension of user perceptions of 
> unprofessionalism. We need to nuture the brand to create the 
> perception and feeling of security, stability and 
> professionalism.
>
> Please re-watch the Quo Vadis talk given by Andrei at Dconf 
> 2013 about being corporate and professional.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M-0LFBP9AU#t=1h0m30s
>

Walter does not own the copyright to the current logo. It 
probably won't but that could bite us in the ass in the future. 
Better to switch to a new but familiar one now with copyright 
assignment to Walter. A corporation would never, ever use a logo 
they don't own.

I just happen the like the flat version better so I think 
switching to it is an improvement in both style and legalities.