While I appreciate the work that was put into this I gotta say I really don't like it. The "slate" logo looks cold and enigmatic which is really not something that a large corporation like Microsoft generally wants to be seen as. I actually think one thing Microsoft has going for it is its familiarity, its a brand almost everyone has a history with and to the average consumer at least that a big selling point. The lettering also feels particularly generic and a little on the trendy side. Of course its all a matter of taste I imagine.
The Next Microsoft
201–210 of 355 posts
Re: The Next Microsoft
#202The slate logo is every bit as 'visually uncomfortable' as the Windows logo on that tablet. And the kinda-sorta-connecting office logo style is just plain terrible.
Re: The Next Microsoft
#203I would highly consider microsoft products if they were marketed that way...but they aren't and they never will be.
Re: The Next Microsoft
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why "Microsoft" and not "MICROSOFT"? I emphatically disagree that capitalization is merely a matter of opinion, as it can have significant ramifications in both readability [1] and trademark law, especially where marks like 'Word', 'Windows', 'Excel', 'Outlook', and 'Surface' (or 'Apple', 'Pages', 'Keynote', and 'Numbers'; or 'Android'; or 'Oracle', 'Sun', and 'Java'; or ...) are concerned. [1] http://blogs.msdn.com/…
I agree that capitalization is not mere opinion. I was asking why not capitalize a name? Makes Microsoft sounds like some stuff, not some business.
There's something (unintentionally?) cyberpunk about this.
Not to be confused with the present-day software company, in Neuromancer a "microsoft" is a chip used in conjunction with a cybernetic wetware implant located behind the ear. Microsofts grant the user new abilities as long as the microsoft is plugged in. For example, a French language microsoft might be used to temporarily allow the user to speak French. The term refers to a small, portable piece of embedded software, hence "micro" and "soft."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprawl_trilogy#Glossary
For those who don't recall, Microsoft Corporation was not always a corporate giant; at the time the author wrote this book, Microsoft was one of the many small companies that made software for those newfangled microcomputers. Microsoft the company was started in the mid-1970's; the company name was registered in 1976 and went public in 1986.
Just a couple of years before this novel was written, most software for microcomputers came in a plastic bag with a disk and some photocopied instructions (if you were lucky).
Re: The Next Microsoft
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you allowed to give your students assignments that involve redesigning existing brands? I did not go to school for design, so I really have no idea if this is allowed, but what would happen if you told the students that their assignment was to create an ad for Nike? I'd jump at something like that.
Or if you can't do that, tell them to invent a competitor and brand that?
I don't think that works as well. Doing an ad for nike feels cool, and you get to brag about it on your facebook page.
Re: The Next Microsoft
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft largely resolves this conflict in a way that works for consumers but not for tech pundits: they bring the same B2B customer service principles to their consumer product support channels (e.g. three years of Xbox repairs for the red-ring of death - on a 90 day warranty no less). Keep in mind that Metro is exactly what enterprise wants. Just listen to the good people at 37signals.
Could you give us a link to what the good people at 37signals have to say?
Re: The Next Microsoft
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right. I found it. Probably not the best example of a ubiquitous company with an instantly recognizable logo, unless it was just a joke.
With the website you are on it is highly likely that many people would instantly recognize the logo. Maybe not the general population, but here, definitely.
Sure. Just weird to include it between Nike and Google as a company big enough to use simple shapes as logos. I didn't recognize it (obviously). Not a bad logo, though.
Target has almost the same logo just with circles and would be a better example.
Re: The Next Microsoft
#208Dear everybody, Are you paying attention? This is how you build a portfolio. Did microsoft ask this person to do this? No. But he did it, and it's brilliant, and now he can put it in his portfolio under "speculative work". And then he gets a job doing this. I can't tell you how many people I talk to (I live in a college town, and frequently go to bars and strike up conversations with people) who just finished, or are…
Where does the Xbox fit in this New Microsoft, though ? There was no mention of it, while it's become a big part of Microsoft business over the years.
Re: The Next Microsoft
#209So, I'm not a huge fan, but definitely an interesting attempt. Some commentary, because why not: - As others have noted, the "moonshot" imagery is a good idea and manages to seem classic and futuristic at the same time. - The wordmark is a little cliche (lowercase sans wooo), but it looks okay. I like the beveled foot of the t, which provides echoes of the slanted logo, but feel like it's just an afterthought right n…
I didn't see the 'slates fighting' in Office, I saw them as a bouquet, given that Office is made of several items that work together.
To me it is reminiscent of the excel logo.
Re: The Next Microsoft
#210Dear everybody, Are you paying attention? This is how you build a portfolio. Did microsoft ask this person to do this? No. But he did it, and it's brilliant, and now he can put it in his portfolio under "speculative work". And then he gets a job doing this. I can't tell you how many people I talk to (I live in a college town, and frequently go to bars and strike up conversations with people) who just finished, or are…
This can go either way. Remember when dcurtis did a unsolicited spec redesign for the American Airlines website? We here at HN tore him a new one (justifiably so, it ignored so many critical aspects of the business, and came off as entirely impractical). When you do something like this, you better be sure you nail every single angle of it. FWIW, I normally hate spec redesigns - they're usually positioned in a pompous…
Worst case you get a reputation as being a bit opinionated, and learn a whole lot about the kind of things people are going to poke holes in.