Google Braille Logo is Classic

[PaulPA]

One of the reasons I consider Google to be tops in search, and one of the better business models going, is their willingness to not focus all their energies on being business driven. How many CEOs would allow their company logo to shown in braille form, even for one day, without complaining heavily about its effect on "branding"? This logo looks great.

[malasorte]

<note: this post is spliced from another thread. -tedster>

Hello all,

Google has a brand new logo, celebrating the birth of Louis Braille on January 4th 1809. If you click on the logo, a page with search results opens for "louis braille birthdate" and the number one page is from Wikipedia. This page must pe getting 1000's of hits per second.
And as a proof of how low some people can get the page is vandalized almost every minute with links like "free cell phones" etc...

[edited by: tedster at 2:22 pm (utc) on Jan. 4, 2006]

[MatthewHSE]

Check out Google's logo for today - I've gotten used to the things they've done to their logo on other special days, but I never expected anything like this! ;)

[pmkpmk]

Yes, it's daring - probably a lot of people might be unsure they are at the right page.

[briggidere]

i'm not sure what the 1st dot is all about though. could it be copyright or something. it is the only thing that doesn't fit the picture properly. mmm

[MatthewHSE]

1st dot . . . might it denote upper-case? (I wouldn't know myself.)

When I first saw this, I thought I'd gotten to a non-US Google and was reading their name in a foreign language. I'm surprised they'd risk something like this, but then, it IS only for one day.

[briggidere]

you got it right there MatthewHSE. it is for a capital. damm your clever.

[roodle]

Yeah, I think it's cool too. Wikipedia have banned annonymous editing on that page - surprise surprise...

[pmkpmk]

Wikipedia has banned anonymous editing on any English page since the John Seigenthaler Sr. [en.wikipedia.org] incident a few weeks ago.

[ogletree]

As a legally blind person I am glad that they commemorate such and important day. Braille is very important. Anybody whose vision does not allow them to read normal print at a decent rate should learn Braille. Unfortunately this is not the current accepted way of doing things. A child taught Braille early on will be able to read 300+ words a minute. The establishment believes if you can read any print at all even if you can only see 20 pt type you don't need to learn Braille. They don't realize that if that is all you can see you are illiterate. If you can't read your illiterate. Blindness is not an excuse to be illiterate. End Rant.

[Kangol]

The first site that ranks for "louis braille birthdate" just went down. I wonder how much traffic did it got this day.
Ill mail that webmaster and tell him to put some adWords on :)

[Beachboy]

That's class. I am very impressed.

[petra]

Initially I though it was my computer acting up until I hovered the mouse over it and what do you know! Classic!

[topsites]

The first site that ranks for "louis braille birthdate" just went down. I wonder how much traffic did it got this day.
Ill mail that webmaster and tell him to put some adWords on :)

I don't know for sure, but in my experience it's less (a LOT less) than the hype would make us believe.

Don't get me wrong, it's more traffic most our sites see everyday, but it's likely no more than what you'll see once or twice in its lifetime, likely about 1,000 clicks/day or so, maybe 10k hits/day for a really popular thing (keeping in mind, a hit is defined as a data request, so 10k hits = 1,000 page loads, roughly).

In terms of hits (specifically, data requests), maybe it breaks the 100,000 hits/day mark, but probably not. Certainly in initial attention this is likely, but folks who click through, then click through again? It is still vaguely possible, but not nearly as close.

Wikipedia is lucky... Perhaps 50-100 clicks/day, maybe less... But, it's free.

[edited by: topsites at 6:35 pm (utc) on Jan. 4, 2006]

[Stefan]

It's interesting, for sure, but now I have fingerprints on my monitor from trying to read it.

Wikipedia has banned anonymous editing on any English page since the John Seigenthaler Sr. incident a few weeks ago.

Really? I edited a page two days ago. I assumed it was done anonymously, because I wasn't signed in or anything. Perhaps I'm confused as to the term "anonymous".

[tedster]

I've heard that editing can still be anonymous -- but adding an entirely new article cannot. I've also edited a page since the JS incident.

[pmkpmk]

You're right - my comment was a little bit premature.

[frizzy]

"is their (Google's) willingness to not focus all their energies on being business driven..."

Not business driven? This story about the Google logo is all over the news today. What a great marketing tactic -- and Google can get away with doing this. Also, it does not cost them anything while it helps build their brand awareness and image. Not bad for a simple logo change for a day...

We have to remember, Google is a company. They are a public business trying to get a return for their investors. It's easy to get caught up in these things, but a great business decision imo it sure was!

[kevinpate]

tis indeed a touching tribute, no pun intended.

[zooloo]

I very nearly emailed people about it but decided I should turn my PC off and go outside. :D

Though I'm bound to mention it down the pub.

It's brilliant.

zoo

[cellularnews]

As a legally blind person

Is there such a thing as an illegally blind person?

[tomda]

Is there such a thing as an illegally blind person?

Yeah, illegally blind person are guys who pretend to be blind for 20 or more years, then go to Lourdes, get cure and rich from their illicit miracle. ;)

The truth is that anyone with vision worse than 20/200 that cannot be improved with corrective lenses is considered legally blind.

[ogletree]

haha.