Yep, we said it. The new Windows 8 logo is pretty ugly. It actually looks a lot like the Windows 1.0 logo, only slightly worse. Say what you will about using big kitties as the title and logo for an operating system, at least the OS X logo doesn’t look like it was drawn by a 10 year-old using Microsoft Paint.
Buster Hein is a freelance writer who lives in Phoenix, Arizona. Twitter: @bst3r.
74 responses to “The Official Windows 8 Logo Is Ugly”
very ugly, apple ftw.
I’m not a fan of it, but it’s not ugly. It’s just simplistic, and in line with their Metro style. Anyway, it’s not like you know anything about design.
Sweet mother of God, that’s uglier than that fat rapper on YouTube.
http://youtu.be/dIqN7Cj2Sjw
It’s odd that I just read an article this morning about this logo. It was created by Paula Scher of Pentagram Studios. For those who aren’t in the graphic design community: she’s famous. Her concept was to simplify the logo back down to a window, because as she puts it: “your name is Windows. Why are you a flag?”
Sure, it’s simple. It’s meant to be. And yes, the Apple and OS X logos are both beautiful, but they’re also needlessly complicated. They’re filled with reflections, bevels, and other “Web 2.0” nonsense that, from a design standing, serves no purpose and therefore shouldn’t be there.
Personally, I think Scher did a great job on the Windows 8 logo.
EDIT: I want to mention this was posted by a die-hard Apple fanboy. I’m backing up Scher and her logo design, not Microsuck.
Meh.
you’re right. i don’t know anything about design.
I’d shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders.
I like the logo. I think that Paula Scher did a great job. But for those crying about it being simple, that is exactly the way everything is moving. A simplistic approach to everything. Isn’t that what Apple is all about and what Windows 8/Metro are moving to?
Simple apps, targeted with minimal effort. Simple everything, so it seems fitting to me.
btw, I am not saying that I buy into the simple everything approach. Just making an observation.
Bam!
Neither do Microsoft, it would seem.
not ugly, just boring, montone and not exactly inspiring?
I submitted mine, but I don’t think they’ve already made up their minds. :(
http://themacadvocate.com/2012…
There is always beauty in Simplicity. Just because it does not have a Drop Shadow or Multiple Colors should it give way to someone slamming it. I love that I switched over to using a Mac last year, although I really do not care for the Blind Smearing Apple Fanbois/girls love to do.
Scher met her objective and I like that she simplified it, but why not keep some of the waviness of the flag? I understand dropping the gradients and multiple colors. But that flag element has decades of branding behind it. To me the simplified window on a slant doesn’t fit.
I’m sure she explored many ideas and ultimately Microsoft gets to decide which version. But it just seems like there could of been a better version.
I love two things about this article:
1) Buster offers an informed, thought-out critique of the exact flaws of the Windows 8 logo, and doesn’t simply say “It’s ugly” with nothing to back it up, as though it’s simply obvious why it’s ugly. He also clearly knows who the designer of the logo is, and doesn’t require one of his readers to supply that information for him.
2) Clicking on the image of previous Windows logos opens a much larger version of the graphic, and not a significantly smaller one, which make it nearly impossible to make out anything.
Queue a suit by the Hellenic Navy:
you don’t need to “know about design” (that’s very subjective btw), to know when an identity is bad, u even said is simplistic (superficial, oversimple, oversimplified; shallow), opposed to minimalist, which is the kind of design that uses few, but strong elements to get to the point. Windows 8 identity doesn’t get anywhere. Btw, here’s the identity discussed by people who “know” about design http://goo.gl/5nPjR
I agree with Mitch, Apple’s been known for their overkill on the bevels and reflections. I do actually like the simplicity to the new logo and plays along nicely with their Metro style.
Sheltand Islands too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S…
you don’t need to “know about design” (that’s very subjective btw), to know when an identity is bad, u even said is simplistic (superficial, oversimple, oversimplified; shallow), opposed to minimalist, which is the kind of design that uses few, but strong elements to get to the point. Windows 8 identity doesn’t get anywhere. Btw, here’s the identity discussed by people who “know” about design http://goo.gl/5nPjR
Ugly as new Cult of Mac blue logo
what about windows Millennium?
Kinda like Windows.
Just making a burn on some low hanging fruit.. Microsoft is really trying to innovate and I wish them luck, but this logo is a bit Meh. The angle of the logo makes the TM stands out more than is should IMO. This gives it a cold bureaucratic corporate in your face feel, especially in the age in when EVERYONE is getting pretty sick and tired of copyright lawsuits.
I love one thing about your comment:
1) Brian Hogg did not completely devastate this sad blog post :)
I don’t think it’s that bad. Better than the overdressed logos they’ve been using to date and more evocative of Metro.
Sorry all you artists and designers, but my first impression was wow simple, clean, boring, and it does not grab my attention. If Paula wanted to get back to “windows” she should have reversed the color pattern on the logo. At least she got the color right; blue, its how you feel when you use Windows.
Edit: Just put my finger on it reminds me of an Intel or IBM logo.
Sure it has decades of branding. But the initial concept for the wave was to emphasize “movement” That concept by itself has become cliche.
I agree that Windows had the final decision. I also am willing to bet that this was Scher’s first choice, and I say that because I’ve spent time studying her work and methods.
AGREED! The Zune interface is a baby-powdered back hand slap at typography.
I think it’s the font choice that make me hate it. Ugh it’s just so…monotone and predictable.
Ugly, Simplistic, and just happened to be designed on a Mac that was posted by COM earlier this week. The very least they could have used live tiles from WP7 to be posted into Windows 8.
Yeah. The guy who design it is learning how to use a illustration software and did the best he could, since he didn’t have any CorelDraw nearby…
As is the OS!
My thoughts? Google stole the widows colours for Chrome, Microsoft wants no association with that. (Seriously, Chrome logo is a twisted Mjcrosoft logo)
Man… a logo is defined by shape, not by graphic effects. It is true, Apple embellished their logo a bit, but if you remove all the effects you will reveal a very balanced shape. Which I can not say about the new Windows 8 logo. First thing first I find it very disproportionate. Secondly, it’s not simple… it’s simplistic … it looks like it’s not finished. TM and R? Are you kidding me? It’s good they did not trademark the “8” though. I don’t comment on Paula’s reputation, but I’m 100% sure this is a committee design, and Balmer took the final decision.
Anyone with any sense of design will tell you it’s not ugly. It’s minimalistic and simple. Is it monotone and maybe not the most inspiring logo? Probably.
It makes me sad when fans of a product/company star bashing other products just becuase it was not done by their company of preference… :(
I would have to agree. They’re trying to say “We’re not cluttered anymore. We’re a clean easy to use OS.” Their logo did just that. I don’t care for windows, but the logo is not ugly.
Love it or hate it, underneath it all its still Windows.
That logo is ugly! I liked the Vista orb even though Vista sucked itself!
That logo is ugly! I liked the Vista orb even though Vista sucked itself!
I think it is their best Windows logo so far. Not that I would switch to Windows after my Apple-powered liberation of a few years ago. But simple minimalist designs always look better than multicolored complex logos.
The color choice is awful.
Ugly would be akin to repulsive, I think it would be going a bit far to be repulsed by 4 boxes with a cross going through them.
I can understand why people would be underwhelmed by it, but ugly? Comes across as Windows bashing out of habit.I don’t particularly mind it, it is fairly simplistic to a fault but could be a grower.Simple logos and designs like this need the strong product to do the talking for them, that’s where it’s real weakness may lie.I agree with the above comment, color choice is awful. Reminds me of some faded pharmaceutical product.
The logo needs some colour and a lighter ‘weighted’ font.
This image shows the logo listed above, a slightly altered logo which retains the blue look, then a colourful one. I think with a splash of colour, this logo would look much, much better.
http://i1038.photobucket.com/a…
Thoughts?
I always love it when something is terrible and the grad students come out to say “you think it’s ugly because you don’t understand the theory behind it”. Fantastic.
To 99% of people it looks like a business card their father tried to make in Word, but 1% of design specialists will appreciate past the ugly to its technical qualities (which I’m pretty sure are supposed to be based on research that determined what ratios and proportions are pleasing). Its post modern early Etruscan dumpster-fire theory you Philistines! :)
The logo perspective is the wrong way around, no? When I look at it my eyes follow the slope back down and then I dont see the Windows 8 writing? I study photography/design stuff online, and Ive read how our eyes work from the left of the image to the right.
Apart from this flaw, I dont think its ugly, just a little cold because of the blue colour. Its design is simplistic, rather like Apples logo and font. I can see a law suit coming on ;)
I also agree. I think the issue is how monochromatic it is. But, the simplicity is appealing.
At least it’s not Orange
Not sure if I’d agree with your “disproportionate” comment, but okay. TM and R aren’t optional, those are legally binding and necessary, no designer gets around it. As my last comment, looking at any logo just by itself can be difficult. I’ll be more interested in seeing how they implement the logo (ie how, where, and why they use it) before I give it a full critique.
They need to make their os as simple and minimalistic as their new logo is. And oh yeah finally a window, what the hell was with that multicolored flag crap for eons? They need to redesign their os a lot more design wise than just putting the tile view with html 5 bs. I’ve had a mac for two months and a windows computer of some sort for 16 years and I can tell you this much, I’m not going to upgrade to windows 8. That tile interface can burn in hell!
yes if you rip of something to its fundamentals, it becomes minimal and -not suprisingly- simple… and yes if you add perspective to it, it looks modern, BUT this doesnt help it being NOT boring.. Minimal and Simple is not enough, it should also be WITTY!
well the apple logo itself is also quite minimalist without any addons as for the osx logo the web 2.0 nonse as you put it is kept to the minimum, as for the logo it simply lacks excitment, its just too monotone
I think they should have kept the 4 colours; they’ve become symbolic of Windows. By all means, go monochrome for printing in B&W, but I really think it would look better as this:
I didn’t know Bill Gates created the Mac with Steve Jobs!?
http://youtu.be/WZLrwgq95xw
The logo is also made on a Mac!
http://gradly.net/2012/02/18/m…
want to show their new os is simple…!
I don’t think the logo is ugly. It feels like synonym of Windows 8’s metro-style design.
With the windows 8 UI being designed on a mac. This windows 8 logo is made on a windows pc. That’s pretty clear. Most likely with the new Windows 8 as the OS and the latest and greatest version of paint. It shows what is possible on a windows pc. You cannot expect more from a company that still swears by heaving the windows registry (the biggest design flaw in modern history) as it’s holy grail.
umadbro?
Looks similar to Windows 1.0 with the windows on a slant and big ol’ 8. Rather boring.
I don’t think it speaks to the MetroUI design language at all, personally, which is very assertive and colorful. This is… bland. Not that that’s necessarily a bad thing.
Windows = Shite
Mac = slightly less shite
Mint / Ubuntu = Perfection
As a logo designer, I feel the logo really suits them:- bland, over-corporate and uninspiring ;)
http://inkbotdesign.com
she may be Paula Scher or who ever…honestly the logo is very poor and unattractive..
Trust me i have designed many logos over the year…but something like that??
please…don’t tell me is a logo! you may called minimalistic i call it childish…..it may have some appeal in kinder gardens
I just don’t get Microsoft’s love affair with the color Cyan. Everything they do has it somewhere in their designs. Enough already!
It seems to me that Cult of Mac has a state of the art logo. Firstly they don’t even have any original logo. Seriously why do you talk about others when you in first place your senseless logo is even worst then Windows? I think MS Windows logo is ok. It’s not the greatest thing on earth but is simple and ok. Just as Apple logo. Remove all gloss and so on and it’s in the same category. Just because MS doesn’t do cool stuff that doesn’t mean everything they do is crap.
Please guys stop emulating Steve Jobs.
Do you even know what HTML 5 support means?
Please take a look at the Apple logo in the “About this Mac” box. Is Apple’s chromed logotype with that streak through it beautiful? It’s weird that Microsoft looks simple and sleek and Apple is the fat chromed Lincoln now!
Note: I am an Android and Linux fan.
Windows 8 Logo: Cheap looking and boring at its attempt to be minimalist
Apple Logo: Minimalist but “powerful” in a wierd sense I can’t explain. Has sort of a subtle feel to it.
Windows 7 Logo: Better then 8’s logo and perfect for Microsoft as a logo.
Linux Mascot Logo: Cheap and Tacky
Android Logo: Good. Not great but not bad either.
So frankly, Apple has a nice logo. Really nice
Interesting assessment. That said, I disagree completely.
Windows 8: The logo works with the new “metro” UI quite well, and also returns more effectively to it’s “windows” roots. Minimalist can be boring on the surface. But the subtlety and nuance are what make it interesting.
Apple Logo: Minimalist. That’s why it’s powerful.
Windows 7 Logo: Also pretty effective, although more as a brand update than an obvious “Windows” reference. A bit too many gradients for my taste.
Tux (Linux) Logo: A great, endearing and minimalist mascot. Technically breaks some logo design rules, but is perfect for the geeks for whom it was intended.
Android Logo: Effective and minimalist in many of the same ways as the Apple logo. Also a mascot of sorts, which is always a good way to get users to connect emotionally.
As you can see, critiquing logos is not exactly a science – everyone has their opinions. But generally, large companies have effective and minimalist logos because they spend LOTS of money and time making sure of it.
In the case of Windows 8’s Logo, while it makes reference to Metro, it is much too different to the older logos that it may seem unfamiliar to a number of people. The color and shape are much too different in my opinion to be recognizable.
Well Apple has a minimalist logo. Now Windows 8 does too. Ubuntu has a minimalist one too. In my opinion, Linux could do with a new minimalistic logo that looks more professional in my opinion.
But yeah, logo preference isn’t a science and companies do spend quite some effort to make good logos. That said, Linux’s logo wasn’t exactly the product of hours of research and design to find the perfect logo.
i understand what html 5 support means. In terms of minimalism, I think the os needs to be easier to use and access different things. The flow of the os is stagnant and not re-imagined.
Funny, sounds like discussion between me and my girlfriend. “That dress is ugly”, “you don’t know anything about design!” In my opinion, design is for giving positive impression to the public, by public, I mean all the people no matter he/she knows design or not. If there is a design which only people who know design like it (not even like it, sometimes they just say it carrys “design”), but common public just simply say it is ugly, then it is a total failure, especially when it is a commerial product!
I don’t own any product from Apple and I don’t like the noob-oriented system, but I’d say, Apple gives out simple beauty that most of the people can hardly hold to it, that’s the succesfulness of “design”! After a short experience of Win 8, I’d say it will be a succesful platform because of tons of reasons but I just can’t agree with the logo and the feel of metro.
I’d say, the points you listed for the Win 8’s logo is pointless. Even me as a traditional windows user for more than 10 years, I don’t know the 1.0 logo until I saw some comments recently. Nobody(especially noob users) wants to hear the “story” behind the logo if they are not attracted by the logo in the first place.
It might “work” with the metro, but come on, anything can work with the color tiles, don’t you think the old “4 color flag” works even better? But the point is, MS gave up the most valuable mark of Windows to a very cheap looking, low efficiency, some “modern art museum” style logo(I don’t even recognize it as a logo in the first place). It is the total failure of the company value.
Bitter opining is still opining. So you’ll miss the old windows “flag”. I won’t. I like the new design, and I appreciate that Microsoft of late seems more daring and willing to risk losing business from folks like you (which they WON’T, by the way) in order to remain relevant in the long term.
Be honest: you may not like the new logo. But you’re not going anywhere – you’ll use the new OS. And in a few years you’ll probably defend this “modern art museum” style logo with the ferver you now have for the “old” logo. Because you’ll be familiar with it.