241–250 of 301 posts
This 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…
Your first paragraph immediately reminded me of the logo/CI transition for one of Germany's largest hospital operators, "Helios" (subsidiary of Fresenius): "old" logo (easily recognizable as a medical institution, easily discernible "H" for "Helios"): http://www.medical-network-hessen.de/images/News/Helios_Klin... "new" logo ("H" not clearly discernable in the two green blobs, no reference to medicine at all): https:…
I've never seen either of these logos before, but in the new one I immediately see the "H" formed by the white space between the two "green blobs", which to me look like "healing hands" and which I take as a medical reference (although TBH they do make me think "chiropractor" rather than "doctor"). I don't think the new one is great, but I much prefer it to the old one, which looks like a very half-assed attempt to combine an H with the Rod of Asclepius. It's like they weren't even trying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything is about impression and perception. For example, I have observed that people treat me more seriously when I dress better than with the typical "jeans+tshirt" combo. Now, we can say this is superficial bullshit, but at the end of the day, the way you dress influence people's perception of you. So in my opinion, Go's new branding give it a more "serious" image and perhaps people unfamiliar with the language…
In this case the cliché brand identity is the jeans and t-shirt combo. Does hip branding not make a language seem juvenile? You talk about serious image, but surely you can't find more serious languages than those devoid of branding, like C and Lisp.
Caveat: 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…
Apologies, but I disagree with basically everything you're saying here. Branding isn't hard; forcing a constructed brand is hard. That's the real source of friction here. A brand might be way more than a logo, but THIS brand is not. That logo is literally the only thing this design agency contributed at all. Even the colors were already in use around the project. If the difference between "a brand" and "a logo" is "t…
Let's agree to disagree. I've been involved in dozens of branding processes. None of them were easy, from the strategy to the creative to the execution.
If the agency did their job, the brand guide _should_ feel obvious. That's how you know it's on brand.
I find this sort of comment very condescending to designers. I'n not a designer, but I've managed them. Good design is hard. Good creative is hard. Good branding is hard. This was excellent work, and if you see "marketspeak" you need to re-evaluate what good creative work looks like.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that though Python is popular independent of its branding, it definitely has a strong branding system, just less explicitly stated as go's. Their font is quite iconic, and their logo and colors more so: https://www.python.org/community/logos/
That all happened waaaay later.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your first paragraph immediately reminded me of the logo/CI transition for one of Germany's largest hospital operators, "Helios" (subsidiary of Fresenius): "old" logo (easily recognizable as a medical institution, easily discernible "H" for "Helios"): http://www.medical-network-hessen.de/images/News/Helios_Klin... "new" logo ("H" not clearly discernable in the two green blobs, no reference to medicine at all): https:…
> "H" not clearly discernable in the two green blobs, no reference to medicine at all I've never seen either of these logos before, but in the new one I immediately see the "H" formed by the white space between the two "green blobs", which to me look like "healing hands" and which I take as a medical reference (although TBH they do make me think "chiropractor" rather than "doctor"). I don't think the new one is great…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really, more like Java 1.1. Java 1.4 already had much more features and library offerings than Go still lacks.
The Go standard library is top notch, especially for networking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd agree here. It's like they tried to make the new branding as generic as they possibly could. I liked the simple, basic site that Go has always used. It seems inevitable that they'll redo the site, to include megabytes of JavaScript for features that nobody wants, like hijacked scrolling. (The site[0] for the design agency they talk about loads about 3 MB. Almost none of it is images. The site loads all that to di…
I visited the website. It just shows a big W: https://kek.gg/i/78bwZ-.png
You're not missing that much, though, since there are quite literally (yes, I counted) fifteen words on the entire home page.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything is about impression and perception. For example, I have observed that people treat me more seriously when I dress better than with the typical "jeans+tshirt" combo. Now, we can say this is superficial bullshit, but at the end of the day, the way you dress influence people's perception of you. So in my opinion, Go's new branding give it a more "serious" image and perhaps people unfamiliar with the language…
In this case the cliché brand identity is the jeans and t-shirt combo. Does hip branding not make a language seem juvenile? You talk about serious image, but surely you can't find more serious languages than those devoid of branding, like C and Lisp.