On Monday, 13 April 2015 at 10:31:06 UTC, ixid wrote:
On Monday, 13 April 2015 at 07:12:29 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
It does not matter if one knows this is planets or not (these
aren't planet technically, but phobos and deimos, mars's
moons).
What does matter is that the logo is recognized and associated
with D. Any logo change goes against that goal, so that's
probably won't happen.
Do you think anyone outside a tiny number of forum users would
recognize the logo at this stage?
C and D share a great feature - their entire ecosystem, ethos, is
expressed entirely in a single letter. On reddit or hacker news
one need merely write the letter D and everyone knows what you
are talking about. Only a small fraction of those people
associate D with its current logo - a white D on a red "shiny"
background, the white D having some sort of blob attached to it.
To me the logo looks far too busy. I find it clunky, forced
(because it's trying to squash in two moons and a planet) and
unattractive.
On the subject of the D media "brand", I don't believe there
really is one. For instance, take a look at the D on the cover of
Andrei's book:
http://erdani.com/index.php/books/tdpl/ - no blobs in sight.
I'd suggest a fresh look be introduced when the ref counting and
GC work has been done, and personally I'd suggest just a simple
clean 2D metro-ish "D" as the "logo", but I do realise that I am
just one tiny voice of many. I think the homage to Digital Mars
is just confusing in the website logo but should be retained in
related product names such as phobos.
To compound the heresy and further stir the Wrath of Gary :-) I'd
even change the colour to blue.
I hasten to add that all the above thinking is pure meaningless
bikeshedding and getting a better GC is where it's all at for me
:-)
