since the branding is one major think for all platforms (social media, websites, merch, etc.) and for the OS itself, we need a clear roadmap.
So we need to define it.
Rocky Linux stands for the same values as the CentOS project:
“Community-driven free software effort focused on delivering a robust open source ecosystem around a Linux platform.”
If you prefer a post like it, the likes are indicating the community though and will be the base for the branding.
The logo needs to fits this simple values:
1.) Easy scalable (favicon, logos, banners, videos, for t-shirts and other merch etc)
2.) easy to look in any kind of format (Darkmode, lightmode (default))
3.) not too busy because of point 1 and 2 (edited)
4.) Supporting formats: png, jpeg, webp, favicon.ico, ai, svg
The community was talking about a purple logo/design to stay away from other distros:
.) Blue - Fedora, Arch, Zorin, Deepin
.) Red - Redhat, FreeBSD, Debian, BlackArch
.) Green - SUSE
.) Orange - Ubuntu
.) …
Yes. That is right. But I see both things can go together.
We want to be what CentOS was.
As I see it:
We want to be solid as a solid alternative, a trusted distro that is not going to disappear or be sold.
We want to be solid in the sense of providing stable pace release cycle (following RHEL), based on trusted processes (transparency), trusted pipes, trusted repos (integrity).
We want to be solid in the way we match the quality of a professional distro (RHEL), just without the RH branding or support or special add-ons. Same as “old” CentOS.
Good point, Patrick. I like also to stress in “independence”.
Keeping the “old” CentOS spirit, we must follow RHEL sources & release cycles. I think that one is clear. So we are very dependent on the RHEL upstream source.
We need to remark anyhow that while RHEL is tied to Red Hat’s business model, Rocky Linux is an independent community driven project.
I don’t know if with similar phrasing or using some other word instead of independent to say the same, like “self-sufficient”, “self-governed”, “separated”,… Suggestions ?
Yeah, I love blue logos and blue wallpapers, but @kevinsumner is right. We should not use color schemes that are already used by other distros. This could even lead to sueing.
Since we don’t have the word “Enterprise” in the name, I think it is extremely important to make sure that word is in the short definition.
Something like:
Rocky Linux stands for the same values as the CentOS project:
“Community-driven free software effort focused on delivering a robust open source ecosystem around an Enterprise Linux platform.”
There are other discussions doing on about changing or slightly altering the name, so the word “Enterprise” may end up being included but, for now, I know that the enterprise-level business world that I deal with will likely gloss over this distribution unless it is forefront and center that it is, in fact, an ENTERPRISE solution.
The to be fair, the CentOS logo is the opposite of an enterprise, corporate look. Enterprise logos don’t use multiple colors and are rather duotone or simple. The current CentOS logo is more consumer looks with so many colors. I don’t like it and it’s the same trend Microsoft or Google does with using multiple colors. Looks childish. There is a reason they do, they are global consumer brands and every color has a different reaction on every person. By using the primary colors they want to attract everyone which is not the purpose here.
See how Red Hat is just using black and red to pick one example. Same for most enterprise type software/brands.
If we want to present and transmit on the branding a corporate/stable message, 2 colors max.
And you want to send that message because this is why people pick CentOS. If they wanted a dev or more recent software, they would pick Fedora. I suspect CentOS is so popular because of its slow release and its mainly attracting business users. With that said, the current CentOS logo is the opposite of attracting a business market. When I say business here, I mean anyone that just wants to run a production server (even at home) and don’t bother with it for years to come. It’s an insult that those that picked CentOS 8 now have even less support than 7. Not sure what Red Hat was thinking…
As for the colors, why not use something that was never used before? Something that is clearly very different to everything else. I have no problems creating several designs if someone has an idea on all formats.
I would suggest:
2 colors max.
Must look the same on both dark and white backgrounds
Should be clearly visible on a small scale (think here a tiny font awesome icon), most designers make the logo complex because they design them on bigger sizes, and then it loses completely its form when it’s resized to a tiny size. Think here powered by slogan on a page and the logo is just a stamp.
Look more like a symbol than a logo.
Unique color. Separate yourself from the rest.
Unique color here is a bit controversial. The reason why you don’t see other colors besides the typical blue, black, red, that most companies use is because they come from an era of physical printing and some colors just don’t look the same when printed, hence they stick to the safe colors. But I think it’s time to move on and printing has also evolved in terms of color accuracy. There is no reason why a different color can’t be used in 2020 as the % of people that will print the logo is tiny. Most of the branding will be visible on a digital screen and this is not going to change in the future but increase.
Personally I would suggest the color the following colors:
Hex:
#00AC97
Or
#00BAD4
They are extremely unique and look good both on white and dark backgrounds. I made some lookups that I never released using those colors and the fonts look impressive on dark and white.
]