Talk:Frog Design
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Frog Design article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 6 July 2017. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
edit
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Recs7168.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Product details and Organizational culture
editSome ideas for future improvement:
- I think there's a lot more to be said about what products have come from frog
- Organizational culture is a big aspect as well (for design companies)
- Structure is okay now, but be wary as new stuff is added
- History is also fairly out-of-date. Recent developments needed to be added.
Jonathan Ive
editJonathan Ive used to work for frog design but I can't find any refs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.203.82.194 (talk) 10:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Page name?
editShould the name of this article from "frog design", not "Frog Design"? Neilc 19:08, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- Exactly, I too can't figure out why it's written as frog design here. Amit@Talk 06:40, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- The company styles itself as "frog design", not "Frog Design". I think Neilc was asking back in April 2006 why the name of the article was not "frog design", which it wasn't back then (but now it is).
- WP guidelines say that it's preferred to ignore artsy lowercasosity, but I don't see the harm in it, myself. I interpret WP:IGNORE as applying here, as in: "The article title's been this way for a while (implying consensus), so why change it?".--NapoliRoma (talk) 03:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- Okiley Dokiley! :D Amit@Talk 13:54, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- It is part of the heritage of frog design to be lowercase. Founder Hartmut Esslinger has written in "a fine line" (page 6) "frog design is always printed in lower-case, a rebellion against German grammatical rules that, forty years later, other companies are beginning to adopt." I hardly think a brandmark qualifies as "artsy lowercasosity". JakeZ (talk) 05:27, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Please read MOS:TM. We capitalize trademarks here on Wikipedia, even if the trademark holders don't. See also What's in a nAME(cq)?—the basic rules of capitalization and punctuation are not revoked just because a trademark holder wants to make a statement. On the other hand, it is interesting that Mr. Esslinger has stated the reason for the lower-casing of the trademark; this would be an interesting fact to include in the article, with proper sourcing, of course. —Bkell (talk) 19:08, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hi. I talk here as a frog employee. Shouldn't the page name be "frog" according to the page content and the current company name? See https://www.frog.co/ Rd.capgemini (talk) 11:53, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
- Please read MOS:TM. We capitalize trademarks here on Wikipedia, even if the trademark holders don't. See also What's in a nAME(cq)?—the basic rules of capitalization and punctuation are not revoked just because a trademark holder wants to make a statement. On the other hand, it is interesting that Mr. Esslinger has stated the reason for the lower-casing of the trademark; this would be an interesting fact to include in the article, with proper sourcing, of course. —Bkell (talk) 19:08, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- It is part of the heritage of frog design to be lowercase. Founder Hartmut Esslinger has written in "a fine line" (page 6) "frog design is always printed in lower-case, a rebellion against German grammatical rules that, forty years later, other companies are beginning to adopt." I hardly think a brandmark qualifies as "artsy lowercasosity". JakeZ (talk) 05:27, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Okiley Dokiley! :D Amit@Talk 13:54, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Sun Sparcstation
editThe first Sun Sparcstation was released in 1989, yet the article says that they did the case design in 1986. Even given the nature of the computer business in the 1980s, 3 years seems like a bit long. Is the date wrong? Was it an earlier model? Did they do more design work for Sun? Did they design all the SparcStation cases? So many questions, can anyone answer? 60.240.207.146 (talk) 22:48, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
esslinger design → frog design
editOriginally it was called "esslinger design", only in 1984 it was renamed to "frog design": https://www.frog.co
There is no need for 2 separate articles. It is working like a profile to promote them. nothing significant to have 2 of them. Light2021 (talk) 19:45, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose merge, given the company's independent history. Regards, HaeB (talk) 05:11, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Wiki Education assignment: History of Modern Design
edit This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 August 2024 and 5 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Frank N. Conner (article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Antje Gamble (talk) 19:42, 18 September 2024 (UTC)