Google unveils new logo

How long do you think it will last?

[ronin]

Ummm.

Yuck.

BBC: [bbc.com...]

Official announcement: [googleblog.blogspot.co.uk...]

[EditorialGuy]

It isn't just for mobile, it's for everything. (I think it looks more boring and generic than the previous version, but maybe that's just me.)

[lucy24]

Yuck.

Took the word(s) right out of my mouth. That ugly capital G! That inexplicably skewed lower-case e! Ugh.

Is it just me, or does the "e" look like a hungry PacMan? What's just off the edge of the screen that it's waiting to gobble up?

[bill]

hmmm... Will take some getting used to...

[tangor]

Really, kiddies, you just don't get it!

A slow news day.

G is embattled here there and everywhere, so the best way to avoid the negative is to roll out a "new look" for TEXT. Which is not even RGB (the primary colors).

[TheMadScientist]

Someone, or even people, approved the change... SMH

[tangor]

Bill.... you know you'll have the rank and file begging to be able to post dancing gifs and other things, too!

[dailypress]

looks ugly... even though I may get used to it.

[Ebuzz]

Maybe they need someone to tell them that it is not the outward appearance that matters, but the inside (their practices and policies).

[bill]

Bill.... you know you'll have the rank and file begging to be able to post dancing gifs and other things, too!

Yes, we're working on it... ;)

---

Looking at the evolution of the logo over the years I can remember being a bit shocked by some of the changes, but there is a level of consistency when you see them all. After looking at this one for a few hours it's not all that bad.

[lucy24]

Will take some getting used to...

Oi! How come you can do that and us ordinary mortals can't?

:: detour to study page source ::

Nope, there definitely isn't an [ img ] button for the rest of us yet :(

[RedBar]

Is it just me, or does the "e" look like a hungry PacMan?

Not just you, that was the first thing I thought as well ... my 6 year old grand-daughter can do better than this, wait, anyone can do better than this!

[jmccormac]

Is it just me or does that bouncing dots thing in the image remind people of a shell game? :)

Regards...jmcc

[robzilla]

I don't dislike it, and I find that the previous logo looks rather dated in comparison.

[Robert Charlton]

I'm sure I'll get used to it, though I liked the old one better. I'm a fan of graceful fonts, and the last one was indeed graceful. The new font isn't clunky, but it's not really special.

This new logo might work better at small sizes, though, which I'm sure is one of the reasons they switched.

The video on the official announcement is a very good recap of Google's evolution as a search engine, with strong signals about Google's future direction in search... very much the go anywhere personal assistant model. Excellent job of using vocal sound montage and deceptively simple visuals to tell a very ambitious story. The visual center of interest on the visuals was very well planned out. It could easily have been a jumbled mess.

I thought the animation on Tuesday's logo wiping off the old and bringing on the new was also very well done, with tilting the final "e" up a nice little grace note.

[pageoneresults]

Everything you need to know about the new Google logo...

Evolving the Google Identity
[design.google.com...]

Our new logotype is set in a custom, geometric sans-serif typeface and maintains the multi-colored playfulness and rotated ‘e’ of our previous mark—a reminder that we’ll always be a bit unconventional.

Custom as in it appears they started with ITC Avant Garde Gothic Demi and then made their modifications from there. I do font massage as part of my portfolio of services and I immediately recognized that font when the announcement was made. I've done a side by side comparison and I'm almost certain Avant Garde is the base font they started with. The Avant Garde typeface was created in the late 1960s for a publication called Avant Garde. Google's previous typeface was Catull.

They put a lot of time, effort and money into the development of the new logo. I know how much is involved when you're creating a new font which they've done, it's called Product Sans.

What do I think? Well, after reading "Evolving the Google Identity", the end result achieves what Google wants - readability across the board. That appears to be the primary focus, develop a logo type and font that is 100% readable across all devices. The new logo has grown on me. When it comes to Google, it's not really the type that I identify with, it's the colors and the sequence of those colors.

ELMO DID IT!

[ChanandlerBong]

I'm glad it's now readable across devices, because before, often I didn't have a clue which site I was on. I would turn my ipad this way and that, but no, it was just drunk Chinese to me.

[jimh009]

Guess I'm in the minority. I rather like it. And the new "G" looks ok in my bookmarks toolbar, better than what was there before.

[mrengine]

Funny thing is Google probably spent millions on the design, focus groups, etc. and it looks no better than what a Fiverr gig would produce.

[Solution1]

It looks to me like the "l" and "e" at the end are too small. Maybe if these were a little bigger, I could get used to the rather large size of the "G".

As it is now, I don't like it.

[pageoneresults]

More about the new "Product Sans" typeface.
[storage.googleapis.com...]

Our logo is built on the mathematical purity of geometric circles. Product Sans reflects this but makes optical corrections for legibility.

There really is a LOT more to the new logo than most of us are "consciously" seeing. :)

[BarsamTech]

logo is better than old one, but favicon ... pfffffff

[lucy24]

it appears they started with ITC Avant Garde

Oh, how interesting. My first thought on looking at the G was "Avant Garde", but I knew their "e" doesn't look like that. Avant Garde is my favorite font that nobody has heard of. It only exists on something like 2% of computers, or I'd use it more.

[samwest]

Who cares? When the name changes to "Gone" I'll take notice.
Slow news day.

[tangor]

There really is a LOT more to the new logo than most of us are "consciously" seeing. :)

Another usable and legible sans serif font for the world to see. A reasonable tweak on helvetica, verdana, tahoma and other san serif screen fonts, very machined and mathematical with little kerning, though is short of being monospaced. We can never have enough fonts (I have more than 25,000, including weights and variants) in the world.

Product Sans is a display face, not technically designed for body text, though would not be truly offensive if used that way. Unless it is released to the general public will likely be useful only for Google properties in an image or fontface style include.

Is Product Sans likely to be popular any place other than a computer screen? Probably not, then again, Google is not known for the amount of PAPER publication(s) it does. :)

[AkGuy]

I like the flat look with their brand, it will lighten the load across a spectrum of distribution points. I like it!

[McMohan]

I try not judge the logo myself. I am too much immersed inside the Google ocean, I am sure I will have a jaundiced vision. When I reached home, the first thing my 12 year old daughter asked ~ "Did you see the new Google logo? Its awesome!" Perhaps that's how the public at large see it, may be not.

[makeupalley]

to me, the real question is why is this on the front page of webmasterworld.
is this an important news item for webmasters?

[pageoneresults]

Oh, how interesting. My first thought on looking at the G was "Avant Garde", but I knew their "e" doesn't look like that.

After further review, I'm thinking they used multiple geometric sans-serif based fonts as a starting point with "Futura" probably being one of the primary ones. Avant Garde is very close but there are certain letters where Futura is closer.

While the new design may "look" simple, the underlying logic of the simplicity is genius.

Google unveils new logo. How long do you think it will last?

This may be a keeper, at least for the foreseeable future. :)

[randle]

They put a lot of time, effort and money into the development of the new logo.

When somethings already very good, its difficult to improve upon it. In fact the chances of success are quite small, no matter how much time and money is spent. In fact, the more time spent the greater the chances your reaching for something that just isn't there and you end up taking a step back. Change for change sake.

Its not very attractive - looks like something you would see on a cereal box that was geared toward the children's market. And the favicon looks like a multi colored version of the Green Bay packers logo.

At the end of the day none of it matters, it wont have any effect on the companies products, services and market share so its really not a big deal.