From: Reid Sweatman (drunkardswalk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-09 17:04:47
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of David Abrahams
> Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 8:33 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [boost] Re: Logo 67 bad [was: Logo comments]
> "Eric Niebler" <eric_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > A lot of people are expressing favorable opinions about selection 67
> > boost/squares. This logo is simply out of the question, in
> my opinion,
> > because of its glaring similarity to the marketing imagery
> of Visual
> > Studio. Just look at the Visual C++ box:
> > http://tinyurl.com/6chhn
> > c-plus-plus03.jpg
> > IMO, option 67 should be removed.
> I consider that a background pattern and not sacrosanct. I
> never would have noticed it had you not pointed it out.
> I think if we had to eliminate any abstract graphic that was
> used in promotional or packaging material, there'd be hardly
> anything we could use.
True, but MS is notoriously litigious, and, well, I assume you know of the
case where IBM sued someone for doing a logo in block blue letters? Won too
(big surprise). Some years ago.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk