The circular shape of the letters hints at the eyes of the Go gopher, creating a familiar shape I found it agreeable, woody, complex and balanced, with notes of ash and clover.
But: are they sustainably harvested?
Go's New Brand
151–160 of 301 posts
Re: Go's New Brand
#152This makes me incredibly (to me) sad. The identity is so completely soulless, and the logo is the opposite of timeless, trying to grasp currently oh so hip and pop retro aesthetic. Nevermind that the retro logo and super sleek modern visual identity seems to clash with each other, both are abandoning the playfulness that was so prevalent before, most clearly evident in the various Go gopher illustrations. And its not…
>But for Go, this logo is the one that I acknowledge: > https://blog.golang.org/gopher/logo.png Check the link again. They pulled the rug out from under you.
The link still refers to the old logo for me.
Re: Go's New Brand
#153This makes me incredibly (to me) sad. The identity is so completely soulless, and the logo is the opposite of timeless, trying to grasp currently oh so hip and pop retro aesthetic. Nevermind that the retro logo and super sleek modern visual identity seems to clash with each other, both are abandoning the playfulness that was so prevalent before, most clearly evident in the various Go gopher illustrations. And its not…
The logo is awful.
- it ham-fistedly plays on the name Go (look, the logo is "going"...)
- it is not opinionated (it conforms seamlessly to contemporary corporate logo design, it looks like stock art)
- it does not repay sustained attention
Go is a brutalist language. Clean lines, no frills, lots of power, close enough to the metal. I want monotype, exposed beams and concrete, RTFM, no ugly movement lines.
I would actually rather they had taken a photo of the word "Go" written in concrete.
And honestly, I don't care about any of these things, it's just window dressing on a very solid programming tool. It's frustrating when the miss is that obvious, though. Whoever pushed this through was clearly very risk averse, rushed, or both.
Re: Go's New Brand
#154Reading the comments here makes it clear why most programmers should stay away from design. I've programmed for 20 years now, but that stupid gopher and the way it was everywhere was a serious put off for me on giving Go a look. Nerdy AF. Good riddance. I wonder if there was a huge internal battle between the brand savvy people which realized how terrible the gopher was, and the Go creators. Guys, don't be so stereot…
You realize that the gopher (and glenda before it) was created by professional illustrator and not programmers?
That is true, but its also worth pointing out a bit of context: the gopher was created by Rob Pike's, one of the creators', wife, who happens to be a professional illustrator.
Point being, its not like it was contracted to a professional design team. They took a very efficient programmer-like path: have a relative who knows design make it. And I love that as a geek, and I love the gopher, but from the perspective of a design professional its time the language got a true logo in addition to a geeky mascot.
Re: Go's New Brand
#155[deleted]
Re: Go's New Brand
#156Looks like a courier company. Very bland and corporate looking which I guess is the focus of Go as a language. It am a mediocre programmer so I really like Go, it is my main language, but it is an uninspiring language by design.
This logo looks aimed at suits and not the Go community. That might not be a bad thing for Go jobs and for Google. Open source communities often have puns in naming or plushy worthy logos and just generally playfulness which I don't see in this logo.
Re: Go's New Brand
#157At first glance I disliked it, but after a second look at it I think it's quite nice. It's bold, clean, and simple. People are generally resistant to change but it's something they'll become accustomed to fairly quick. Glad to know they kept the little guy gopher mascot.
Re: Go's New Brand
#158Ironically, it looks very generic.
DOH. I totally came here to make this very joke. You win, good gentleperson. You win.
Re: Go's New Brand
#159Logo design and acceptance (by the ones commissioning it) is a strange thing, in my experience. This new logo looks like a gas/fuel station logo or a racing logo. I can't imagine it being dissociated with these categories. The older gopher one, though kinda whimsical, was nicer, cuter and amenable to be modified to indicate different things in different contexts. This new logo is static and is the opposite of the old one in many ways.
New logo designs, of things that have been around for sometime, invite derision and ridicule (and for good measure). Getting used to such decisions will take time.
Re: Go's New Brand
#160Caveat: I'm a software developer who's worked in agencies for half of my 20 year career. A few thoughts: 1. Branding is hard: everybody things they can do it. Creative direction and art direction are really, really hard. If you haven't seen the "Make my logo bigger cream" video, go watch it, and then have some grace with the Go team. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgcX0y1Nzhs 2. A brand is WAY more than a logo. I ge…
I see that "Brand Guide" as style over substance personified:
> Roboto is a contemporary sans serif typeface designed for readability.
That's an oxymoron: "sans serif typeface designed for readability".
Thin sans serif body text is how you show you hate your reader's eyes.
And they didn't even run a damn spell-checker over the thing:
> For additional background and guideance (sic)
(Points for using the correct word "typeface" in lieu of "font" tho. Are you watching Woz!?)