[Mageia-discuss] Here's two I like; some others (with + comments in posts above) which I don't like so much.

[Rick Stockton]

We are becoming a tangle of quoted/re-quoted posts, with add-on votes and
replies all mixed together :( But, I'll take part in this method of
"review", since everyone else is doing the same.

I have different favorites than most previous commentators. I like the
"Magic golden egg on Living Sceptre" by Alex,
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexsim22/5120476855/
And he's done it beautifully in both color and grayscale. The one thing he
has NOT done properly is check the licensing on his fonts; I'm pretty sure
that "Trebuchet MS" is a license-for-money proprietary font, owned by
Microsoft (although that version is ugly anyway). The one which looks good
and needs to be checked is the one he calls "js-math". If it's now owned by
Oracle, well, that could be a bad choice too.

My other favorite is eMiR's globe in four quadrants with hand-drawn "M",
http://www.flickr.com/photos/29757814@N02/5023349863/ I have a long
comment attached to that photo- the two strange dots (Curitiba and Paris
???) should probably be deleted. But the Globe is not derivative of
Firefox, and the four quadrants are in complete contact with each other
(at the equator, and at a dividing line down the middle of the logo).
Because they are solid colors, and fully attached within the circle, I
think it works [i]better[/i] than the well-liked Earth/Air/Water/Fire
scheme ( http://www.flickr.com/photos/54316230@N06/5141934927/ ).

Per my comment on that picture, each of the four images in [i]that[/i] set
is detached from the others -- you end up with [u]a pattern of 4
logos[/u], rather than one single logo. People with eyes like me would
remember "there's a leaf for Earth, and a Flame, and a Water blob, and a
wind for Air". But that's four DIFFERENT logos, and in my head, four
things does NOT "map" to one thing very well. If we want people like me to
associate our new logo with ONE thing, Mageia, then we need to make ONE
logo. Not four.

The very popular http://www.flickr.com/photos/54240048@N08/5013673327/ is,
for me, [u]too[/u] "light". The colors, and the gentle, balanced swirls,
add up to... not much. Pretty, and pretty forgettable. A heavier text font
will not solve the problem; the picture itself is too "weak". Think about
the business logos which you respect -- you'll probably decide, as I did,
that they're usually a lot more "SOLID" than this one.
---
I present strong opinions, I know. Please *DO* feel free to ignore them if
you disagree with me. And thanks for reading this far. :)