JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z wrote:
[...] Like this? (again, this can be implemented more carefully, it's just a sketch to explore the idea.)
I'm afraid the fatness of the nose connotes a bomb way too much. Real rockets are fat-bottomed (except in a few cases where the payload forms a sort of bulb at the top), while bombs are tear-drop shaped (nice ballistic aerodynamics, vs. supersonic aerodynamics). Also, bombs tend to have smaller fins, because they tend to require less guidance (since most of the guidance is provided by the drop vehicle), while rockets tend to have more conspicuous fins, because they start from 0 velocity and they need to pitch and roll to achieve the correct trajectory. So when I see your rocket, I immediately think "Mk. 82 500 lb. bomb". And I'm afraid that font still evokes Borland way too much. Especially the capital "B". The logo looks very much like something that could have been produced by the Borland marketing team (though if Borland were to try to buy Boost, I'm sure it would be happy with the logo ;). I think it would be nice if the ring were a little heftier, because it makes "C++" seem a bit anemic. And I agree with Dave that the +'s could be on the top (maybe tilt the rocket down a little to make room). Dave