New CodeGear Logo
27 Mar
Hey, we have a new logo!
I was worried that I wasn’t going to like it, but I really do. I like the colors and I like how it looks like it is crammed in a box and trying to burst out. I’ve also seen mockups of the all the stuff for it — stationary, business cards, website, etc. — and they all look great. I’m looking forward to this new brand getting more exposure in the coming weeks.
I liked the previous (temporary) logo much more than this one. I already talked with 7 other delphi developers, and all of them have the same opinion.
If there is any chance, please pay a good designer to work on a better logo (it will not be dificult, since this one really sucks). With all the great stuff coming out from CG, this logo is a shame.
Sorry for being so sincere.
March 27th, 2007 at 5:47 pmhello…
yea i also liked more the previous logo.. looked more profesional,more compact.. more usable on products.. and as carlos said.. yes this logo does suck really badly…
finding someone to make the logo shouldn be dificult.. you dont need someone really pro either spend too much money on it.. to make a very good logo
im also sorry for being honest
Cheers
March 27th, 2007 at 7:42 pmYes…
really sucks
You can do better
Cheers
March 27th, 2007 at 8:00 pmOdd that the "E" in "GEAR" isn’t the same shape as the one in "CODE"…
I’m not going to say that I hate the new logo, because everything new and different seems bad. That and my complete lack of design sense. (I tell people that I am "esthetically challenged".)
March 27th, 2007 at 8:05 pmI designed the original (previous) CodeGear logo you still see on the CodeGear website today (March 27) until it’s replaced with the new one. Glad you liked it! I have a little design blood and background so I can hack out a logo. I did that pretty quickly just using std turnkey logo concepts, not intending for it to be permanent (but it was originally completely hand kerned!). Actually it was desgined as a template so that we could "visualize" all the name candidates for the company because names come across differently when they are stylized. When we settled on the name, we had a logo that was acceptable enough to start working with. Actually about a month after we went live with the codegear site I was on our partner’s website "ComponentOne" http://componentone.com/ and realized that I may have had a little "subliminal" influence! no ideas are original… I don’t know if it was in the back of my mind or not, but C1’s logo certainly does resemble the "original" CG one I did… I’m not ashamed, a good friend of mine is a seriously respectable abstract oil artist - I’m still an abstract hack and apprentice, but I’m striving to copy his style in addition to developing my own. If I can emulate Miro or Klee, I’m really happy!
But that had nothing to do with marketing’s decision to develop a new brand identity. What I put together was something quick and dirty - what marketing is doing is something wholistic, original, and designed specifically for CodeGear and what we’re about.
The marketing team worked with a really good design firm, and they talked with developers and looked at the marketplace and where programming and tech is going and together with CodeGear marketing developed a "complete" CodeGear brand image. If you see the logo "in context" ie used in collateral, webpages, boxes, etc it is a really really cool design. It’s actually very functional, modern, a little edgy, and custom.
So soming from they guy who drew the logo you like, I would just ask for you to wait and see it once all the materials and websites and products etc are launched with it and then judge. A lot of people looked at it and a lot of people really liked it. I think it will seem very different to you then. I like this one much better than the one I did.
March 27th, 2007 at 8:18 pm>>more usable on products
I would just ask you to wait until you see this one on products. It looks really nice. I think just popping the logo out there doesn’t do it justice. I really started to like it when I saw it in use in webpages, product boxes, and adverts.
I would also say, take a look at it again every few days, and then see if you see it any differently.
March 27th, 2007 at 8:21 pmI like the current one much more, too. The new one looks a bit "home-made" while the actual looks more professional.
March 27th, 2007 at 8:49 pmBut Michael - you are right: We all don’t know how it looks in context. But I hope http://dn.codegear.com/article/34186 won’t be the style, the new logo will be used with.
>> won’t be the style, the new logo will be used with
No thats just a banner. I does have a bit of the industrial worn feel to it - but it’s probably not representative of how you’ll see it in full context.
March 27th, 2007 at 8:57 pm>> won’t be the style, the new logo will be used with
No thats just a banner. I does have a bit of the industrial worn feel to it - but it’s probably not representative of how you’ll see it in full context.
March 27th, 2007 at 8:57 pmI like previous one. But, of course, you decide.
March 27th, 2007 at 9:01 pmLogo should be wide, not tall, I think.
March 27th, 2007 at 9:07 pmPrevious one owned, but this one is not beautiful.
March 27th, 2007 at 9:15 pmYep… first one was better, by far (IMHO).
March 27th, 2007 at 9:59 pmI like the new one, the old one was unexciting and dull. This one makes you look twice.
March 27th, 2007 at 10:50 pmyes,I like the previous logo.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:20 pmI like the previous one!
March 27th, 2007 at 11:50 pmI’m afraid I’m in minority, but… I really love the new logo. It seems more professional.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:14 amThe new logo seems kind of brutal to me - the old one was much nicer if you ask…
March 28th, 2007 at 12:24 amimo give away a free copy of Delphi 2007 or D4PHP to the one winning the Codegear logo contest *hint*
March 28th, 2007 at 12:37 amDitto I’m afraid…Thought when you brought the first one out "hey that’s pretty cool with little or no time/effort" followed by "can’t wait to see what they come up with once they’re given some time".
Sadly however, the above stinks. Looks very amateurish and REALLY think you should drop the "from Borland" bit. As they say in parts of the UK that makes it look "nowt nor summut" (nothing nor something).
Either your controlled by Borland or your not, which is it? This one makes it look more like a Borland product!
March 28th, 2007 at 1:04 amSorry, I have to agree with the majority. The new logo already looks tired. Kind of like the logos I used to see on software packaging for my Apple II+ :o)
I’m not sure who designed it, but I know that there are many in the Delphi community that could do a better job for very small reward.
Some of the problems I think the new logo exhibits:
1) The Borland tag at the bottom. Why?
2) Too regular (like it’s been deisgned by a coder using MS Paint! :o)
3) Uninspiring font and colours.
4) The way in which the CODE overlaps the GEAR doesn’t work. With the CO overlaping the GE it appears that the AR are just shorter letters being squashed by the DE i.e. not overlapping.
5) It doesn’t give the impression that you are a forward thinking company. While the rest of the world is moving to Web 2.0 CodeGear is moving back to the 80’s (which, from my experience is definately not the case)
I know you’ve probably gone too far with the new logo (stationary etc) but if I were you guys I would have a little rethink.
/Paul
March 28th, 2007 at 1:56 amMe too…I don’t like the new logo, please put in the non recicle bin.
March 28th, 2007 at 2:18 amLooks like I’m in the minority, because I like the new logo.
(And sorry to nit pick, but "stationary" is something that isn’t moving. However you can write on "stationery")
March 28th, 2007 at 3:24 amI like the new one, too.
…apart from the "from Borland" bit: That’s a bit like taking delivery of your shiny new Lotus Elise and finding it has a "LOTUS - from Proton" badge on it.
But, at least the logo is designed so you can crop that off…
March 28th, 2007 at 3:30 amI already commented on what I thought of the new logo on ST’s blog, on the whole, I’m not a fan.
March 28th, 2007 at 4:15 amI already commented on what I thought of the new logo on ST’s blog, on the whole, I’m not a fan.
March 28th, 2007 at 4:15 amDang, that went double because I got some weird casting error.
March 28th, 2007 at 4:15 amLets view the good points of this new logo.
- The word ‘Gear’ remember’s me a car gear, blazing fast…
- The logo is huge, like the new CG products, wich is very good
Go go go CG!!!!!
March 28th, 2007 at 5:36 amA logo should always look good anywhere. I don’t buy the comment: "I would just ask you to wait until you see this one on products. It looks really nice. I think just popping the logo out there doesn’t do it justice." If this logo was made by a marketing company you should fire them. It looks home made by a programmer on is spare time. Codegear should put more effort on this. This will be the image of the company.
March 28th, 2007 at 7:12 amDon’t like new logo at all, sorry… absolutely.
March 28th, 2007 at 7:20 amNot really a logo - just CODEGEAR…
March 28th, 2007 at 7:55 amI liked the old logo too but I’m willing to give the new one a chance to grow on me. Like the previous posters, I think its time to grow up and drop the Borland tag all together.
March 28th, 2007 at 8:00 amThe goggles, they do nothing! That looks like a label for some crappy 1980’s soda!
March 28th, 2007 at 8:08 amHere’s a 5 minute job:
http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/9411/xcgfj3.png
March 28th, 2007 at 9:06 amI like it! (the 5 minute one I mean)
March 28th, 2007 at 9:09 amHaha. The "5 minute job" looks better!
March 28th, 2007 at 9:22 amThis logo is so ugly that it make the first one looks good.
March 28th, 2007 at 9:27 amWhat bother me the most in this new logo is "code" smashing "gear". What are the reasons for this?
C Johnson –
I’m stunned — stunned! — that you don’t like the logo. Who’d have guessed?
Nick
March 28th, 2007 at 9:30 amIt looks like a logo for a 1980’s video arcade game machine
March 28th, 2007 at 10:22 amThe logo made by "Anonymous Coward" above looks really great. I like the gears, but I think that the lower gear should be red as well. To bad it’s not the logo that will be used.
March 28th, 2007 at 11:38 amHi,
I think you could give community a chance and create contest.
As an example of the possible output quality you can get see:
http://www.nival.com/homm5/contest/prize/
Those are IMHO amazing and with logo it should be much less work I belive.
March 28th, 2007 at 11:56 amA couple variations for the heck of it:
White text, gears in red: http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/5166/xcg3sx0.png
March 28th, 2007 at 1:12 pm"Gear" in red: http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/5451/xcg2bu3.png
I found an image of some of the new CodeGear branded products Michael Swindell mentioned:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tab_(soft_drink)
Knew that logo looked strangely familiar.
March 28th, 2007 at 2:00 pmsurprisingly i like more the logo exposed by anonymous coward than the actual new logo.. because the new code gear logo looks like made on a rush by someone on corel draw on the lunch break.. absolutely not apropiate for such kind of company like codegear is …
March 28th, 2007 at 5:00 pmI vote for this one:
http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/9411/xcgfj3.png
Go Anonymous Coward GO Go GO !!
March 28th, 2007 at 7:34 pmNahhh, that Anonymous guy is getting better…
http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/5451/xcg2bu3.png
March 28th, 2007 at 7:36 pmLet’s not expense anymore time fussing about logos. It is what it is. Its not going to make the Delphi compiler faster or make us developers more productive.
Its there. Deal with it and move on!
IDL
March 28th, 2007 at 7:38 pm@Impatient Delphi Loyalist:
March 28th, 2007 at 8:42 pmYou’re right - but a good brand is needed to sell the products to new developers. And that’s what we need: That CodeGear make revenue to have money for further development of their products.
And that would make us more productive.
Imo, first logo was way better.
March 29th, 2007 at 2:16 amNick -> I like the 5 minute job Anonymous did.
I find the current incarnation to be dull, unimaginative, uninspirational. It doesn’t convey anything except the company’s name and a sense that someone thought it was worth spending 4 minutes with mspaint to create it. It has internal artistic inconsitancies that speak more to the need to spend another minute in MSPaint rather than any actual artistic intent.
And yes, I definitely do not like that ugly little gray bit hanging off the bottom. Trust me, you want to get as far away from the Borland name as you can get.
It looks like it was designed by committee.
As I mentioned to Steve T, I understand you guys are excited about it, but I think you’ve mistaken the excitement for change for REAL excitment about the logo itself. And as I mentioned to him, only time will really tell there.
March 29th, 2007 at 3:56 amLike, I hear you sell Jeans. Far out! Do you, like, ship to San Fernando Valley? Mmmmmwa.
March 29th, 2007 at 5:32 amMichael:
I took your advice and looked at the new logo several times over the last few days. I must admit your “down and dirty” is far more appealing to me than the holistic approach you are advocating.
I am sure it’s my age, but the new logo seems like something my teenage son would do, and your “down and dirty” seems like something I would do. I supposed it depends on the market you are targeting which logo is appropriate. If CodeGear and Delphi are to have any long term viable future though, we need to target and recruit younger developers (I’ve seen some photos of various Delphi user groups recently, and the spring chickens are far and few). I suppose from that perspective, it may be rather appealing to the younger crowd.
Good luck with the logo. I trust the denizens at CodeGear will make the right choice.
Tom Martin
March 29th, 2007 at 7:32 amDelphi Centurion
http://delphicenturion.blogspot.com
Who did this?
The first CG logo is nice. This one just doesn’t make it.
Please change it or keep the first one.
Luis Madaleno
March 29th, 2007 at 8:02 amTo all the codegear people,
Please read all messages and change the logo.
Peter
March 29th, 2007 at 11:29 amWas the new logo designed by the same guys that came up with "Inprise"…?
March 29th, 2007 at 1:54 pm>> I took your advice and looked at the new logo several times over the last few days.
Everyone has their own tastes. But I think we’ve had the benefit of seeing all the materials that the logo will be used in. So we’re responding to it in a different context and with more information which isn’t fair. We’ll certainly pass on the feedback to the marketing team.
March 29th, 2007 at 3:51 pmOk, enough. Let’s get a real measure of the quality of a logo.
Who wants a coffee cup with this logo on it? Would you put any effort into seeking out a free one if you had to work at it, would you pay 20$ to someone like cafe express to get one?
Given a free tshirt with this logo printed 12"x12" across the back, would you wear it or toss it to the dog after an event?
I, for one, will stick with my Squirrelly Wrath mug for now.
March 29th, 2007 at 5:59 pmThe font for the new logo looks like it was taken off the side of the video game in "The Last Starfighter", yeah, that old, and that lame. If that had been sprung on us in another week, say, April 1’st, I might understand. Somebody please google "logo design".
March 29th, 2007 at 7:21 pmI like the anonymous contrib much better:
http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/5166/xcg3sx0.png
I was going to design one myself and send it to you. It would have had gear-like teeth on
the C and the G.
What I dislike most about the new logo you posted is the bad kerning and the way the
CO in code clips part of the letters GE in the second word.
Secondly, I think the CodeGear left to right (wide) is better looking than one above the other, but if you’re going to put one above the other, at least make a visual play with gears, of some kind!
Just my $0.02. My employers hired a graphic designer to design a new logo, spent lots of money on the logo, and in the end, I like the amateur one we had before. It was better.
I don’t trust marketing types very far, I guess. If I was you guys, I’d pick a logo my customers liked, although it’s entirely up to you, and I’ll buy the product either way.
It’s just it would be nice if it looked good.
And hey, while we’re all egotistically suggesting things, let me show you the CodeGear logo I just drew:
http://www.warrenpostma.com/pictures/codegear_logo_by_warren.png
Mine is kind of influenced stylistically
by the "Rocketeer", and evokes, IMHO,
that good old American Yankee Innovation,
gears, polished brass, heavy industry,
that sort of thing. Kind of steam-punk,
I guess.
Warren
March 30th, 2007 at 7:18 amMy first impression upon seeing the new logo was that it looks unprofessional. And I still think so when I see it. It seems lik it’s an in-house job. Someone firing up Photoshop thinking they could knock-up a logo.
March 30th, 2007 at 10:54 pmThe anonymous contribution is by far the better of the two.
I will still use Delphi, but I won’t includes such ugly logo in my apps or website. Proud to be a Delphi user, but not that proud to mess up my work with such a bad and cheap designed piece of crap.
The way Delphi is heading under the wings of CodeGear is great, so to bad that this little thing is not of the same standard.
And to response to Impatient Delphi Loyalist’s remark: a logo is way more important than you think - it has a strong association with the quality of the productes. The same way most people first rate an application by purely judging it at how it looks. This is the same with a logo - if it is bad, so will the company wich uses it. If it does not look professional, than that company is not either.
As suggested, CodeGear should have done it differently. The company my father works for, just awarded the best logo with a relative cheap prize to anyone who sent in the best logo and new name for that company after two companies joined forces.
As I said, I will stick with Delphi and CodeGear (did not yet received D2007 but I expect it within a couple of days), but new customers may be put off by this ugly logo!
Fons
March 31st, 2007 at 6:44 amThe Netherlands
Sorry, but it’s completely lame. I hope you haven’t printed too much stationery. How about doing a poll next time you’re thinking about a new logo?
March 31st, 2007 at 3:22 pmI think the logo is a poor attempt. Simple as that.
Writing the name out in Arial Bold 12 would actually be better than what you have come up with.
Roll back to start, and give it another try.
Also, if someone within CodeGear thinks that easy convertibility into icons should be an important design factor, duct tape their mouths shut.
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:44 amNew thing always take times to be accepted,I think.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:31 pmThe more I look at it the more I like it. It grows on you.
April 4th, 2007 at 2:52 pmI’ll try to make my comments constructive.
1) The C/G O/E overlaps are awkward.
The A is pushed over too much into the R. In other words, the A overlaps with the R more than it overlaps with the E - not symmetric.
2) Because of (1), the A looks short.
3) The R, on the other hand looks clipped at the top.
4) The "tail" of the R is clipped to an unattractive square point.
5) Both E’s should have the same design.
6) The sharp turns on the left of the C and G are awkward (again, clipping).
7) The D and E touch at a point, which seems inconsistent with the rest of the logo. Logically, it seems the D should be obscuring part of the E.
9) Overall, there is an appearance of three layers: CO on top, then GEAR, and DE on the bottom. This is actually a combination of overlap and color. The eye catches the overlap first, then it’s drawn to the brighter red color, and finally back to DE. This kind of eye movement is generally a bad idea in a logo.
On a non-design-related note: The "from Borland" bit is a let-down.
April 4th, 2007 at 9:39 pmYou truly are joking - a bit late for April Fools day. The "new logo" was written in turtle graphics by turtles that are clearly intoxicated. Please recycle all paper goods with this new logo.
April 6th, 2007 at 11:13 amThe anonymously designed logo is much, much better than this one. I would also like to mention that red on black theme of the new CodeGear site is an abomination of design.
May 8th, 2007 at 11:55 pm