OStatic

Greg Bell's post on open source logos over on the OpenLogic site prompted me to think about open source branding in general.

Greg asks whether open source companies should approach logo design differently from proprietary software companies. Specifically, he wonders whether or not open source companies should be looking at "open" submission of logos and so forth.

I look at a lot of marketing by companies that work in the open source space as well as pure open source projects that may or may not have any real commercial aspirations. I think part of the answer lies with the company's relationship with the community -- if it's a strong relationship, where the community contributes quite a lot to the project, then I'd say definitely have the community involved in designing the logo.

If it's less strong, where the project is open source, but the community outside the company is not that great, then you'll probably see little community interest in helping with the logo anyway.

But, in general, I think it's important for the community to be involved in every aspect -- not just code.

Firstly, it's not just licensing that attracts people to open source projects. It's a sense of community, which comes through in the naming, logos, and overall identity of projects produced through open development.

I'll grant that many pure open source projects could use some additional polish when it comes to marketing/branding (particularly when it comes to Web design...) but I usually prefer the open source approach over the efforts from proprietary companies.

Many projects are starting to think about how they present themselves, even early on. I'm really glad that new KDE and GNOME apps aren't usually tagged with the K and G prefixes (respectively) that some of the older apps are saddled with. For instance, Konqueror is a great name for KDE's Web browser/file manager combo, but KWrite and KTrafficAnalyzer are less than inspiring even if the programs themselves are wonderful.

A couple of suggestions for open source projects that are starting up and thinking about naming, logos, branding, etc.:

• Google the name to make sure you won't have a problem later on. Really.

  Renaming a project is a major hassle, and it's way too easy to pick a name that's already in use by some other unrelated project. And it's usually a bad idea to pick a name that reflects a proprietary competitor. (As the Linspire folks found out with "Lindows," and the Pidgin folks found out with "Gaim," etc.)

• Pick a name that at least suggests what the project does.

  All too many projects have names that don't reflect what the software actually does. If you're hoping to attract users, it helps a lot if the name is reflective of what the software does, and if the name is not off-putting. You should see the looks I get when I suggest that people try "GIMP" for photo editing...

• Pick a name that has a little oomph.

  While I loves me some OpenOffice.org, I think the apps in the suite could be much better named. "Calc" and "Writer" are a bit on the dull side, you have to admit. Impress is a decent name for a presentation/slideshow application, though.

Want to see some open source apps that have really nice branding, Web site design, and and so forth? Check out GNOME Do and Banshee.

GNOME Do is immediately suggestive of its function -- it helps you do things. Banshee is a slight stretch, but if you remember what a "banshee" is, you can make the connection between a media player and the mythical creature.

Do you think open source project leaders should reach out to the community for help with naming, branding, logos and sites? 

• branding
• logo
• gaim
• openoffice.org