5 ms·

> Who cares? It says Oxford University Press which is the important part. The little image above it is just fluff and literally doesn't matter. I certainly woul

> Who cares? It says Oxford University Press which is the important part. The little image above it is just fluff and literally doesn't matter. I certainly wouldn't call it 'unfathomably bad' considering it's not a child's drawing or a some obscene gesture. It's modernist, minimalist crap, indistinguishable from all the other modernist, minimalist crap. Everyone might as well rebrand as solid-color circle distinguished by a numerically unique RGB value. Their old logo was much better, since it harkens back to a literal coat of arms, which isn't something you see every day.

pvg 4y ago
which isn't something you see every day. Undoubtedly influenced by Oxford and Cambridge but it's a design style adopted by so many universities it's practically generic for 'some sort of university thing logo'. I don't have strong feelings about the new logo either way but the idea the old one is some distinctive masterpiece seems misplaced.
- porknubbins 4y ago
  When you’re one of the oldest universities in the world though, I think sticking with the old logo conveys a subtle gravitas and confidence in your legacy, much more than constant rebranding that says “look at me”.
  - pvg 4y ago
    I'm not sure it's obvious it conveys anything beside 'looks like everyone else'. It's like the GP comment complaining about 'modernist, minimalist crap, indistinguishable from all the other modernist, minimalist crap' never ran across one of the most recognizable university press marks out there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Press#/media/File:MIT_Press_logo_(black).svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Press#/media/File:MIT_Pres...
    - porknubbins 4y ago
      Yes I don’t think there is anything obvious here, de gustibus non disputatum after all. I am a big fan of modernism even minimalism done well. MIT is an engineering school and its logo fits. I just object to lazy or default minimalism.
louthy 4y ago
> It's modernist, minimalist crap, indistinguishable from all the other modernist, minimalist crap Which is, like, just your opinion, man.
- tarboreus 4y ago
  Pretty good opinion, though.
mikkergp 4y ago
> Their old logo was much better, since it harkens back to a literal coat of arms, which isn't something you see every day. Maybe here not there, but A quick google search suggests a university with a coat of arms logo is very common.
tomtheelder 4y ago
> a literal coat of arms, which isn't something you see every day Except that a coat of arms has got to be THE most common logo for anything university related. I don't like the new one at all, but if you'd showed me the old one and asked me what it was for I'd have had no idea. Not memorable or recognizable at all, even if it is their coat of arms.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > Except that a coat of arms has got to be THE most common logo for anything university related. And the generic geometric object with some subtle styling has got to be THE most common logo for anything period.
neuralRiot 4y ago
To me the old logo had some meaning, the new, is just one more tryng to fit in an app icon.

pvg 4y ago

which isn't something you see every day. Undoubtedly influenced by Oxford and Cambridge but it's a design style adopted by so many universities it's practically generic for 'some sort of university thing logo'. I don't have strong feelings about the new logo either way but the idea the old one is some distinctive masterpiece seems misplaced.

porknubbins 4y ago
When you’re one of the oldest universities in the world though, I think sticking with the old logo conveys a subtle gravitas and confidence in your legacy, much more than constant rebranding that says “look at me”.
- pvg 4y ago
  I'm not sure it's obvious it conveys anything beside 'looks like everyone else'. It's like the GP comment complaining about 'modernist, minimalist crap, indistinguishable from all the other modernist, minimalist crap' never ran across one of the most recognizable university press marks out there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Press#/media/File:MIT_Press_logo_(black).svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Press#/media/File:MIT_Pres...
  - porknubbins 4y ago
    Yes I don’t think there is anything obvious here, de gustibus non disputatum after all. I am a big fan of modernism even minimalism done well. MIT is an engineering school and its logo fits. I just object to lazy or default minimalism.

louthy 4y ago

> It's modernist, minimalist crap, indistinguishable from all the other modernist, minimalist crap Which is, like, just your opinion, man.

tarboreus 4y ago
Pretty good opinion, though.

mikkergp 4y ago

> Their old logo was much better, since it harkens back to a literal coat of arms, which isn't something you see every day. Maybe here not there, but A quick google search suggests a university with a coat of arms logo is very common.

tomtheelder 4y ago

> a literal coat of arms, which isn't something you see every day Except that a coat of arms has got to be THE most common logo for anything university related. I don't like the new one at all, but if you'd showed me the old one and asked me what it was for I'd have had no idea. Not memorable or recognizable at all, even if it is their coat of arms.

tablespoon 4y ago
> Except that a coat of arms has got to be THE most common logo for anything university related. And the generic geometric object with some subtle styling has got to be THE most common logo for anything period.

neuralRiot 4y ago

To me the old logo had some meaning, the new, is just one more tryng to fit in an app icon.