 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Invisible" <voi### [at] dev null> wrote in message
news:4947d193$1@news.povray.org...
> I'm not really sure what Haskell could have here...
I know it's a pretty weak idea but all I think about when I hear "Haskell"
is Wallys' smarmy buddy Eddie!
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I'm not really sure what Haskell could have here...
>
> I know it's a pretty weak idea but all I think about when I hear "Haskell"
> is Wallys' smarmy buddy Eddie!
It's actually named after a person.
That person's name - absurdly enough - was Haskell B. Curry. o_O
They were going to name the language Curry - but they figured the jokes
would never end. As it is, they failed to realise that Haskell sounds
just like Pascal (which is also a programming language), and also
"hassle" and "rascle"...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
>> Hmm, I always liked it's CSS. Well, if it shall make you happy, try
>> this:
>>
>> http://www.alu.org/alu/home
>>
>> :P
>
> Eww ick! What an ugly shade of green. (And green is my favourit colour!)
Looks yellow to me.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Haha I could do the same with the competitors of the company I work for,
>
> Remind me... Who the hell do you work for?
A Japanese company that makes LCDs and TVs and stuff.
They don't seem to have the hang of European style marketing yet, and think
that a website design for a Japanese audience will also work well in Europe.
Actually I think it's more that the IT systems worldwide are so fragmented
that each country basically does what it thinks best with their very small
team of people, and you end up with a load of separate websites that all
look completely different and nobody sees the need for the .com domain.
Occasionally someone from Japan sees one of these other websites and makes
some demands about what should be changed, and you end up with hideous
looking stuff.
Given that sales last year in Europe alone were several billion pounds, I
think they should spend some money on getting their online presence
together, but then that's just me and nobody who makes that sort of decision
even knows I exist!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> Remind me... Who the hell do you work for?
>
> A Japanese company that makes LCDs and TVs and stuff.
>
> They don't seem to have the hang of European style marketing yet, and
> think that a website design for a Japanese audience will also work well
> in Europe. Actually I think it's more that the IT systems worldwide are
> so fragmented that each country basically does what it thinks best with
> their very small team of people, and you end up with a load of separate
> websites that all look completely different and nobody sees the need for
> the .com domain. Occasionally someone from Japan sees one of these other
> websites and makes some demands about what should be changed, and you
> end up with hideous looking stuff.
>
> Given that sales last year in Europe alone were several billion pounds,
> I think they should spend some money on getting their online presence
> together, but then that's just me and nobody who makes that sort of
> decision even knows I exist!
Sounds familiar... :-S
The company *I* work for has been known by a small handful of different
acronyms in its time. Apparently "this confuses our customers", so we're
on a big rebranding kick. We're throwing away all the old names and
sticking to just one of them from now on. And we've got a shiny new logo
that consists of that name. (It's actually rather nice, as corporate
logos go. At least it looks clean and modern now!)
And we're changing our website and our email addresses to match. Oh,
except it *doesn't* match. It's one of the old acronyms.
Wait... WTF?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> huahuhua
>
> Great!
Actually, my favourit so far is this...
http://media.nokrev.com/junk/haskell-logos/logo7.png
It looks a tad harsh, but the genius of it is that it's 5 straight
lines. You can render it any way you like, and it's still the logo! :-D
Hell, you can even do this:
____ ____
\ \ \ \
\ \ \ \
\ \ \ \ __________
\ \ \ \ \_________|
\ \ \ \
/ / / \ ________
/ / / \ \_______|
/ / / /\ \
/ / / / \ \
/___/ /___/ \___\
;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Actually, my favourit so far is this...
>
> http://media.nokrev.com/junk/haskell-logos/logo7.png
>
> It looks a tad harsh, but the genius of it is that it's 5 straight
> lines. You can render it any way you like, and it's still the logo! :-D
It does look nice simple and effective, but put some colour in there!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> Actually, my favourit so far is this...
>>
>> http://media.nokrev.com/junk/haskell-logos/logo7.png
>>
>> It looks a tad harsh, but the genius of it is that it's 5 straight
>> lines. You can render it any way you like, and it's still the logo! :-D
>
> It does look nice simple and effective, but put some colour in there!
Well, yeah. It's a tad monochrome. And somebody complained that it looks
too "millitary" with all the sharp angles. But that's just it - it's
such a simple shape that you can draw it several different ways, and
it's still the same symbol. So you can experiment with assorted colours,
line styles, curves, etc. But I think the *shape* itself is a good idea. ;-)
And then some other dude goes "hey, I don't think we should have a logo
with a lambda in it, or any other syntactic elements".
Had *you* noticed the lambda in there? Did you realise that the symbol
is based on the monadic bind operator? Or did it just look like an
interesting shape to you?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 12:44:07 +0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>
>Had *you* noticed the lambda in there? Did you realise that the symbol
>is based on the monadic bind operator? Or did it just look like an
>interesting shape to you?
The first thing I thought was "Mu onwards".
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> It looks a tad harsh, but the genius of it is that it's 5 straight
> lines. You can render it any way you like, and it's still the logo! :-D
The sixth number is six, not five.
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
