
Branding and Conway’s Law - lpcrealmadrid
http://blog.socialrank.com/2015/02/04/branding-and-conways-law/
======
yellowapple
A few nitpicks:

    
    
        “Your team should work like an open-source project.” Funny, because that’s exactly what
        GitHub (the product) is.
    

No it's not. Sure, it's _used_ by a lot of open-source projects, and it's
built on quite a few open-source technologies, but if you were to ask someone
at Github to give you the source code for the whole product _at all_ (let
alone under an "open-source" (read: free software) license), you'd probably be
laughed at.

This is like saying that Windows is an "open-source product" because some
people happen to use it to write open-source software.

    
    
        Even their Error 404 page keeps with the “freedom” branding — you land on the design team’s
        interpretation of MC Escher’s house of stairs.
    

It's actually more likely to be an interpretation of Escher's "Impossible
Cube" [0].

[0]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impossible_cube](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impossible_cube)

~~~
lpcrealmadrid
correct on both accounts, thanks for taking note of them! will make edits to
reflect those

------
chazu
An interesting read. Hopefully I'll remember to keep an eye out for symmetries
between branding, culture and product in the future. It would be fun to find
and document more instances of such symmetries, especially with respect to
troubled products or companies. What can we learn from looking at successful
(or unsuccessful) attempts to turn products/brands around from this angle?

