I would seriously reconsider your statement, whether it's wise or not for MS to define everything with an OS experience.... that at the moment seems to be rather disliked. Dangerous stuff!
Whereas Apple can produce an ad campaign any way they choose to... and even pull it as they recently did... but the brand and that iconic Apple logo... didn't suffer a smidgen. Not in the least.
It's called having a logo that eclipses trends, is flexible, and is timeless. The newest retro-rage fonts, such as that used by Pinterest... sit's perfectly well next to the Apple logo. Not so much next to either the logo or the word mark from Microsoft. Just as an example.
Yeah. And that's exactly why I consider the design shortsighted. You really MUST put it into it's comfortable surroundings, BEFORE you know who it is, and what it is supposed to be representing. Just 4-squares is NEVER going to be as iconic and easily recognizable as the Apple logo. Ever.
Also, what happens when the "squares" become stale? When the "Microsoft" wordmark doesn't fit, or is not wanted? For instance an embossed "4-square logo" in glass. What if those 4 squares visually translate into a "Suisse" product... without also going to the trouble and expense of adding "Microsoft".
When I first saw the logo I thought it looked quite clean and a nice tie in with "metro" tiles.
The mark is easily forgettable without set colours or microsoft name. It becomes far too rigid for the sake of simplicity.
They kept the "ft" joined, at least. "Respecting our roots", I imagine. F for fraud, T for traitors.
I know your just poking fun but it is common to use ligatures as overlapping occurs and can make a clean design look busy, unprofessional and unsightly especially for logos! ????
I know your just poking fun but it is common to use ligatures as overlapping occurs and can make a clean design look busy, unprofessional and unsightly especially for logos! ????
Sure thing, and I did mean what I said at the beginning* about how they're probably doing it as a throwback to their old logo/font. They probably could have picked one that avoided the issue, but it's difficult to copy Apple and fuss with typography at the same time.
I don't know what they're teaching you in school (I'm assuming you've went to design school)... but either you skipped too many classes, or it's as bad as some of us ol' Xacto/Rapidograph guys think it's become. Because I hate to break the news to ya, but the 50's and 60's were... and still are... easily the most influential decades of image branding, creative design and advertising EVER.
i went to Art Center 15 years ago. never skipped class, though fell asleep in quite a few from exhaustion. fun times. of course the 50s and 60s were highly significant. modernism is the foundation of contemporary design. herbert bayer is why i haven't used a capital letter in personal writing for...um... maybe since school. however, design has certainly continued to evolve, and in this digital age the brandmark/logo is hardly the end all be all of a brand. it seems to be for apple, but clearly not now for microsoft.
of course it won't be as iconic as the apple logo. it would almost be stupid for them to try to compete at that level. which is likely why they did not. i don't really get how it is disliked. here, on an apple rumors message board where 98% of the people are fanboys, sure. everywhere else? and, often, initial polarization of opinion is a sign of something good. and, without a doubt, microsoft now owns the square. not only is it an iconic AND highly functional foundation to their UI work, it is now part of their branding.
never in a 1000000 years would i have imagined that microsoft would come to represent purity and minimalism when it came to design or UI. but, they are definitely heading that way, in a good way. i think it is just a short matter of time before the metro UI team starts integrated and influencing the core windows UI team. have you read their UI guidelines? i checked it out when windows phone 7 was new, and the voice is really well defined, and i gotta say, stronger than the OSX and iOS HIGs.
i think sagoe looks more contemporary than helvetica, specifically because of its sharp points and such. helvetica i love, but it is not the end all be all. it is quite possible a timeless modern design, but it still shows its age. i want my devices to accomplish tasks, i want them to be precise and fast and consistent tools. i don't want them to be all over the place. you can't argue that apple's design experience now looks unfocused when compared to microsoft's. helvetica on iOS. lucida sans on mac. garamond in print and advertising, along with myriad also. and, as you mentioned, basically off the shelf adobe fonts, that they clearly didn't adjust themselves to make better (again, apple helvetica's number kerning irks me so much).
and, trust me - if years ago me knew i'd be lauding microsoft's graphic and UI design approach, i would have been shocked. i am. i think they are doing everything right. i have a classmate working there for the last couple years, and a previous UI/UX design coworker working there (he knows his stuff). my impression is they have been stocking up over the last 2-4 years on pretty high quality creative folks, and it is starting to show. not sure if their CEO gets that at all, but at least he seems to get it enough to get out of their way and let them do what they need to do.
btw, frutiger is quite nice. and, thanks for the real thoughts. this thread has actually been worth reading thanks to posters like you. usually, it is 100% fanboism. cheers.
i went to Art Center 15 years ago. never skipped class, though fell asleep in quite a few from exhaustion. fun times. of course the 50s and 60s were highly significant. modernism is the foundation of contemporary design. herbert bayer is why i haven't used a capital letter in personal writing for...um... maybe since school. however, design has certainly continued to evolve, and in this digital age the brandmark/logo is hardly the end all be all of a brand. it seems to be for apple, but clearly not now for microsoft.
Great school. I considered going there in the early 80's, but instead went to Parsons downtown, and also took classes at USC. It's at both of those schools that I made acquaintances that later allowed me to get a Mac in '84. In '85 I started working for the agencies, as well as on some films and music projects... with my Mac in tow. Sadly, I never graduated with a degree.... HOWEVER, I met and worked closely with so many great professionals in photography, film, graphics, typesetting, music engineers, etc.... I maintain to this day, that it was the better "educational" choice by far! I showed them what could be done on the Mac... and they showed me what problems they wanted solved, and what would make their profession, easier and better. Absolute "win - win" experiences.
Critique: Capitalizing properly in the language you're writing in is for "communicating quickly" your thoughts. It allows the person/people you're trying to communicate with, the luxury of "speed reading" to find relative places, people... and other main subjects to refer back to.
Herbert Bayer: it could be theorized that at the time (early 1900's), Communism and Marxist philosophies were the rage among intellectuals. By choosing to bring everything down to "lower case", thus communizing type and communicating ideas, it could be argued that Herr Bayer was making a political statement with his typography and graphics. Fitting that he also lost that fight, considering that capitalization (Capitalism) won the battle on all fronts for good reason....uhm... regardless of how it has evolved.
Off topic: actually, the underlying principles of Communism and Capitalism are "pure" philosophically... until you mix in the impurities known as the "human factor and condition". It's only then that the practice of either philosophy becomes... well, rather flawed. You could apply this to design as well.
of course it won't be as iconic as the apple logo. it would almost be stupid for them to try to compete at that level. which is likely why they did not. i don't really get how it is disliked. here, on an apple rumors message board where 98% of the people are fanboys, sure. everywhere else? and, often, initial polarization of opinion is a sign of something good. and, without a doubt, microsoft now owns the square. not only is it an iconic AND highly functional foundation to their UI work, it is now part of their branding.
Read the above posts from others that have pointed out how many ways MS is trying to copy Apple... and even Goggle... their 2 main rivals.
And no, Microsoft does NOT now own the square. Just as much as Apple does NOT own rounded corners and is not claiming to (sorry to p** on the Android fans... but really, Apple is not maiking that claim at all. Google: "sum of it's parts" for explanations).
Question: have you taken a trip to Europe, and/or visited Germany, Austria, Switzerland and the Netherlands... or Scandinavia?
I'm writing this from Germany, and have lived and traveled extensively throughout Europe for 23+ years now. If you haven't been here before, you would not believe how much ALL of the design in the Germanic and Scandinavian countries, still take their design cues from the Bauhaus movement. The "square" has been re-invented, colored, and used so many numerous times, that Microsoft has to be extremely careful what they do with their "square" here in Europe, especially if they ever choose to use one color. There are many trademarks and logos that they are already coming painfully close to mimicking: major banks and corporations, assorted non-profit organizations, museums and public works, national identities even.
never in a 1000000 years would i have imagined that microsoft would come to represent purity and minimalism when it came to design or UI. but, they are definitely heading that way, in a good way. i think it is just a short matter of time before the metro UI team starts integrated and influencing the core windows UI team. have you read their UI guidelines? i checked it out when windows phone 7 was new, and the voice is really well defined, and i gotta say, stronger than the OSX and iOS HIGs.
I'm going to agree with you, that at least they are trying to pull the "pieces into a whole" concept. However... as much as I love minimalism.... you have to still know why and where it should apply.
For example:
Apple has recently caught some flak over their insistance to use gray icons in the Finder window sidebar. That choice has caused many users to bemoan the fact (for them), that it is too difficult to "quickly" differentiate the icons, and then becomes a GUI liability, rather than a "user friendly" enhancement. Regardless of the fact that it adheres to Apple's "minimalism" design philosophy, it flies in the face of SJ's desire to always consider the USER first, and the function/feature later. (Note: I personally am not hindered in any way... but some users are.)
Microsoft will run into the very same problems sooner rather than later. The rigidity of the square dictates that eventual fact. People will become "lost in a sea of squares". Is that desirable? Immersive is an adjective that has opposite meanings depending on the context: drowning or engaging.
i think sagoe looks more contemporary than helvetica, specifically because of its sharp points and such. helvetica i love, but it is not the end all be all. it is quite possible a timeless modern design, but it still shows its age. i want my devices to accomplish tasks, i want them to be precise and fast and consistent tools. i don't want them to be all over the place. you can't argue that apple's design experience now looks unfocused when compared to microsoft's. helvetica on iOS. lucida sans on mac. garamond in print and advertising, along with myriad also. and, as you mentioned, basically off the shelf adobe fonts, that they clearly didn't adjust themselves to make better (again, apple helvetica's number kerning irks me so much).
and, trust me - if years ago me knew i'd be lauding microsoft's graphic and UI design approach, i would have been shocked. i am. i think they are doing everything right. i have a classmate working there for the last couple years, and a previous UI/UX design coworker working there (he knows his stuff). my impression is they have been stocking up over the last 2-4 years on pretty high quality creative folks, and it is starting to show. not sure if their CEO gets that at all, but at least he seems to get it enough to get out of their way and let them do what they need to do.
Again... it's laudable for trying only. MS is applying an all encompassing and rigid design philosophy to a very complex and flexible (at it's core) set of devices and software. Yes, they've done a 360... but have not truly considered the implications down the road. They are trying to "be cool" and re-imagine themselves... but their fans and user-base, by choice or by situation (work), may just decide it hinders productivity rather than enhances it. What then?
btw, frutiger is quite nice. and, thanks for the real thoughts. this thread has actually been worth reading thanks to posters like you. usually, it is 100% fanboism. cheers.
... I still disagree about Frutiger...
... I take your fanboism quote as a bad generalization, since there's some really, REALLY smart and influential people on these AI forums. Look up posts by Dick Applebaum, mdriftmeyer, Marvin, solipsism, etc.
... I thank you for the compliment... and say "Cheers" in return since you're buying
Finally... you need to take a closer look at the "who, what, why and where" regarding your chosen design philosophy to follow. You make the same mistake as Microsoft by not applying it for a good and solid reason, other than for "design's sake".
Looks good! I saw a preview of Office 2013 and it seems that FINALLY MS have taken a leaf from Apple's book -- it looked NICE and was pleasurable to use. So many tiny graphical touches. Very nice indeed.
Good job MS. The more decent competition for Apple, the better for everyone.
Microsoft are going to spend gazillions on marketing and this will work as far as selling new PC's and tablets etc.
Make no mistake, Microsoft have a strong hold on the corporate environment with the server software and network groups, I think this will never change (Apple have certainly dropped the ball on this one).
I don't think Microsoft will do so well selling products like Apple do though and I think this is what they are aiming for with the new logo.
I think this could end up being another Zune move.
Meh, it's a nice logo I guess. Maybe I'm over-thinking this, but from the video, it looks like the blue square represented Windows, then the orange square represented Office (but they showed a 3-D square or something), then the green square seemed to be XBOX (but they just showed the round normal XBOX logo there) and then the yellow square.....wait.....what about the yellow square? Were they going somewhere with this???
actually, those colors for a long while were a way to represent the different MS Office Apps since at least Office '97.
Yellow = Outlook
Green = Excel
Blue = Word
Orange/Red = Powerpoint
Granted, those colors have been on the "Windows" operating system logo since forever, I think it was at least since Windows 3.1.
I think that's where the disconnect happens for me. I have always though using the colored squares in Metro and Windows phone UI had no logic. The colored squares seem to have an arbitrary look to them. If they really wanted to use colored blocks like this, they should have come up with a strategy for the colors. And if they did, it's not obvious to me, and I work in a highly graphics-related field.
For example: (this is only one concept)
Yellow = communications and networking (i.e. email, phone, text, contacts)
Orange = Social Media and 3rd party apps.
Red = Productivity apps (word, excel, PP, etc.)
Purple = Music, video, photos and other media
Blue = Internet related apps
Green = Gaming
This way you have the primary 4 colors of the logo representing the core functions of the OS, and the other colors can be worked in as 3rd party or secondary apps. At least with this one example, you could quickly know what is what visually by color. Of course that sucks for color-challenged folks but then you could supplement it with a white or black silhouetted logo in each block, and/or text.
Comments
Well, it looks really good when seen really small in the upper left corner of their website. Brilliant! Not.
And the typeface is even more boring than before. They should've at least kept the little slit in the "o".
Originally Posted by justbobf
Well, it looks really good when seen really small in the upper left corner of their website. Brilliant! Not.
Their old favicon is still there. But then again, no one will ever pay attention to favicons again…
They should've at least kept the little slit in the "o".
They kept the "ft" joined, at least. "Respecting our roots", I imagine. F for fraud, T for traitors.
When I first saw the logo I thought it looked quite clean and a nice tie in with "metro" tiles.
The mark is easily forgettable without set colours or microsoft name. It becomes far too rigid for the sake of simplicity.
I know your just poking fun but it is common to use ligatures as overlapping occurs and can make a clean design look busy, unprofessional and unsightly especially for logos! ????
Originally Posted by Fillie
I know your just poking fun but it is common to use ligatures as overlapping occurs and can make a clean design look busy, unprofessional and unsightly especially for logos! ????
Sure thing, and I did mean what I said at the beginning* about how they're probably doing it as a throwback to their old logo/font. They probably could have picked one that avoided the issue, but it's difficult to copy Apple and fuss with typography at the same time.
*and the end
It sure didn't take Microsoft long to kick this logo to the curb... It no longer shows up anywhere on their site.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc
I don't know what they're teaching you in school (I'm assuming you've went to design school)... but either you skipped too many classes, or it's as bad as some of us ol' Xacto/Rapidograph guys think it's become. Because I hate to break the news to ya, but the 50's and 60's were... and still are... easily the most influential decades of image branding, creative design and advertising EVER.
i went to Art Center 15 years ago. never skipped class, though fell asleep in quite a few from exhaustion. fun times. of course the 50s and 60s were highly significant. modernism is the foundation of contemporary design. herbert bayer is why i haven't used a capital letter in personal writing for...um... maybe since school. however, design has certainly continued to evolve, and in this digital age the brandmark/logo is hardly the end all be all of a brand. it seems to be for apple, but clearly not now for microsoft.
of course it won't be as iconic as the apple logo. it would almost be stupid for them to try to compete at that level. which is likely why they did not. i don't really get how it is disliked. here, on an apple rumors message board where 98% of the people are fanboys, sure. everywhere else? and, often, initial polarization of opinion is a sign of something good. and, without a doubt, microsoft now owns the square. not only is it an iconic AND highly functional foundation to their UI work, it is now part of their branding.
never in a 1000000 years would i have imagined that microsoft would come to represent purity and minimalism when it came to design or UI. but, they are definitely heading that way, in a good way. i think it is just a short matter of time before the metro UI team starts integrated and influencing the core windows UI team. have you read their UI guidelines? i checked it out when windows phone 7 was new, and the voice is really well defined, and i gotta say, stronger than the OSX and iOS HIGs.
i think sagoe looks more contemporary than helvetica, specifically because of its sharp points and such. helvetica i love, but it is not the end all be all. it is quite possible a timeless modern design, but it still shows its age. i want my devices to accomplish tasks, i want them to be precise and fast and consistent tools. i don't want them to be all over the place. you can't argue that apple's design experience now looks unfocused when compared to microsoft's. helvetica on iOS. lucida sans on mac. garamond in print and advertising, along with myriad also. and, as you mentioned, basically off the shelf adobe fonts, that they clearly didn't adjust themselves to make better (again, apple helvetica's number kerning irks me so much).
and, trust me - if years ago me knew i'd be lauding microsoft's graphic and UI design approach, i would have been shocked. i am. i think they are doing everything right. i have a classmate working there for the last couple years, and a previous UI/UX design coworker working there (he knows his stuff). my impression is they have been stocking up over the last 2-4 years on pretty high quality creative folks, and it is starting to show. not sure if their CEO gets that at all, but at least he seems to get it enough to get out of their way and let them do what they need to do.
btw, frutiger is quite nice. and, thanks for the real thoughts. this thread has actually been worth reading thanks to posters like you. usually, it is 100% fanboism. cheers.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
They must have done soooo much brain storming with the advertising agencies spending millions of dollars to design this logo.
Its not good. Not good at all.
How about - now its Microsoft's turn to copy - a logo. How about Samsung (Samscum) logo?
Looks virtually the same as the old one, BORING! Everyone move on, nothing to see here.
I like their new logo.
Corners are sharp, so they are safe
Great school. I considered going there in the early 80's, but instead went to Parsons downtown, and also took classes at USC. It's at both of those schools that I made acquaintances that later allowed me to get a Mac in '84. In '85 I started working for the agencies, as well as on some films and music projects... with my Mac in tow. Sadly, I never graduated with a degree.... HOWEVER, I met and worked closely with so many great professionals in photography, film, graphics, typesetting, music engineers, etc.... I maintain to this day, that it was the better "educational" choice by far! I showed them what could be done on the Mac... and they showed me what problems they wanted solved, and what would make their profession, easier and better. Absolute "win - win" experiences.
Critique: Capitalizing properly in the language you're writing in is for "communicating quickly" your thoughts. It allows the person/people you're trying to communicate with, the luxury of "speed reading" to find relative places, people... and other main subjects to refer back to.
Herbert Bayer: it could be theorized that at the time (early 1900's), Communism and Marxist philosophies were the rage among intellectuals. By choosing to bring everything down to "lower case", thus communizing type and communicating ideas, it could be argued that Herr Bayer was making a political statement with his typography and graphics. Fitting that he also lost that fight, considering that capitalization (Capitalism) won the battle on all fronts for good reason....uhm... regardless of how it has evolved.
Off topic: actually, the underlying principles of Communism and Capitalism are "pure" philosophically... until you mix in the impurities known as the "human factor and condition". It's only then that the practice of either philosophy becomes... well, rather flawed. You could apply this to design as well.
Read the above posts from others that have pointed out how many ways MS is trying to copy Apple... and even Goggle... their 2 main rivals.
And no, Microsoft does NOT now own the square. Just as much as Apple does NOT own rounded corners and is not claiming to (sorry to p** on the Android fans... but really, Apple is not maiking that claim at all. Google: "sum of it's parts" for explanations).
Question: have you taken a trip to Europe, and/or visited Germany, Austria, Switzerland and the Netherlands... or Scandinavia?
I'm writing this from Germany, and have lived and traveled extensively throughout Europe for 23+ years now. If you haven't been here before, you would not believe how much ALL of the design in the Germanic and Scandinavian countries, still take their design cues from the Bauhaus movement. The "square" has been re-invented, colored, and used so many numerous times, that Microsoft has to be extremely careful what they do with their "square" here in Europe, especially if they ever choose to use one color. There are many trademarks and logos that they are already coming painfully close to mimicking: major banks and corporations, assorted non-profit organizations, museums and public works, national identities even.
I'm going to agree with you, that at least they are trying to pull the "pieces into a whole" concept. However... as much as I love minimalism.... you have to still know why and where it should apply.
For example:
Apple has recently caught some flak over their insistance to use gray icons in the Finder window sidebar. That choice has caused many users to bemoan the fact (for them), that it is too difficult to "quickly" differentiate the icons, and then becomes a GUI liability, rather than a "user friendly" enhancement. Regardless of the fact that it adheres to Apple's "minimalism" design philosophy, it flies in the face of SJ's desire to always consider the USER first, and the function/feature later. (Note: I personally am not hindered in any way... but some users are.)
Microsoft will run into the very same problems sooner rather than later. The rigidity of the square dictates that eventual fact. People will become "lost in a sea of squares". Is that desirable? Immersive is an adjective that has opposite meanings depending on the context: drowning or engaging.
If you haven't done so already, you really must take a look at Helvetica: The Documentary
Again... it's laudable for trying only. MS is applying an all encompassing and rigid design philosophy to a very complex and flexible (at it's core) set of devices and software. Yes, they've done a 360... but have not truly considered the implications down the road. They are trying to "be cool" and re-imagine themselves... but their fans and user-base, by choice or by situation (work), may just decide it hinders productivity rather than enhances it. What then?
... I still disagree about Frutiger...
... I take your fanboism quote as a bad generalization, since there's some really, REALLY smart and influential people on these AI forums. Look up posts by Dick Applebaum, mdriftmeyer, Marvin, solipsism, etc.
... I thank you for the compliment... and say "Cheers" in return since you're buying
Finally... you need to take a closer look at the "who, what, why and where" regarding your chosen design philosophy to follow. You make the same mistake as Microsoft by not applying it for a good and solid reason, other than for "design's sake".
Looks good! I saw a preview of Office 2013 and it seems that FINALLY MS have taken a leaf from Apple's book -- it looked NICE and was pleasurable to use. So many tiny graphical touches. Very nice indeed.
Good job MS. The more decent competition for Apple, the better for everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky
It sure didn't take Microsoft long to kick this logo to the curb... It no longer shows up anywhere on their site.
That's the Windows Logo (minus the 2012) and it was featured in the video in the news article.
Really?
Well, I guess now microsoft can say that they also stole their logo from Apple....
....Boot Camp....
Microsoft are going to spend gazillions on marketing and this will work as far as selling new PC's and tablets etc.
Make no mistake, Microsoft have a strong hold on the corporate environment with the server software and network groups, I think this will never change (Apple have certainly dropped the ball on this one).
I don't think Microsoft will do so well selling products like Apple do though and I think this is what they are aiming for with the new logo.
I think this could end up being another Zune move.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotRs
Really?
Well, I guess now microsoft can say that they also stole their logo from Apple....
....Boot Camp....
What?
Yup. Microsoft definitely borrowed that logo from Boot Camp, introduced in 2006.
Originally Posted by Euphonious
Yup. Microsoft definitely borrowed that logo from Boot Camp, introduced in 2006.
He was making a joke. But then you made a fool.
I think its funny that they put some much "work" into finding a font. I find the font as boring as any, not even pleasant to look at.
I have no gripe against simple and clean, but 4 squares just doesn't feel new.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JupiterOne
Meh, it's a nice logo I guess. Maybe I'm over-thinking this, but from the video, it looks like the blue square represented Windows, then the orange square represented Office (but they showed a 3-D square or something), then the green square seemed to be XBOX (but they just showed the round normal XBOX logo there) and then the yellow square.....wait.....what about the yellow square? Were they going somewhere with this???
actually, those colors for a long while were a way to represent the different MS Office Apps since at least Office '97.
Yellow = Outlook
Green = Excel
Blue = Word
Orange/Red = Powerpoint
Granted, those colors have been on the "Windows" operating system logo since forever, I think it was at least since Windows 3.1.
I think that's where the disconnect happens for me. I have always though using the colored squares in Metro and Windows phone UI had no logic. The colored squares seem to have an arbitrary look to them. If they really wanted to use colored blocks like this, they should have come up with a strategy for the colors. And if they did, it's not obvious to me, and I work in a highly graphics-related field.
For example: (this is only one concept)
Yellow = communications and networking (i.e. email, phone, text, contacts)
Orange = Social Media and 3rd party apps.
Red = Productivity apps (word, excel, PP, etc.)
Purple = Music, video, photos and other media
Blue = Internet related apps
Green = Gaming
This way you have the primary 4 colors of the logo representing the core functions of the OS, and the other colors can be worked in as 3rd party or secondary apps. At least with this one example, you could quickly know what is what visually by color. Of course that sucks for color-challenged folks but then you could supplement it with a white or black silhouetted logo in each block, and/or text.