Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember it looked terrible and unmemorable. Really, if you asked me 5 minutes ago to draw it I’d be unable to. I only remembered it was some sort of ugly use of the NeXT characters. Apparently people’s response to it is polarizing. I always thought it was a ridiculously bad logo.
the fact that you can even remember its shape and ugly colors is remarkable, considering this is a product that was never widely used and hasn't been sold since 1997
What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
111–115 of 115 posts
I didn’t remember its shape or colors. Did I say otherwise?
Re: What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
#112Re: What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
#113I might be in the minority, but the NeXT logo never looked good to me - there's something off with projection of the cube.
It is (almost) orthographic and people apparently expect perspective of some kind, or want to see a proper projection.
That is the cube clash as I see it.
Re: What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe because it is an orthographic projection and not a perspective one.
I like orthographic projections, but this isn't one. The square at the top has perfect 90* corners, despite the "depth" (and thus being viewed from the side). Orthographic projections of a square squish it into a rhombus.
Good catch! Maybe that is the disconnect! I see close to ortho. Closer to ortho than it is anything else, but it just is not an ortho projection.