SGI's New Logo and Look
RenderMan
I, and everyone Ive talked to agree that was a horrible mistake.
SGI, your target market was advanced computing audiences.
We have long held SGI as the high-end masters. The ones that realize that
design and visualization is an integral part of computing. The name "Silicon
Graphics" wields authority, its familiar and powerful. The chrome 3D logo
has long been a symbol of exactly what the machines are capable of.
That's now changed.
Welcome, the new SGI. The new SGI name, and the new "sgi" logo that brings
them down to the childrens level. It kills me to see youve cast aside your
longtime expert image in favor of a look that is in line with the Apple iMac
and the Dodge Neon. Set aside your aire of elite, and instead turn to the
simplistic, the clownish.
What a mistake.
With your dying UNIX legacy, and your underperforming RISC hardware we all
were saddened to see Silicon Graphics fade away. We all reluctantly turned
to the NT world to stay in business. For a brief time my collegues and I had
our hope re-inspired, SGI entered the market with a new breed of powerful,
dominating NT Workstations. Workstations that demanded respect. They would
bring thier vision, thier expertise, thier power, and thier look to the
world of animators and visulization experts once again. The Visual
Worsktation - the first Silicon Graphics NT machine to bear the well-known
3D logo reinspires us to own the best.
Or so we thought.
The two strongest things Silicon Graphics had going for it was thier name,
and thier look. Undeniably, you could DO things on an SGI that you couldnt
on any other machine, just by looking at them you knew this. Those last two
steadfast defining qualities of Silicon Graphics have just went the way of
Apple. SGI now looks to align themselves with the iMac. Expert traded in for
"easy to use". Visionary traded in for "daily driver". Advanced traded in
for "simplistic".
Thats what this world needs, another Packard Bell.
Much like the logo, what once was very capital, is now all "lower case".
If indeed your target market has changed. If indeed your trying to butter up
to the low-budget college kids, the housewife chat-a-holics, the
one-mouse-buttoners out there, then congratulations - youve probably entered
the market as a big hit.
I know all us, real workstation users, all us CAD/CAM professionals, all use
GIS and Visualization experts, all us Simulation designers are sad to see
you go. I used to be proud to have a granite textured monitor, with a thick
chrome 3D Silicon Graphics logo dead center. I wont be proud to have a
translucent toaster with a cheaply screenprinted, white lettering "sgi" on
the bottom corner. But maybe my little brother will.
Is this sappy? Yes. Is this probably over-dramatized? Yes.
However, does the look of a company have an effect on who buys thier
hardware? You better believe it. And I think you just upset alot of people,
and most likely those were the people that bought from you.
Bad idea.
RM
Mian Chang
snip...
If indeed your target market has changed. If indeed your trying to butter up
to the low-budget college kids, the housewife chat-a-holics, the
one-mouse-buttoners out there, then congratulations - youve probably entered
the market as a big hit.
...snip
RM;
From the sgi (all lower case) press release:
"The company's new trade name - SGI - is a significant element of the branding strategy, which also includes a distinctive new visual style, amplification of the master brand and consolidation of numerous separate product brands under
three sub-brand categories."
"Under the new system, products like Cray supercomputers, which were added to the SGI product roster when the company acquired Cray Research in 1996, will be marketed as one of three primary sub-brands under the SGI master brand umbrella.
The three sub-brands include;
SGI servers and services,
Silicon Graphics visual workstations,
and Cray supercomputers.
These sub-brands represent the consolidation of previously ill-defined
product brands in the Silicon Graphics family."
So as I read it the server business is sgi, workstations remain Silicon Graphics and the super computers remain Cray. I suspect there's a bookkeeping advantage here too.
And contrary to you statement, not all of us have turned to nt (yet). I hasten to add, most of us in the visual arts will more likely look to (don't laugh) the mac, before moving to nt. We've never completely divested of our macs, still prefer them (sans crashes) and hope the next (get it, NeXT?) OS will live up to most of the hype. Irix showed our studio, that an operating system really could be stable. What a concept!
As long as sgi makes a product I can use and afford, with the software I need and want, I really don't care what it's called. I won't rule out nt in our studio (never say never!!) but it will certainly be the LAST of last resorts.
ciao,
m
-- VERTIGO
Mark Holloway
Very well said. I was thinking the same exact thing. The prestige is gone. I
thought it was a joke when I went to the web site but then I realized it's not
April 1st. I was very sad. I practically had tears running down my face. The
highly respectable, highly elite Silicon Graphics is now dead. Aside from that,
the new look is HORRIBLE. Besides, what they claim "sgi" stands for doesn't
even make sense. Who is going to want to pronounce it "Servers, Graphic
Workstations, Insights". Lame. They screwed up badly!
Regards,
Mark Holloway
Wesley Horner
: Let me be the first to say, SGI's new look completely sucks.
: I, and everyone Ive talked to agree that was a horrible mistake.
: Is this sappy? Yes. Is this probably over-dramatized? Yes.
: However, does the look of a company have an effect on who buys thier
: hardware? You better believe it. And I think you just upset alot of people,
: and most likely those were the people that bought from you.
Its funny but when I mention to people I use an SGi they usually don't know
what at i'm talking about (non computer people). When I then say Silicon
Graphics they Ooo and aaah. So even this group that they seem to be trying to
appeal to doesn't identify with SGI. The name Silicon Graphics had cache.
I hope they will at least use the 3d cube in conjunction with the new name
but I'm afraid these are the Dilbertesque signs of a company with worse
problems than anyone imagined.
There old name and image wasn't the problem. They didn't do anything to
bolster thier image and let it rot in the face of image building campaigns
from Sun, Microsoft and even Apple.
Hopefully the remaining shareholders will boot the uninspired ceo before the
company loses so much money that it's bought by someone like Compaq.
Discusted,
wes
--
~~~~wes...@gladstone.uoregon.edu~~~~~~~~~~NeXTMail OK!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vax a vicious creature known to eat 110AC and quotes through its
*DCL*. Vax are usually found in groups of Vaxen called clusters where
they lay in wait to ravage their prey known as users.
cos...@nospam.enteract.com
: Hopefully the remaining shareholders will boot the uninspired ceo before the
: company loses so much money that it's bought by someone like Compaq.
Even better, the "ceo" in question should be beaten with a rubber hose and then gang
raped by said Compaq tech support personell.
Silicon Graphics has definately gone down the shitter for good.
Javi
Aggghhh. I just checked the page in question. That new image is not ugly,
IT IS PAINFUL TO WATCH. I thought the NT feecees were their ugliest thing
yet, until I checked their new logo. Oh, my god! I have seen kids in
kindergarten making better logos. Unbelieveable.
What was wrong with the Silicon Graphics brand name. As far as I was
concerned it was a recognizable brand name, and the 3d cube logo was quite
clever. As the old saying goes, "if it ain't broke don't fix it'.
Whe a CEO is willing to spend so much money in a stupid piece of crap like
the new logo, it pretty much tells us that he has no idea what the heck is
going on. If SGI had invested the money and resources that has wasted on
the NT machine and the new logo, in renovating its Irix offerings, they
would be back on their feet. Oh, well.....
Then I searched on Mr. Belluzzo's background. And to my surprise this
fellow has a bachelor's degree in accounting. And then it all made sense.
And nitwit with a degree in accounting trying to direct an engineering
company. That dude is probably making more money than most PhDs within SGI
combined. And SGIs website seems to be a shrine to his persona. 'Keynote'
speech at comdex. This is pretty much what does it for me, an accounting
moron trying to give a keynote speech on technology. With statements like:
' The talk will center around how technology too often gets in the way of
today's urgent need for solving problems and how visualization is the road
to insight.", I love this other one "In a very real sense, technology has
created as many problems as it has solved. Although technical advances
will continue to simplify and standardize computing," So if technical
advances have made things harder to deal with, how come they made
computing simpler? Can anyone tell me what the hell he is talking about?
Clearly he is letting us know how he is technology challenged.... but then
again, why is he directing a technology company? Are the stock holders
going to do anything about this? I want to know the state of SGI before
and after this guy took over.... sgi.... maybe they should change their
letters altogether, here is my new logo: R.I.P.
--
Francisco J. Mesa-Martinez www-robotics.usc.edu/~mesamart
USC Robotics Research Lab mesa...@robotics.usc.edu
Salvatori Comp Sci Center #103 (213) 740-7288
University Park, Los Angeles CA "..std disclaimers apply"
Chris
how i feel,
Silicon Graphics, oh wait, i'm sorry, sgi, has just hit the all time
low. I thought the fact that their resources were going to some NT machines
was bad. It is clearly a marketing tactic to take advantage of the recent
burst in popularity with NT for 3D graphics, a market that at one point they
had cornered. Beluzzo probably saw NT as a threat, so rather than trying to
do better than it, and make a low cost IRIX based solution, The 320 and 540
were developed. Which is at least understandable.
Now Belluzzo goes and strips the company of the name that was pretty
much it's livelyhood. The logo is pure comedy. they go from an imaginative 3
dimensional cube, to lowercase lettering spelling out sgi. The I stands for
Insight, Simply pathetic. I don't know if this is going to be the demise of
Silicon Graphics, Inc. or not. Maybe if they started shipping thier
workstations in boxes that look like cows, they can try and corner the
home-user market. God only knows if that is what's next in sgi's future.
Maybe television commericials.
Best,
Chris Morrow
Javi <mesa...@robotics.usc.edu> wrote in message
news:mesamart-140...@ppp-224-229.usc.edu...
Darien Phoenix Lynx
Graphics" and have the cool relief silver cube on them. Since I'm not really
a graphic designer, the "cool factor" of having a Silicon Graphics
workstation really influenced my decision. I wanted the ultimate NT box and
assumed that with a name like Silicon Graphics, that had to be it. :-P Maybe
that makes me a bad consumer, but I'm sure it says something about SGI's
deicsion to change a really high-end and classy image.
Anybody think they might recant? Maybe a "Silicon Graphics Classic"
campaign? :-)
Chris <deez...@aol.com> wrote in message news:7f2ufd$9...@netaxs.com...
mapl...@gamers.org
Mark Holloway <mlhol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Very well said. I was thinking the same exact thing. The prestige is gone.
I don't agree. A vast proportion of SGI users already refer to the
company as SGI (I do), but far too many business-oriented people haven't
considered SGI for servers because of the name 'Silicon Graphics'. You
don't believe me? Check any issue of Information Week. All they ever talk
about when discussing 64bit computing is Sun, HP, IBM and SCO; never SGI,
even though SGI adverts are found in the magazine, and SGI currently
offers the most scalable 64bit OS available.
SGI needed a brand rethink. The server market is very important to the
company and that was not being served by the 'Silicon Graphics' name in
the modern market place (were you actually not aware of this? It was
obvious to me 2 years ago). For far too long, reporter after reporter
in the media starts an article about SGI by referring to them as 'the
company made famous for its ground-breaking effects in Jurassic Park'.
Even yesterday, some reporters covering the name-change used exactly this
kind of wording which is precisely why SGI has made the change. See:
http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,35022,00.html?tt.yfin..txt.ni
One probably won't see short term effects, but in the long term the
business market and customers who desire servers will turn to SGI more
and more because they won't be put off by the inaccurate visual-effects
and graphics-oriented image used by the media. You may not think this is
important, but it *is* important to SGI's future. Half their revenue
comes from the server business. In fact, when SGI first started selling
web servers, the revenue rocketed to $400M in the first year alone!
> ... The
> highly respectable, highly elite Silicon Graphics is now dead. ...
This is a really stupid statement. The company is still there, the
products are still there, the future plans are still there. It was the
elitism which was harming SGI in recent years. I can clearly remember,
back in 1994, a poster on this newsgroup (PC user) asking what an SGI
was; the response from an SGI employee: "If you don't know, you can't
afford one." At the time, it was funny, but now it just seems stupid
and snobbish.
I already call the company 'SGI' and so do vast numbers of others (I
bet you do too). SGI is much more than a graphics company now and that
must be recognised. Personally, I find most of the longer articles I
write these days are about the scalable technology of Cray, Origin and
IRIX, not the graphics topics which can be covered via online info
and existing tech report data.
> ... Aside from that,
> the new look is HORRIBLE. Besides, what they claim "sgi" stands for doesn't
> even make sense. ...
Makes sense to me. Servers, graphics, insight. The latter two have
been publicised for years in their PR. Now it's time to push the
server side too.
> ... Who is going to want to pronounce it "Servers, Graphic
> Workstations, Insights". Lame. They screwed up badly!
It's only typical that gfx-oriented people are going to moan about
the change, but the fact is that SGI must now begin to appeal to a
much wider audience. If you look closely at the other web pages such
as the O2 page, the individual letters are used in the background. In
the long term, this will be important for brand identity and corporate
awareness.
If there was a real fear at all amongst people like myself, it was that
the name would be changed to something *completely* different like
"Silicon Computing", losing the link with SGI's heritage and technical
lead in graphics design altogether. That hasn't happened, for which I
cheer them loudly. My original world view of SGI (5 years ago) was that
they were indeed a graphics-focussed company because my first exposure
to their technology was an Onyx RE2, then an Indigo2 Extreme, and then
an Indy. But not anymore. Researching all their products and services
reveals a company targeting a far wider audience, offering (IMO) the
most advanced server technology in the world (go read all the docs on
Blue Mountain).
The Onyx2 is still the Onyx2. The Origin is still the Origin. Octane is
still Octane, IRIX is still the wonderfully scalable and reliable IRIX,
etc. And all the praise I could throw at SGI for designing such high-
quality systems is still to hand. If you seriously think that a name
change somehow takes away from that, then you're contradicting your
stated original faith in the technology that SGI has developed.
Stop being so gfx-focused. There's much more to modern markets than
polygons. You can't run an Oracle database with triangles.
Ian.
SGI Network Admin, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, England, PR1
2HE. mapl...@gamers.org | Tel: (+44 -0) 1772 893297, Fax: (+44 -0) 1772
892913 "There is no magic, only stuff." - Nakor, "The King's Buccaneer" (R.E.
Feist)
Doom Help Service (DHS): http://doomgate.gamers.org/dhs/
SGI/Future Technology/N64: http://sgi.webguide.nl/
BSc Dissertation (Doom): http://doomgate.gamers.org/dhs/diss/
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Homme R. Bitter
>
> Mark Holloway <mlhol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Very well said. I was thinking the same exact thing. The prestige is gone.
>
> about when discussing 64bit computing is Sun, HP, IBM and SCO; never SGI,
> even though SGI adverts are found in the magazine, and SGI currently
> offers the most scalable 64bit OS available.
How about using Cray for this segment ?
They have been throwing away the good name Cray had in supercomputer
land by branding the big boxes SGI.
I would be delighted to be able to buy a "Cray Origin 200" as a
file/database/www server.
> SGI needed a brand rethink. The server market is very important to the
> company and that was not being served by the 'Silicon Graphics' name in
> the modern market place (were you actually not aware of this? It was
> obvious to me 2 years ago).
I am aware of it, but changing a logo that is either already known and
respected ( established customer base ) or very recognizable and
"spiffy" ( potential customer base ) because you want to attract a
market segment you are already active in doesn't seem logical to me.
> In fact, when SGI first started selling
> web servers, the revenue rocketed to $400M in the first year alone!
Good for them, but they didn't change their logo or their name to do
that.
Maybe it was requested by Microsoft because their logo looked so
ordinary and plain next to the Silicon Graphics Inc. logo ?
> I can clearly remember,
> back in 1994, a poster on this newsgroup (PC user) asking what an SGI
> was; the response from an SGI employee: "If you don't know, you can't
> afford one." At the time, it was funny, but now it just seems stupid
> and snobbish.
We all know stories where customers weren't treated seriously because
the
first impression they gave made the "salesperson" not interested.
Try buying a mercedes wearing jeans with a hole in them, I had a
laugh.
In no way SGI should be snobistic or turn down a potential market,
it's primary objective is still to make a profit.
> I already call the company 'SGI' and so do vast numbers of others (I
> bet you do too).
I'm lazy, it's easier then Silicon Graphics.
> SGI is much more than a graphics company now and that
> must be recognised. Personally, I find most of the longer articles I
> write these days are about the scalable technology of Cray, Origin and
> IRIX, not the graphics topics which can be covered via online info
> and existing tech report data.
>
> Makes sense to me. Servers, graphics, insight. The latter two have
> been publicised for years in their PR. Now it's time to push the
> server side too.
This is clearly marketing bloating, they should have come up with
a story first and then made up the new name, not fondle up a
story that would allow them to keep the same letters.
> It's only typical that gfx-oriented people are going to moan about
> the change, but the fact is that SGI must now begin to appeal to a
> much wider audience. If you look closely at the other web pages such
> as the O2 page, the individual letters are used in the background. In
> the long term, this will be important for brand identity and corporate
> awareness.
IMHO graphical people know the graphics and advertizing market, so it's
pretty obvious they give comment on the graphics and advertizing
techniques
used by SGI.
In the current hardware market you need "something" to distinguish
yourself
from hung-lo that makes a machine that can do 75 % of your machine for
50 % of the price.
Hung lo doesn't invest in marketing and "Wow!", if SGI does, they should
do it proper.
> If there was a real fear at all amongst people like myself, it was that
> the name would be changed to something *completely* different like
> "Silicon Computing", losing the link with SGI's heritage and technical
> lead in graphics design altogether.
This might even have been better, at least we would know what we were
dealing with, in stead of this half worked out, fumbled approach we
got now.
> The Onyx2 is still the Onyx2. The Origin is still the Origin. Octane is
> still Octane, IRIX is still the wonderfully scalable and reliable IRIX,
> etc. And all the praise I could throw at SGI for designing such high-
> quality systems is still to hand. If you seriously think that a name
> change somehow takes away from that, then you're contradicting your
> stated original faith in the technology that SGI has developed.
SGI hardware is cool, SGI marketing made a big booboo, IMHO.
> Stop being so gfx-focused. There's much more to modern markets than
> polygons. You can't run an Oracle database with triangles.
Agreed, but, Cray can do that, leave SGI to the GFX people.
--
Homme R. Bitter
UNIX admin and consultant, MCSE, BOFH
"Collect the iMac, get the entire
collection with your happymeal!"
Scott Elyard
I'm with everyone else here when it has been expressed that the old logo
will be missed.
There's where we part company.
For some inexplicable reason, even though I've recommended (and will
continue to recommend) SGIs as high-performance server or visual computing
solutions, I didn't really care what the logo looked like. I don't buy
machines for their logos, I buy them for what's inside the box. I've
never even bought computers because of the color of the box their
compnents are housed in, as the lack of iMacs in my lab will attest (I do
own a PowerBook 1400, dark grey, and an SMP Apple 8500 PowerMac,
platinum).
How does it hurt a company to provide a bit of lip service to those that
control the flow of money in the current economy? *Of course* it doesn't
matter if a logo and a name are changed for a corporation. *Of course*
it's just repackaging what is essentially the same thing, through and
through, and of course it is purely for the benefit of appearances.
But I've been seeing a lot of nonsense on Slashdot and these newsgroups
about how SGI is now finally utterly tootally stupidly doomed and is now
going out of business for sure and their 5-billion dollar a year upward
spiral will suddenly completely reverse itself and plummet the company
into bankruptcy within a fortnight.
Bring me a loaf of *real* bread to the table, please. It's not a total
rebranding (Borland-Inprise), and I've never heard anyone else call SGI
anything other than SGI *anyway*, so the name change is merely bringing
the name of the firm in line with what people call it anyway. (Even Bill
Amend, creator of Foxtrot, writing for a largely a mainstream,
not-necessarily computer-literate audience, calls 'em SGIs in his strip,
not Silicon Graphics UNIX workstations.)
Or weren't you aware that acronyms cannot be trademark-protected under
current patent and trademark law in the US?
Some of these people have been making the fortnight bankruptcy prediction
at least since 1995. But when diehard supporters start making these
suppositions, I wonder what you're all smoking.
I like the new logo (but then, I am rather fond of type in general, that
being whence I came). Maybe not as much as the old one, but I admit to
not caring what SGI is called so long as I can still call it SGI.
Say whatever you want, but they're still here, they're still growing, and
they're still the best solution right now for the kinds of problems I
still need solved. Logos don't change the reality of the situation all
that much.
--
Scott Elyard ~~~ooOOoo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Peregrinus expectavi pedes meos in cymbalis est. |
| sc...@SPAMLESSstonebug.net |
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'
Brent L. Bates
address is very obvious. Maybe if enough people filled his email box with
complaints he'd listen. ... Yep, probably not. Someone so stupid as to make
such and incredible mistake as this isn't interested in knowing what a huge
mistake he's made. This guy is too busy trying to kill SGI. He's not the
slightest bit interested in saving it. Look at the Mercer fiasco.
RenderMan
matters.
"I didn't really care what the logo looked like. I don't buy machines for
their logos"
Well, I guess Id tend to think differently. Probably so would SGI, and so
would Landor. Probably so would Coca Cola, since they spent millions
researching thier logo, and ended up adding 1 extra wave under it after 50
years. Logo's dont really matter, just ask McDonalds. My point is, maybe you
"think" you buy a machine for what's inside. But the reality is, youre
initially drawn to the company by it's image. A logo and corporate image is
all about drawing the right crowd in. Youve alreay been drawn in, and now
you just look at the numbers. Youre a bad example. The problem everyone
seems to have, is that it's so completely ignorant - SGI states a complete
oxymoron - "We want people to know we make servers, and high-powered
supercomputers, thats our audience" - "We decided on a logo, and color
scheme that looks like Baskin Robbins Ice Cream". You'd have to be pretty
blind (or an SGI CEO) to think this is a fit.
RM
Scott Elyard <scott@NOSPAM_stonebug.net> wrote in message
news:scott-15049...@elyard.abam.com...
Wesley Horner
: Then I searched on Mr. Belluzzo's background. And to my surprise this
I saw him give a speach at macworld and I have to say he is the worst public
speaker I have seen in that position. He wore a shirt that clearly had just
come out of the box (still had the creases) and it was so rehearsed that
he didn't have any emotion to his delivery. His speach at the intro for
the nt workstations was even worse. Scripted humor that flopped.
He needs to take lessons from Scott McNealy and Steve Jobs before he comes
out of his hole.
Alexis Cousein
>
> RenderMan (n...@one.com) wrote:
> : Let me be the first to say, SGI's new look completely sucks.
> : I, and everyone Ive talked to agree that was a horrible mistake.
>
> : Is this sappy? Yes. Is this probably over-dramatized? Yes.
> : However, does the look of a company have an effect on who buys thier
> : hardware? You better believe it. And I think you just upset alot of people,
> : and most likely those were the people that bought from you.
>
> Its funny but when I mention to people I use an SGi they usually don't know
> what at i'm talking about (non computer people). When I then say Silicon
> Graphics they Ooo and aaah.
One of the reasons that the graphics workstations are indeed still
*Silicon Graphics* workstations...
That name hasn't disappeared -- we just stopped sticking it on servers.
--
Alexis Cousein
Systems Engineer
SGI Belgium
a...@brussels.sgi.com
Darien Phoenix Lynx
news:3717244F...@brussels.sgi.com...
> One of the reasons that the graphics workstations are indeed still
> *Silicon Graphics* workstations...
>
> That name hasn't disappeared -- we just stopped sticking it on servers.
Oh--that's different then. They could have been more forthcoming in that
explanation, to placate many of their existing customers.
Alexis Cousein
Well, if you go under http://www.sgi.com/products/ , you'll see that the
"Visual Computing" machines are called "Silicon Graphics" machines...
...though the 3D Cube logo indeed *has* gone (I, and many others who
"understood" what it meant liked it, but apparently there are people
around who can't make out a 3D cube from it -- hey, now it will become a
status symbol to still have the old logo around one's belongings ;) ).
Even more (and I've witnessed this myself) can see it, but then can't
translate that to a company name, especially server folk -- something
which is going to be harder with the new logo ;).
I have witnessed myself how someone saw a 64-CPU SGI Origin 2000, was
impressed, but couldn't tell me what company built the blue thing over
there, though it had a metallic logo on it. The "SiliconGraphics" type
was too small to be read from a distance, and if that guy could have
read it, he'd have wondered where the Graphics were and whether it was
being used for Jurassic Park III ;).
Scott Elyard
> What youre effectively saying is that you dont think corporate image
> matters.
>
> "I didn't really care what the logo looked like. I don't buy machines for
> their logos"
>
> Well, I guess Id tend to think differently. Probably so would SGI, and so
> would Landor. Probably so would Coca Cola, since they spent millions
> researching thier logo, and ended up adding 1 extra wave under it after 50
> years. Logo's dont really matter, just ask McDonalds. My point is, maybe you
> "think" you buy a machine for what's inside. But the reality is, youre
> initially drawn to the company by it's image. A logo and corporate image is
> all about drawing the right crowd in. Youve alreay been drawn in, and now
> you just look at the numbers. Youre a bad example. The problem everyone
> seems to have, is that it's so completely ignorant - SGI states a complete
> oxymoron - "We want people to know we make servers, and high-powered
> supercomputers, thats our audience" - "We decided on a logo, and color
> scheme that looks like Baskin Robbins Ice Cream". You'd have to be pretty
> blind (or an SGI CEO) to think this is a fit.
>
> RM
So you can buy a computer on the basis of how cool their logo looks?
That's not a valid technical issue if I'm looking to spend $10-14k on a
workstation or two. What's valid are things like OS, features,
performance, and service.
As to my being ignorant about the importance of logos, I'd say you're
wrong there, if for no other reason than I never said the logo *wasn't*
important. I just said it wasn't *that* important, and certainly not
important enough to wind up getting all bent out of shape.
I *do* appreciate the issues of corporate identity and so on. But even
so, nothing has changed that much: the name, and the logo. That's it.
Ultimately, this is strictly cosmetic, and will only matter to those who
only see SGI as a vendor of gfx workstations, not a supercomputer or
server vendor.
I don't necessarily think I'm a bad example, either. While I might
frequently urge people to do research before they plop any part of their
budget into a computer (or a car or a hamster cage or an ant farm), I
suspect the sort of thinking I do is actually the way many people do buy
computers.
Re: Coke's logo. Since I can scarcely taste any difference in most
colas, I buy what's on sale, like most people who buy soda. I don't spend
money on Coke because they had a prettier (subjective) logo than Pepsi or
Safeway brand.
Re: SGI does indeed make servers and supercomputers. It is a part of the
audience they want to hold. How is it an oxymoron to change the name of
the company to abstract it from the relatively nichie
gfx-workstation-vendor-only perception?
Further, complaining strictly here isn't likely to do much good. Another
poster has already suggested issuing a more formal (hopefully polite)
repsonse to Belluzzo himself, and then sabotaged it by stating that doing
so will get nothing.
If that's how you feel, why open your mouth here at all in the first
place? If you believe that your opinion is only relevant in this
newsgroup or on slashdot, basically forums few CEOs (unsurprisingly)
eschew, how can you possibly express any valid cynicism on the irrelevance
of complaining?
Or, to make my point lucidly:
A show of hands please: how many of you actually believe Belluzzo reads
this newsgroup?
A show of hands please: how many of you think that complaining here will
do any good?
A show of hands please: how many of you will be unsurprised if nothing changes?
From thence comes my own cynicism.
skyw...@my-dejanews.com
scott@NOSPAM_stonebug.net (Scott Elyard) wrote:
> A show of hands please: how many of you actually believe Belluzzo reads
> this newsgroup?
> A show of hands please: how many of you think that complaining here will
> do any good?
> A show of hands please: how many of you will be unsurprised if nothing
>changes?
> From thence comes my own cynicism.
Merced, PC, NT, Linux.... Logo...
and hence mine.
RenderMan
sgi" will do for you guys. They claim that "Silicon Graphics" conjures up
images of machines that ONLY work in movies like Jurassic Park. First of all
I dont see how changing your name to just "sgi" will change that much, and
neither will the panzy colored new logo. It's about how you market. It
doesnt take a 40 million dollar check written out to Landor to realize this.
I buy packaging materials from a place called "Tiger Direct" - theyre one of
the most successful mail-order packaging companies out there. Im sure they
too could make the argument "Man, by our name... people probably think we
sell Tigers... we should change it." - this is called
"Corporate-Over-Analyzation" - (you can probably thank your CEO for that).
Youre assuming that all your potential client base are complete morons
incapable of understaning that SGI makes high-end computers for various
tasks. Theres less complete incompentents out there than you think. And
those that are, arent going to be positvely affected by the new (cheesy)
logo anyway. Mister IQ of 4, isnt going to now see the new logo and say,
"OH!!! I BET THEY MAKE SERVERS AND SUPERCOMPUTERS WITH INSIGHT NOW!" - Youre
sacrificing your 17 year image to cater to people that will never know the
difference. How you look, and what the SGI name means is all about HOW you
market. So, let's see... for the past 6 years (as long as Ive been using
SGI) all Ive ever seen in the way of product literature from SGI is hype
about machines that are "designed for visualization". You go out of your way
to plant your machines in the background of movies like Jurrasic Park, and
Twister. Always showing "advanced graphics and visualization" on them.
Everything ever produced in the way of marketing for your machiens always
SUPPORTED the "graphics computers" part of what you do. Look at the new VWS
ads, they appeal to only greative people. If you want to change or
re-educate your audience, Id rely more on how you market, what you say in
your pieces, and stressing the functionality of your machines rather than
ditching your steadfast recognizable logo and name.
There, see, I could have saved you money. Stop payment on the check to
Landor, and mail me half of it, and we'll call it even. - hehe
RM
P.S. Im sorry, but if you use an example "a client saw a 64CPU machine, but
couldnt tell me who built that "big blue" thing in the corner with a
metallic logo on it." - um. you cant help that person. There's people like
that in this world, and if he's that ignorant, your new logo wont help. I
also have my doubts that youll have any footholds whatsoever selling to a
guy as ignorant as that. I mean, how do you do it? "Yea, were SGI... um..
you should buy our machines because they can scale up to 64 CPUs.. "
this guy will say, "What do you mean scale? What are CPUs? Im lost.. what's
that wierd chrome thingy on the front of this box?.... me.. Tarzan.. fire
... bad... " -
Alexis Cousein <a...@brussels.sgi.com> wrote in message
news:371751A1...@brussels.sgi.com...
Scott Elyard
<a...@brussels.sgi.com> wrote:
> ...though the 3D Cube logo indeed *has* gone (I, and many others who
> "understood" what it meant liked it, but apparently there are people
> around who can't make out a 3D cube from it -- hey, now it will become a
> status symbol to still have the old logo around one's belongings ;) ).
You mean this is all a ploy to get me to buy a new Indy? They might have
just said so.
Javi
>
> RM
>
> P.S. Im sorry, but if you use an example "a client saw a 64CPU machine, but
> couldnt tell me who built that "big blue" thing in the corner with a
> metallic logo on it." - um. you cant help that person. There's people like
> that in this world, and if he's that ignorant, your new logo wont help. I
> also have my doubts that youll have any footholds whatsoever selling to a
> guy as ignorant as that. I mean, how do you do it? "Yea, were SGI... um..
> you should buy our machines because they can scale up to 64 CPUs.. "
> this guy will say, "What do you mean scale? What are CPUs? Im lost.. what's
> that wierd chrome thingy on the front of this box?.... me.. Tarzan.. fire
> ... bad... " -
>
Very well said! I think it is pretty funny how employees from the company
formely known as Silicon Graphics rush trying to give any kind of
justification, to their company's sequence of disasterous decissions in
the past few years. I am pretty sure that if Mr. Belluzzo had opted to
change the Silicon Graphics
to F*CK in bold 80 point hot pink letters, there would be people trying to
explain how much sense the new change actually does.
Silicon Graphics last worry was their logo or identity. After all it is
just a name, and the fact that they concentrate so many resources in an
unecessary change is a blatant proof of a company without much directior
or 'insight' (how ironic). Maybe too many heads in the marketing dept were
idle since they were not doing their job: sell systems, and decided to
have some fun. But these same people never stop and looked around and saw
how come some of their most important rival's names are even less related
to high performance computing, lets compare:
SGI: Silicon Graphics Computer Systems Inc. (silicon, graphics & computer)
HP : Hewlett-Packard (?????)
SUN: Stanford University Network. (Network)
Intel (??????)
Compaq: (??????)
Dell : (??????)
And I don't see HP nor SUN dropping their logos. What about apple, what is
there in that name that says 'fast easy to use personal computers'? Yet,
even when they were in their worst quarter, I never saw a report from
Apple's execs blaming the bad performance of their company on the fact
that the logo of their company was the shilouette of a bitten multicolored
apple (speaking of logos that have to
be printed in monochrome....). Or when people buy a BMW little do they now
that the blue and white divided circle represents the propeller of a
plane. Or why would anyone buy a japanese computer. Is there anything in
the Fujitsu name that says 'servers and supers'? (NEC or hitachi for that
matter). Or what about the name Compaq, or Dell, do they say "peecee"? In
fact if you look at some of the most sucessful companies in the industry,
their names have little if anything to do with their activity, it is after
all just a name. And same goes for corporate logos. The 3D cube was open
to interpretation. Not everyone was required to see a 3D cube, maybe some
shaw 3D pipes (the geomery engine pipeline concept). Some shaw 3 arrows
comming together, or a futuristic flower... whatever. The fact is that it
was a recognized symbol. Art is left to be interpreted, it can not be
defined, it has to be felt. And that is what the 3D cube was, it was one
of the most clever, stream lined and elegant corporate emblems that boring
corporate America had. And they throw it away, why? I just don't get it.
That is why I usually enjoy European corporate identity a bit more. Lots
of corporations over there have logos that are abstract paints, it doesn't
have to mean anything is just art for art. Something that just looks good,
or different, there is not a single guideline that especifies what
everyone has to see when they see that logo, it means different things to
different people, yet they all relate that
personal image with the company that uses it. In fact I didn't know what
the heck that think next to Silicon Graphics in the machines I saw was.
And that is why that logo stayed longer than most of the 20000000 I have
been exposed in my life, because I had to spend time thinking about that
crazy shape.
Jeez, and now SGI people are insulting my intelligence because they seem to
think that I am unable to remember four words. It is just a succession of
dissasters after another: Release a PC with non standard architecture,
with drivers not even close to spec (I still remember the guy that came to
demo the NT feecees and all he did was saying... "well when the drivers
are ready". Not very professional). Drop MIPS, then revive MIPS again. Got
to bed with intel and Microsoft. Drop Cray's name, drop Silicon
Graphics.... and what is the result?
SGI... yet even after I saw their explanation... I don't even remeber what
this sgi stands for'something something insight'? .... and this is why a
person with an accounting degree should not be allowed to ruin I meant run
an engineering company.
Fernando D. Mato Mira
Javi wrote:
> SGI: Silicon Graphics Computer Systems Inc. (silicon, graphics & computer)
> HP : Hewlett-Packard (?????)
> SUN: Stanford University Network. (Network)
> Intel (??????)
> Compaq: (??????)
> Dell : (??????)
Actually, this supports the thesis that calling SGI `SGI (meaning nothing)' is OK.
However, if you look at the names above they are all `_names_':
Sun is `the Sun'. Not some acronym. `HP' is firmly implanted in the brain
as `Hewlett-Packard' (names).
So `SGI' is a problem. Either it means nothing (as bad as ACME), or it's
an acronym (less personal, but better than ACME). If it's an acronym,
even if `insight' has always been around in the SGI marketing literature,
and indeed it identifies the mission of the company, it sounds too much
like marketbabble and vapor. From a mass-market perspective, it would
be much better for SGI to mean Servers, Graphics, and Internet (what's
more scalable than SGI for your web servers? 4Dwm was also the
first web-enabled desktop. VRML. Streaming).
Regarding the logo. You've explained very well how logos work. A good
logo is a _very_ difficult thing to come by, and the `cube' is just brilliant (can
you also see the `S' and the `G'?). The thing is so good that it would be a pity
to just use it for the `Silicon Graphics' line (and then it would only serve a
nostalgic purpose).
The `sgi' must appear on all products. While having just the `cube' with `sgi' below
on generic literature/products would be _the_ thing, you have to thing how you would
put combine those coherently on a machine so that it's not confusing, eg:
cube Slicon Graphics O2
sgi
But a satisfactory way might exist.
Now, this seems be another `dubious graphic/industrial design' issue, eg:
Beige monitors: `I thought color perception was important to SGI. At least the front
panel should be black'
Indigo II: `That's _too_ green. It hurts my eyes to put it on the desk.'
Indy: `You _don't_ put a monitor on a computer (no way I'm using a 17 incher)'.
Mosaic era: `Yuck, those SGI web pages look too cheesy (and are a waste of
bandwitdh)'.
Granite keyboards: `What a silly idea. That makes harder see the lettering (not
everybody touch-types 100%)'
--
Fernando D. Mato Mira
Real-Time SW Eng & Networking
Advanced Systems Engineering Division
CSEM
Jaquet-Droz 1 email: matomira AT acm DOT org
CH-2007 Neuchatel tel: +41 (32) 720-5157
Switzerland FAX: +41 (32) 720-5720
Richard Masoner
"Darien Phoenix Lynx" <dpl...@my-dejanews.com> writes:
>> That name hasn't disappeared -- we just stopped sticking it on servers.
>
> Oh--that's different then. They could have been more forthcoming in that
> explanation, to placate many of their existing customers.
SGI was forthcoming, if you all read the press release announcing the
name change. They indicated SGI is still legally "Silicon Graphics"
and that "Silicon Graphics" would still be the brand name used on their
graphics machines.
Richard Masoner
Darien Phoenix Lynx
guess it's that they didn't really put together any literature or effort to
address the feelings of their existing clients. The press release is
targeted at the whole world, and is a kind of advertisement for new clients.
I wish they were more forthcoming in their explanations of what the name
change does *not* mean, to help their existing customers understand the
change better. They could have made a mini-FAQ for their concerned
customers, for example, with such questions as "Why did you drop the cube?"
and "Will the name 'SiliconGraphics' still be printed on graphic
workstations?"
Richard Masoner <rich...@gno-sbamm.dgii.com> wrote in message
news:371b4bf3.0@samba...
Pim van Riezen
>mapl...@gamers.org wrote:
>>
>> Mark Holloway <mlhol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Very well said. I was thinking the same exact thing. The prestige is gone.
>>
>> about when discussing 64bit computing is Sun, HP, IBM and SCO; never SGI,
>> even though SGI adverts are found in the magazine, and SGI currently
>> offers the most scalable 64bit OS available.
>
>They have been throwing away the good name Cray had in supercomputer
>land by branding the big boxes SGI.
>I would be delighted to be able to buy a "Cray Origin 200" as a
>file/database/www server.
Why not ship all machines sans logo, and add
1) A silver cube
2) A "cousin ned" SGI logo
3) A cray logo
to the box and let the customer pick the one that gets his libido up most? :-)
Pi
--
+----+
"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
Patron Saint of Breakfast Cereal, Occultist (not precluding rogue
obscenities such as IRIX and C++), Casual Poet, Occasional Composer,
Oper Bastard for Undernet.Org, Freelance LART for #linux
Arno Kruse
as Real Cool Stuff, both in hardware and software. The reason they use,
to stay in business, sucks. Wouldn't it be better not to switch to
Intel&NT, but to convince the world that MIPS&IRIX are better? They are,
and sgi knows it. I'm not saying the world should start using only O2's
and Octanes, but they should use Them for high-performance computing,
which they're intended for. It's not good for sgi's reputation to build
an expensive Intel-based machine to run NT. My cheaper AMD K6-2 does it
as fast, and costs less... i'd never thougt i'd say that, but, in this
case, My PC is better (and cooler) than sgi!!
Listen, SGI...
We, at the unofficial SGI (freaks) fanclub have adored SGI stuff as holy
items... wouldn't it be a shame to loose that status? MAny, very Many
people adore Older SGI stuff...
Dont loose it, guys...
Arno Kruse
Wilko Bulte
>"Homme R. Bitter" <h.bi...@vplate.com> wrote:
>>mapl...@gamers.org wrote:
>>>=20
>>> Mark Holloway <mlhol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> > Very well said. I was thinking the same exact thing. The prestige is=
> gone.
>>>=20
>>> All they ever talk
>>> about when discussing 64bit computing is Sun, HP, IBM and SCO; never S=
>GI,
>>> even though SGI adverts are found in the magazine, and SGI currently
>>> offers the most scalable 64bit OS available.
>>
>>How about using Cray for this segment ?=20
>>They have been throwing away the good name Cray had in supercomputer
>>land by branding the big boxes SGI.
>>I would be delighted to be able to buy a "Cray Origin 200" as a=20
>>file/database/www server.
>Why not ship all machines sans logo, and add
>1) A silver cube
>2) A "cousin ned" SGI logo
>3) A cray logo
>to the box and let the customer pick the one that gets his libido up most=
>? :-)
4) A Microsoft logo? ;-) ;-)
--
_ ______________________________________________________________________
| / o / / _ Arnhem, The Netherlands
|/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte WWW : http://www.tcja.nl
_______________________ Powered by FreeBSD ___ http://www.freebsd.org _____
John Bokma
<924696627.2033607461@news>...
[snip]
>I would be delighted to be able to buy a "Cray Origin 200" as a
>file/database/www server.
Why not ship all machines sans logo, and add
1) A silver cube
2) A "cousin ned" SGI logo
3) A cray logo
to the box and let the customer pick the one that gets his libido up most?
:-)
And make it available to existing users as an upgrade.
About $250 seems a right 'SGI' price to me :-)
John
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
C A S T L E A M B E R http://www.castleamber.com/
software * development mailto:jo...@castleamber.com
http://www.castleamber.com/ambercam.html Free WebCam Applet
http://www.castleamber.com/john/askjohn.html Ask John