Again, please don't think I'm insulting your intelligence or programming skills when I critique it..
1) Way too big
2) Created in Photoshop or GIMP, which are for photo editing
3) By an amateur
4) No kerning adjustment has been made
5) Saved as a JPG instead of a GIF, with artifacts
6) Won't resize properly even if it was the perfect logo because it's not a vector image
7) You took both words and made them look like what each word is. As if 1-6 didn't make it look amateur already, this does it even more.
8) There is no ... what's the word I'm looking for.. cohesion between the meaning. I guess there is no... focus. Yes, there are lines connecting the two words but there is no cohesion between the meaning.
9) One color in an already amateur-looking logo signals the person is even more of an amateur.
10) The color was popular in 1997.
11) If not amateur, then it looks cheap and makes the company look cheap.
12) Not something you could fix.
13) The kerning issue, though already mentioned, keeps jumping out on me.
14) The bar by the S doesn't even go smoothly into the S.
15) The dot in the word Focus makes me feel like we're talking about contact lenses.
16) Why? Because you literally used no creativity and went with the gut instinct to choose a font that looks like the Focus-brand logo shown on Television (maybe subconsciously) without thinking about what it should look like in terms of a project management software. http://www.us.cibavision.com/lenses/focus_dailies/progressiv...
You should pay somebody with graphical design experience $50 to create any type of logo in 10 minutes.
It won't be so great you will use it all your life (though you might), but at the very least, I'm confident it won't look 'cheap' if the designer has any experience. Your goal here is not to spend $5,000 on a perfect logo... But some small amount on a logo that doesn't look CHEAP.
4. The kerning point is a good one - we'll work on that. 5. The original is photoshop text (scalable), but saved as jpg because the gif with transparency had terrible aliasing.
8. Hmm, this one I don't know how to respond to as you object to using meaning for the fonts. Facebook and Google, do they have cohesion between the meaning? 9. One color fonts are used a lot in logos. (Our prior version had 2 colors) 11. Cheap is definitely bad. 12. Hmm 13. The kerning is easy to fix 14. We are fixing that 15. ok 16. I had no idea about the focus-brand logo. The Ottawa font is my favorite font - I use it for all of my firm's correspondence. I found it in 1995 actually - it is beautiful and very easy to read. The font used for the Focus brand logo is quite different - definitely not as elegant as Ottawa.
Honestly, there are a lot of problems with the site design. I am not a designer so I can't offer anything constructive. You need some professional help.