The presentation at NeXT office was recorded and is available on youtube:
What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
11–20 of 115 posts
Re: What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
#12As a graphic designer, it was the way Paul Rand pitched the design that was the major breakthrough for me. Through interviews you can see how he pitched himself and his process to Steve Jobs. Paul's confidence in his process, backed up with his experience, is what sold Jobs on using Paul Rand and gave me the blueprint in how to deal with clients.
People don't realize that a logo is an empty vessel that is filled with the peoples experiences of the company and product, it has to be the correct vessel. People online see a logo for the first time and judge it without any knowledge of the company or product, which is fine but not really helpful. Interact with the company and product and then judge the logo after time has passed.
Re: What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
#13When I read the jobs biography I had to put down the book and look up the next logo after how important that logo and design process seemed to have been. I was quite disappointed and find it hard to say anything kind about it. It works a lot better on Steve’s t-shirt where you can’t see the box.
I was a young teenager at the time Jobs founded NeXT. The logo burned into my memory, and it is actually the only thing I really remember about the NeXT computers (besides them being black and cool). I still think it is outstanding.
Re: What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
#14I might be in the minority, but the NeXT logo never looked good to me - there's something off with projection of the cube.
Since Steve Jobs is no longer with us to say it, I'll fill in for him. You're holding your head wrong.
Re: What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
#15I loved—and still love—this logo. Maybe it's because we have a gazillion startups and companies now, so every single logo looks the same to me. These old logos have spirit and personality.
Re: What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
#16I find it interesting that the final logo choice is not like any of the sketches. You could imagine that someone came along and went "no, not like any of that" and came up with something different.
It's also humorous to me that the designer was considering something that looks like an hour glass for the X. Imagine using a symbol for your powerful new computer that essentially means "wait".
Re: What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
#17As a graphic designer, it was the way Paul Rand pitched the design that was the major breakthrough for me. Through interviews you can see how he pitched himself and his process to Steve Jobs. Paul's confidence in his process, backed up with his experience, is what sold Jobs on using Paul Rand and gave me the blueprint in how to deal with clients. People don't realize that a logo is an empty vessel that is filled with…
Put another way, the logo can be anything.
Re: What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
#18The sad thing is, the logo was a tiny part of the experience, which these days folks only see the successors of iOS (and derived) devices, and Mac OS X (or whatever they're calling it these days). At least we've moved on from the early releases where the Carbon Finder.app was a significant impact on memory, and the Java calculator app took multiple bounces to load Java and run. I just wish that Apple would do somethi…
Have you ever used GNUstep?
I’m not the parent, but I’ve been following GNUstep’s development on-and-off for 20 years (I was in high school then and thus am too young to experience NeXTstep in its heyday). I truly wish the Linux community had embraced GNUstep instead of the Qt vs GTK path we ended up on. Even if the Apple/NeXT merger never happened, we could’ve ended up being a refuge for abandoned NeXT users and have adopted NeXT’s solid application ecosystem; imagine updated versions of Lighthouse Design’s applications running on Linux. Of course, the Apple/NeXT merger happened and changed the course of history; Linux could’ve benefited from sharing a GUI API with Mac OS X.
One of the most interesting developments that came out of the GNUstep world was Étoilé, which was developed in the late 2000s and looked like a promising rethinking of what a desktop powered by GNUstep technology could do. One impressive feature was its Smalltalk implementation, which brought NeXT technology “home” to its Smalltalk inspiration (NeXTstep can be thought of as a polished Smalltalk machine, with Objective-C and Unix in place of the Smalltalk language and runtime). Sadly Étoilé doesn’t appear to have been worked on in about a decade.
I know in recent years there’s been a major effort to get GNUstep’s API on par with the latest version of Apple’s Cocoa, increasing compatibility. Maybe GNUstep will finally become more popular one day, but I’m glad the project hasn’t died after all these years.
Re: What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
#19I find it interesting that the final logo choice is not like any of the sketches. You could imagine that someone came along and went "no, not like any of that" and came up with something different. It's also humorous to me that the designer was considering something that looks like an hour glass for the X. Imagine using a symbol for your powerful new computer that essentially means "wait".
> hour glass for the X. Imagine using a symbol for your powerful new computer that essentially means "wait".
Are you sure you're not mixing timelines? Was the hourglass established for this metaphor in 1986?
I first remember the hourglass cursor from Windows 95. At the time Macintosh used a wristwatch. This struck me as similar to Microsoft using "recycle bin" because they borrowed a metaphor and didn't want to say "trash".
It wouldn't surprise me to see earlier uses of the metaphor, but some quick googling is not immediately revealing them to me.
Edit: this claims Xerox Star used the hourglass. https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/wait-wait-tell-me/
Re: What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
#20I always go back to the Saul Bass presentation to AT&T over their 1970 logo redesign. He takes 30 minutes to explain the thought process and sell this design hard . By the end you're convinced it's the natural thing to do. I'm sure every executive in the room felt the same way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKu2de0yCJI (Bass would return a mere 13 years later to do the AT&T "Death Star" logo after the breakup)
Wow, attention spans were so much longer back then.