4 ms·

90% of these designs honestly look bland and very forgettable.

by dirtnugget 6y ago

icedchai 6y ago
Sad, but true. I've gotten better logo designs on Fiverr.
- Hoasi 6y ago
  > I've gotten better logo designs on Fiverr. Now, that's quite a statement. Those Fiverr designers must have left a lot of money on the table. Could you please show these better logos?
  - icedchai 6y ago
    Yes, I am exaggerating, but only slightly. I have a NeXT box here and always thought the logo looked amateurish.
    - Hoasi 6y ago
      Amateurish is harsh. I would agree that it looks slightly dated, though not in the wrong way. If you go through the brochure, you get a sense that a lot of thought went into the design itself.
    - runawaybottle 6y ago
      Well, what makes you so sure you have good taste? You have a taste, and many designs probably appealed to that taste. I’ve seen first hand bosses of companies favor designs (half way decent stuff) that appealed to their tastes, but there were elements of the company that knew his/her taste was a little bland.
    - watt 6y ago
      I don't trust your sense of taste at all.
      - icedchai 6y ago
        That’s fine. As far as old workstations go, I prefer Sun’s logo. https://www.famouslogos.org/logos/sun-microsystems-logo https://www.famouslogos.org/logos/sun-microsystems-logo
kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
They're the ducks.
LanceH 6y ago
Someone looks at a piece of "art" and says, "I could do that." Sure, but could you convince someone to pay you $100k for it?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- omnimus 6y ago
  It's like saying that anyone could type out that 50 lines of code that solve deep problem and save milions of dollars.
- dirtnugget 6y ago
  The price does not make it better work. I see very little effort to create a memorable logo. All these logos look very much alike and neither of them feel like they have any soul to convey. There is a hint at minimalist design, however I’d argue that minimal is easy to learn, hard to master. What do you feel when you look at it? I feel nothing. They are just printing out their name in different variations. Don’t get me wrong, I am not somebody who thinks good design is easy. Never said that. I do however believe that a brand needs some kind of character and uniqueness to their brand and these illustrations feel extremely generic.
  - puranjay 6y ago
    I would encourage you to find an old NeXT computer and see the logo in flesh. It adds a ton of personality to an otherwise unremarkable black box. Keep in mind that this logo was done for a very physical medium. And you're viewing it through an entirely digital medium - something neither Jobs nor Rand could have envisioned back then. I would like to think that if Rand was designing a logo for the digital age, his approach would be entirely different
glenstein 6y ago
What designs? If you're referring to the images in the article, most of those appear to be part of a presentation that discusses the merits and properties of different fonts and stylizations, presumably to illustrate a set of ideas that culminates in the reveal of Next logo.
jonjacky 6y ago
You can't understand the logos out of context. Rand's IBM logo (and probably many of his others), was designed along with everything from the architecture of the buildings, through the computer cabinets, to the letterhead stationery. It all had a consistent look that was instantly recognizable as IBM. That was the logo's purpose, not to be splashy and memorable by itself. There is a whole book about this: The Interface: IBM and the Transformation of Corporate Design, 1945 -- 1976 by John Harwood. It's online: https://muse.jhu.edu/book/24792 https://muse.jhu.edu/book/24792 On the importance of IBM's design, Paul Rand wrote, "IBM's products are too complex to be understood by the average buyer. [They] must rely on IBM's reputable name." (quoted in Ch 1, p. 27 in Harwood).
- dirtnugget 6y ago
  I gotta say, the IBM logo among others are very memorable logos. Even the one for NeXT which actually made it falls in this category. I like them. Not so much for the rest which I am seeing presented here though.

90% of these designs honestly look bland and very forgettable.

icedchai 6y ago

Sad, but true. I've gotten better logo designs on Fiverr.

Hoasi 6y ago
> I've gotten better logo designs on Fiverr. Now, that's quite a statement. Those Fiverr designers must have left a lot of money on the table. Could you please show these better logos?
- icedchai 6y ago
  Yes, I am exaggerating, but only slightly. I have a NeXT box here and always thought the logo looked amateurish.
  - Hoasi 6y ago
    Amateurish is harsh. I would agree that it looks slightly dated, though not in the wrong way. If you go through the brochure, you get a sense that a lot of thought went into the design itself.
  - runawaybottle 6y ago
    Well, what makes you so sure you have good taste? You have a taste, and many designs probably appealed to that taste. I’ve seen first hand bosses of companies favor designs (half way decent stuff) that appealed to their tastes, but there were elements of the company that knew his/her taste was a little bland.
  - watt 6y ago
    I don't trust your sense of taste at all.
    - icedchai 6y ago
      That’s fine. As far as old workstations go, I prefer Sun’s logo. https://www.famouslogos.org/logos/sun-microsystems-logo https://www.famouslogos.org/logos/sun-microsystems-logo

kevin_thibedeau 6y ago

They're the ducks.

LanceH 6y ago

Someone looks at a piece of "art" and says, "I could do that." Sure, but could you convince someone to pay you $100k for it?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
omnimus 6y ago
It's like saying that anyone could type out that 50 lines of code that solve deep problem and save milions of dollars.
dirtnugget 6y ago
The price does not make it better work. I see very little effort to create a memorable logo. All these logos look very much alike and neither of them feel like they have any soul to convey. There is a hint at minimalist design, however I’d argue that minimal is easy to learn, hard to master. What do you feel when you look at it? I feel nothing. They are just printing out their name in different variations. Don’t get me wrong, I am not somebody who thinks good design is easy. Never said that. I do however believe that a brand needs some kind of character and uniqueness to their brand and these illustrations feel extremely generic.
- puranjay 6y ago
  I would encourage you to find an old NeXT computer and see the logo in flesh. It adds a ton of personality to an otherwise unremarkable black box. Keep in mind that this logo was done for a very physical medium. And you're viewing it through an entirely digital medium - something neither Jobs nor Rand could have envisioned back then. I would like to think that if Rand was designing a logo for the digital age, his approach would be entirely different

glenstein 6y ago

What designs? If you're referring to the images in the article, most of those appear to be part of a presentation that discusses the merits and properties of different fonts and stylizations, presumably to illustrate a set of ideas that culminates in the reveal of Next logo.

jonjacky 6y ago

You can't understand the logos out of context. Rand's IBM logo (and probably many of his others), was designed along with everything from the architecture of the buildings, through the computer cabinets, to the letterhead stationery. It all had a consistent look that was instantly recognizable as IBM. That was the logo's purpose, not to be splashy and memorable by itself. There is a whole book about this: The Interface: IBM and the Transformation of Corporate Design, 1945 -- 1976 by John Harwood. It's online: https://muse.jhu.edu/book/24792 https://muse.jhu.edu/book/24792 On the importance of IBM's design, Paul Rand wrote, "IBM's products are too complex to be understood by the average buyer. [They] must rely on IBM's reputable name." (quoted in Ch 1, p. 27 in Harwood).

dirtnugget 6y ago
I gotta say, the IBM logo among others are very memorable logos. Even the one for NeXT which actually made it falls in this category. I like them. Not so much for the rest which I am seeing presented here though.