Although Ubuntu's target description suits me well, I think, it did not catch me. Their palette is in colors of my home, but un my top box I need to have somethinng geek, shiny, cool, sci-fi, strong, aggressive...
That's why I do prefer an orb as logo, because it is so versatile. The shape,  materials, the symbols. Easy to remember. But I guess it is taken... Is it?
Ubuntu failed miserably in my case... In look and stability. I think it is of a good marketing though.
Is the name 'Mageia' immutable? Do you suggest to rename it?

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Graham Lauder <yorick_@openoffice.org> wrote:
The artguide and logo guidelines are seriously incomplete and need a lot of
work.  Free software projects have a history of rushing into branding that
they will be stuck with for a very long time, from logo to colour scheme to
pallett.  If it's not thought through and given the consideration it needs, it
can turn into a millstone around the projects neck or a chaotic round of ever
changing looks that confuses the market.

The project needs to get it's branding process it's organised.  Until then
everything should be fluid, even the name should be seen as a "Working Title".

So therefore:

We need to identify our vision,
Identify the way we want the world to see us.
We need to identify our target market
and then come up with a Brand to suit that market.

The brand does not have to be out there until the announcement of the first
release.
The brand that is created now, will shackle the Marketing team for all time.
The marketing team will only hang around if the brand is good.  Hackers need
the tools to do their job, if the IDE they are forced to use when making code
is a pile of shit then they'll go elsewhere.  It's the same with marketers,
give them a good brand and they'll come in droves to be part of it.

Ubuntu's strength was in that initial marketing, targeted at 18 to 35 age
group with warm a comforting and attractive pallett (Browns Reds and Yellows)
and a slightly zany way of doing things (Warty Warthog and so on)  They
identified a market of young people of  above average intelligence who were
not satisfied with the cold clinical professional brand of principal market
leader.

This group had several advantageous facets to them.
1) They were leaders and early adopters of new technology
2) They were rebellious to a degree
3) They had a very positive view of themselves
4) They felt that they deserved to be noticed and that the world should do
stuff for them.

So Ubuntu's branding is aimed directly at that market and very successfully.

The problem that many projects suffer from is that they come up with a
branding that feels good to their own community, while ignoring the market.
And make no bones about it, much of the reason that Ubuntu gets lots of
developers is because of it's wide user base.  That makes it sexy, the
opportunity to be famous:  "I am part of that.."

Now there is a good argument to be made for going after the same market for
all of the above reasons.

We can learn some lessons from the way Ubuntu did things.

They leveraged their location, used a local language and traditions to give
them a name and a story:  Ubuntu = Humanity to Humans and a logo that reflects
and enhances that story.

For me, for this project, I think it's untapped branding strength is in it's
Latin South American Heritage. Connectiva.

Connection,
Computers are about connecting with others and when the world thinks about
South America and connecting they think Dance, .. Tango.  If it was my project
in these circumstances I'd be calling it Tango-Linux. The name even
immediately evokes the branding colours and the pallet, Bold Blacks, Fiery
Reds  and silvers, the colours of passion.  Tango evokes passion, rebellion
but at the same time precision and teamwork.

Unfortunately there is already a Tango Linux, not to mention the Tango Icon
project, but you get the idea.


To conclude: my point is that there needs to be much more consideration given
to the branding elements at this point before we start voting on logos and the
like and I would like to see everything up for discussion, name included, we
are brand new, the world is watching, this is our unique opportunity we need
to stamp our mark boldly but with serious consideration of our goals.

Of course the communities desire maybe just to stay as a small minor player in
the desktop universe, but if that's the case this is not the Mandrake I knew
back at 8.0 when It was on every other computer magazine cover CD, and it was
going after the market in a big way, not worrying about the Ubuntus and
Redhats but out to take down the Redmond machine.  Personally I think that
spirit is still there.


--
Graham Lauder,
OpenOffice.org MarCon (Marketing Contact) NZ
http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html

OpenOffice.org Migration and training Consultant.

INGOTs Assessor Trainer
(International Grades in Open Technologies)
www.theingots.org
_______________________________________________
Mageia-dev mailing list
Mageia-dev@mageia.org
https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev