Evolving the Node.js Brand(blog.nodejs.org)
blog.nodejs.org
Evolving the Node.js Brand
http://blog.nodejs.org/2011/07/11/evolving-the-node-js-brand/
16 comments
That would make sense, as the logo link at the bottom is 404 too.
http://nodejs.org/logos/
http://nodejs.org/logos/
As for the new logo, good idea, poor execution. I like the hexagonal grid, but too much is going on. Why is the "o" solid? Why does the "e" have a green dot in its counter? The enclosed "js" makes the mark read "nodeo".
However, definitely better than the current logo.
However, definitely better than the current logo.
Completely agree on "nodeo" (first thing I thought the logo spelt out), plus the spacing between the letters could probably be decreased a bit more as well.
Perhaps something like this would help:
http://imgur.com/gRDGa
http://imgur.com/gRDGa
Since it seems to run contrary to what others are saying, I like the hex-inspired logo. It's much more distinct.
The graph is an actively-bad idea both visually and philosophically, unless they're really deeply committed to making Node actually work like that. It looks like it is claiming to support lots of internode cluster-type communication; as I understand it, it has no story except vague sketches here, and no matter what it will be a long time before that is the primary story Node has. There's a long row to hoe betwixt here and there.
The graph is an actively-bad idea both visually and philosophically, unless they're really deeply committed to making Node actually work like that. It looks like it is claiming to support lots of internode cluster-type communication; as I understand it, it has no story except vague sketches here, and no matter what it will be a long time before that is the primary story Node has. There's a long row to hoe betwixt here and there.
> It looks like it is claiming to support lots of internode cluster-type communication
There are a few projects that specifically take advantage of node's ability to proxy and distribute work across multiple processes.
Check out these projects:
http://learnboost.github.com/cluster/
https://github.com/nodejitsu/node-http-proxy
https://github.com/substack/dnode
Or my very early prototype botnet thingie: https://github.com/isaacs/sodn
There are a few projects that specifically take advantage of node's ability to proxy and distribute work across multiple processes.
Check out these projects:
http://learnboost.github.com/cluster/
https://github.com/nodejitsu/node-http-proxy
https://github.com/substack/dnode
Or my very early prototype botnet thingie: https://github.com/isaacs/sodn
Node has no special ability to proxy and distribute work across multiple processes. Erlang, Hadoop, OpenMPI, those are things with special abilities to distribute work across processes. "Being able to use sockets" is not a "special ability", not even if you add the word "asynchronously". I'm not aware of a language environment of any significance now where you can't use "asynchronous" sockets. You are trying to build an ability, not harness something that already exists. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's a bit premature to put something like that right in the logo.
I really like node.js, but I'm afraid I can't say the same for the logo or even the statement that someone needs to "jettison preconceived notions about what Node should look like". I mean, really? For a revolution that was engineer led, sounds a bit like marketing bs to me. And that's something node.js doesn't need.
PS. Do not consider this a troll comment. It's just my opinion.
PS. Do not consider this a troll comment. It's just my opinion.
You don't need to like a logo. Having any logo that isn't a total farce is a good idea for any project that wants to get wider adoption and recognition (I think they only had a basic textual one before?)
I write about (and teach) programming languages and libraries for a living. The brand of a project is an important part of the way in which I approach or portray them since it has a bigger impact on readers than most non-media techs would naturally assume.
I write about (and teach) programming languages and libraries for a living. The brand of a project is an important part of the way in which I approach or portray them since it has a bigger impact on readers than most non-media techs would naturally assume.
Fair enough point, but they already have a logo... the word "node" followed by a little cloud then the letters JS. There's not really anything wrong with the old logo, but it's more the wording around the announcement of the new logo that irks me the most I guess... feels so "corporate".
I think it's great that people are starting to have a little more appreciation for design. The new logo is quite good, and I'm very glad they worked with a skilled designer rather than just throw the task at the 99design pool.
Devil's advocate: Logo is too busy. Drop everything but the final JS-inside-a-hex. Make that your logo. The hex is a node. You are a node. Your logo is a hex.
Obviously, you lose a lot by leaving out the "node" word from your logo. But, it becomes much more recognizable. Much more unique. It really depends on how you want to use the logo - if most of your applications will be a logo-as-a-link, it doesn't really matter. People can just click on the logo and go to your site.
(disclaimer: I do like the new logo :) )
Obviously, you lose a lot by leaving out the "node" word from your logo. But, it becomes much more recognizable. Much more unique. It really depends on how you want to use the logo - if most of your applications will be a logo-as-a-link, it doesn't really matter. People can just click on the logo and go to your site.
(disclaimer: I do like the new logo :) )
I like the idea of making the logo fit inside a hex.
Though this sort of thing is obviously subjective, I hate this design as it stands. Abstract shapes can work as the basis of a design, and words can work as the basis of a design, but trying to do both at once makes it look like a middle schooler's first attempt at typography. If you're going to set type, think like a typographer: The word should be pleasant to read, not make my head hurt.
They should decide which is more important -- the text, or the design elements like the hexagon -- and make one subordinate to the other. Set the text in a decent font and decorate with the design element, or embed small words inside a big design element as they did at the end -- I agree that the "js" part of the logo is very nice. But don't try to emphasize the weird shape and the text simultaneously on the same level of the design, because it just looks dorky.
Not that I'm a designer, of course. Maybe three days from now I'll wake up and find myself in love with this design.
Though this sort of thing is obviously subjective, I hate this design as it stands. Abstract shapes can work as the basis of a design, and words can work as the basis of a design, but trying to do both at once makes it look like a middle schooler's first attempt at typography. If you're going to set type, think like a typographer: The word should be pleasant to read, not make my head hurt.
They should decide which is more important -- the text, or the design elements like the hexagon -- and make one subordinate to the other. Set the text in a decent font and decorate with the design element, or embed small words inside a big design element as they did at the end -- I agree that the "js" part of the logo is very nice. But don't try to emphasize the weird shape and the text simultaneously on the same level of the design, because it just looks dorky.
Not that I'm a designer, of course. Maybe three days from now I'll wake up and find myself in love with this design.
The "node" text is visually distinct from the "js" hex. It isn't really a cohesive logo.
I think the node text leaves a lot to be desired. It's cluttered, inconsistent, and that sort of hex lettering is cliché.
I agree with you. Using only the JS hex is much stronger branding.
I think the node text leaves a lot to be desired. It's cluttered, inconsistent, and that sort of hex lettering is cliché.
I agree with you. Using only the JS hex is much stronger branding.
Maybe it's just me, but I liked the old logo better. Simple and to the point. Nothing overly complex.
I think it's a fantastic direction for node's logo and branding. A logo and a style can give a project a point of view that they otherwise might not have.
It's like how what you wear can be a reflection of or determination of your personality to some extent. What you wear and how you wear it can change who you are or define who you are. Same with a logo and a brand if properly executed.
I'm not big on logo re-designs in general because it's like trying to change who you are as a company and that doesn't always work.
However, this is a good direction for node. Also, what I really dig is that it doesn't look like a generic web 2.0 logo. It feels distinct and weird. Kind of like Heroku.
It's like how what you wear can be a reflection of or determination of your personality to some extent. What you wear and how you wear it can change who you are or define who you are. Same with a logo and a brand if properly executed.
I'm not big on logo re-designs in general because it's like trying to change who you are as a company and that doesn't always work.
However, this is a good direction for node. Also, what I really dig is that it doesn't look like a generic web 2.0 logo. It feels distinct and weird. Kind of like Heroku.
yeah i dont like the new branding...speaking as a designer,
i actually prefer the current/old branding at nodejs.org
I was really glad to get an advanced look at the "new" logo. I prefer the old one so much that I've stashed a copy locally in case I ever want to get it printed on a t-shirt.
The new one is horrible! The point to point graph under the hex text. Rubbish!
The new one is horrible! The point to point graph under the hex text. Rubbish!
I created an account to come in and comment on this. I do also really enjoy the old logo, but I suppose I can support an effort to promote node.js.
Anyway, are you in any mood to share the old logo? I like the idea of having it on a shirt or something.
Edit: Scratch that. I'm silly. They're still all over the place with a quick Google search.
Anyway, are you in any mood to share the old logo? I like the idea of having it on a shirt or something.
Edit: Scratch that. I'm silly. They're still all over the place with a quick Google search.
I would expect a self-professed designer to know that "yeah i dont like the new branding" is just about the most useless feedback one can possibly give.
Why don't you like it? What do you think they got wrong and how would you do it better?
Why don't you like it? What do you think they got wrong and how would you do it better?
Fair comment, I apologise.
While alot of what influenced my opinion of the logo is pure subjectivity...
Also I feel that the logo is overly styled (my subjective opinion)
While alot of what influenced my opinion of the logo is pure subjectivity...
> The angled infrastructure encourages energy to move through the letterforms
Also I feel that the logo is overly styled (my subjective opinion)
[deleted]
Looks more geeky and corporate than the current one. Good move.
Broken link
Dear OP, please remove the ridiculous iOS theme. It breaks URL forward
The characters are a bit obese, but I like the concept.
[deleted]
the "n" is awkward and too small. Glad they changed the name to nodeo though, sounds a lot more exciting.
Google Cached Version: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?sourceid=chrome...