Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-08 09:40:54

"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Joel de Guzman wrote:
>> I think the real issue here is discussion about preferences. Such
>> discussions, might potentially have some influence on how people
>> will vote. But we already agreed, from the start, that such
>> discussions are ok. I personally do not see anything wrong with
>> that.
> So who's going to break the ice?

Here goes:

One of the most important challenges for us to deal with in the next
few years is raising Boost's level of professionalism, both in
practice and in image (**). The logo should project solidity and

In this department, number 67 stood head and shoulders above the rest
for me. It is also memorable and easily iconifiable. The next
most-likely candidate for me was 68a, closely followed by 75c,
suitably modified. Most of the others didn't even come close in my

Having given them a second look after noticing them in the upper ranks
of the voting, 38 and 39 look better to me than they did initially,
but they still have a fundamental problem: they project the
connotation of a child's toy blocks. While that has a certain appeal
in projecting "ease-of-use" and "component software," it has obvious
negative overtones in my opinion.

The 83 series, BTW, ranked fairly high on my professionalism scale,
but seemed to be more appropriate for a photographic services or
printing company or a music company, and the retro lettering, while
pretty, perhaps makes too much of a statement.

In my opinion, getting "C++" or "::" into the logo design as graphic
elements is of very little importance (***). Most of the designs that
do that seem to be too clever by half, which is distracting and looks
somewhat amateurish in the end. I realize I was probably responsible
for planting that seed. Sorry, but what can I say? I'm not a skilled
logo designer, and I know it -- which is why I only made one
submission, and that was only to stimulate thought. Probably the
reason the FedEx logo works is that it's really subtle.

(**) I believe it's neccessary in order to increase adoption, which I
think is crucial for us. These are my values; of course you might

(***) I do think it's important to have the words "Boost" and "C++
Libraries" in there somewhere, but not neccessarily as graphic

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at