Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 15:29:03 -0800 From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> To: <martin@orbweavers.co.uk>, <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: New Logo Message-ID: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNOELEFCAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> In-Reply-To: <1931.217.37.3.201.1130935789.squirrel@www.orbweavers.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of >martin@orbweavers.co.uk >Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 4:50 AM >To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >Subject: Re: New Logo > > > >I think the critism is a bit harsh. Any logo for FreeBSD is >going to be an >lossing battle - how do you please the beastie fans who don't want >anything radically different, >and those that want a more 'professional' >logo. Beastie is not an 'unprofessional' logo. >I think this logo does the job very well, Obviously. >all beastie fans can >immediatly recognise it for what it is, But, it's uglier than Beastie. Why trade away a good image of Beastie for an ugly one? >while someone who is >unaware (i.e. >the PHB) will only see it as a generic logo. > The folks that objected to Beastie are going to object to this one for the same reasons. It's red. It has horns. It must be of the Devil. My God, the wonderful Rush Limbaugh, says so. Ted
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNOELEFCAA.tedm>