Post a Comment
If I would be Microsoft, I would wait to see if my new Metr... err... Windows UI style and Windows 8 is successful before "burning my brand" using that so flat design.
By the way, I prefer the gray tones of UI and logos of Apple rather than the rainbow-esque new MS style.
Edited 2012-08-23 15:49 UTC
Stylization of a brand usually means bad things afoot. Lets hope it is not true in this particular case.
Also i think it is rather ugly, I much more prefer the NT3 windows flag to those four coloured lego pieces.
(reference: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_J-rZMVb1cjo/TFdUxxV-5iI/AAAAAAAAAB8/kPLYU...)
"Logo" means "word" (from the latin "lŏgus" and that from the greek "λόγος"). But nowadays some people add confusion to all that, for example saying "logo" when they mean "logotype" and Microsoft says now:
Edited 2012-08-23 18:10 UTC
So, now Microsoft *is* Windows? I'm not sure why the Windows logo is there right beside the Microsoft name, when the company does so many other things...
Also, while the font looks clean, it also looks pathetic compared to its predecessor. It looks like, compared to the original more masculine logo, this one's lost its balls. It's an ugly gray, its boldness was butchered, no italics... it just looks weak.
Wow... Microsoft really is trying to make every little thing they do and everything about them reek of Windows 8. Given what a turd that OS is for anyone who wants a real desktop, it should be interesting to see what all these dumb changes do to their image as they try to "refresh" themselves.
Really, it looks just like the Windows 8 logo, but in different colors with the icon more square and a different word. I wouldn't exactly call that an improvement.
Edited 2012-08-23 18:58 UTC
It kind of made me realize that Microsoft is trying to be 'cool' like Apple, but they never will be. At least not in the minds of iTards who worship at the alter of Jesus Jobs. Therefore, MS should concentrate on building a practical OS for productivity and business needs, instead of trying to cater to mouth breathers by dumbing down the interface and making everything colorful.
I think people are reading too much into a logo. Its primary facet is that it needs to be recognizable (without being offensive). Apple has the "apple" logo. Microsoft has the window frame. Whether it's color or grayscale is irrelevant, really. Brand folks will tell you that it needs to be recognizable first. Everything else is secondary.
The new logo isn't offensive but its more than bland and corporate. It shows intent an intent that the Metro look and Metro is the future and will be with us for a long time. However, Microsoft may find this logo in fact dates very quickly, I also think the Windows 8 logo is awful, but I don't suppose it will be with us for long.
(Yes I do know its not called Metro now)
"The symbol is important in a world of digital motion"
"The symbol’s squares of color are intended to express the company’s diverse portfolio of products"
but especially "We’re excited about the new logo".
I'm always amazed at the amount of 'symbolism' that is charged onto those graphical signs (which is often seen only by the marketing staff)
"Excited" about a logo? One that is made of four colored squares, in a squared pattern? Really?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tw-GGT6900s
hmmm, not much ....




