
Google’s look, evolved - rryan
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/09/google-update.html
======
raldi
2008 HN discussion from when the outgoing "little blue g" favicon was
introduced:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=211518](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=211518)

In it, Dustin Curtis criticizes Google (rather rightly, in my hindsight-
enhanced opinion) for a Marissa-Mayeresque design process of "Make 300 logo
variants with pseudorandom permutations, and then pick your favorite." Looking
at those permutations now
([http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_7ZYqYi4xigk/SEnK37orPGI/AAAAAAAAAp...](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_7ZYqYi4xigk/SEnK37orPGI/AAAAAAAAAp4/gR3gdZ6sgbU/s1600-h/favicon_iterations.jpg))
it's obvious (again, with the benefit of hindsight) that they were all very
inside-the-box. Apparently nobody even considered trying a different font.

This pg comment from that thread turned out to be particularly insightful,
given today's news:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=211649](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=211649)

~~~
nostrademons
The reason they did that was so that they could build up data on the effect of
each factor independently. That way, when the bigwigs get into a meeting and
discuss alternative designs, they can predict "Ok, this will have $X effect on
revenue but will decrease search latency by Y ms, which itself will have +$X
effect on revenue."

I was the first engineer on the first visual redesign that tried to change
_everything_ about the page [1]. One of our biggest problems was that since we
tried to change everything at once, the metrics went haywire, and we couldn't
know if a change was because we introduced a left-nav (okay, actually we kinda
could, because we'd experimented with a left-nav on its own beforehand) or
because we changed the line spacing or because we cleaned up the logo or
because we added icons. There was effectively no way of "debugging" the user;
when user behavior varied from expected, we didn't know why.

I've got plenty of other stories from that era, but they aren't really fit for
a public forum. Happy to discuss privately. (Kinda ironic when the non-Googler
says that to the Googler...)

[1] [http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/spring-
metamorphosis-...](http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/spring-
metamorphosis-googles-new-look.html)

~~~
jacquesm
I understand the urge to try to maximize on stuff like this, but in the end it
loses sight of what's most important: the quality of the results. And
sometimes I feel that a lot of valuable engineering time and effort is wasted
on making things prettier and better monetizing in the short term when in the
longer term the better search results are what would really move the needle.

And most A/B testing focuses on the very short time effects of the change (and
change all by itself, even change for the worse can have a short term positive
effect just because something is new). On another note: A/B testing has
another limitation, which is that you're optimizing for the bulk, please one
person more and you more or less automatically annoy another.

~~~
nostrademons
There are plenty of talented people working on ranking and webspam too.

There's a limit to how parallelizable those problems are. At some point, more
people working on an algorithm doesn't make it faster or better, it just makes
it more confusing and worse. Mythical Man Month applies as much to Google as
it did to IBM. And so you might as well put people onto optimizing the rest of
the page as well, because they'll do more good there than having yet another
cook in the ranking algorithm kitchen. (I'd argue that there are too many
people working at Google in general...I left, so I'm no longer contributing to
that problem. But then, there were probably too many people when I joined, so
I contributed to it for 5 years.)

------
stormen
I love it. Quite often logo redesign processes gets completely out of hand,
but this was a significant improvement over the older version: Cleaner, more
modern and beautiful in all its simplicity. Bravo!

~~~
bradleyjg
I don't like it. It seems more juvenile in the same way comic sans gets
criticized for. The loss of character on the lower case g is especially
unfortunate.

 _Non est disputandum_ I guess.

~~~
thrusong
I really like this new look, but really hated Facebook's move away from
Klavika earlier this year. This to me feels more friendly, fun, and still has
personality whereas I feel Facebook's new logo is dull and lifeless.

~~~
chronic41
To me, Facebook's logo is far better than Google. Facebook is much less
childish.

~~~
thrusong
I absolutely love Facebook's brand, with the Klavika logo. I just don't like
the new typemark.

------
hellbanner
Google's userinterface, in gmail.com, at least, has gotten progressively
worse, and worse, and worse, and worse since its inception in my experience
and everyone I've asked about this.

... don't know what else to say. I question if their designers use their own
products.

Latest bugs worth mentioning: Chrome still has an issue that can cause
microphone to not work in Hangouts. Gmail.com has added a "Your plug-in google
talk will no longer be supported soon" ...

~~~
DanBC
Google maps is _incredibly frustrating_ to use. I can't understand what user
testing they do.

~~~
qq66
What changes would you make to Google Maps, with a basic set of assumptions?
(let's say, you can't dramatically increase the cost, you can't hurt Google
revenue sources, and you have a team of ~20 engineers to work on the changes).

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
I'd change it back to the way it was prior to the redesigns.

It used to work fine. The big problem with the current version is the almost
complete absence of legible affordances.

There are all kinds of buttons with logos on them that do stuff. But until you
learn what they do, their functions are mysterious.

Basic things like Traffic used to be obvious, one-click features. Now they're
hidden in the burger menu, so at best they're two clicks away, and at worst a
non-trivial percentage of users has no idea they exist. (Etc.)

~~~
tedunangst
Sticking the UI over top of the map really is silly. The 10 pixels of map I
can still see between the search box and the border of the screen are
completely useless, but make the page considerably noisier (more
edges/transitions).

~~~
tajen
I too enjoyed the side bar. It's mysterious but it made me feel like there was
more real estate. The map wasn't covered with boxes, whereas in the new design
the 40% left handside of the map is unusable. Also, when searching a place, it
resets the zoom, it zooms until I see the inside of that place (such as, the
city center), whereas I generally want to see where the city is located with a
bit more context. Same for a path: it puts the origin and destination on the
viewport edges, whereas I generally want to locate the route, therefore see
slightly more context. Slightly enough that it's painful.

------
munaf
Here's a bit more info on the design process:

[https://design.google.com/articles/evolving-the-google-
ident...](https://design.google.com/articles/evolving-the-google-identity/)

~~~
abalos
> including building a special variant of our full-color logo that is only 305
> bytes, compared to our existing logo at ~14,000 bytes.

That's _huge_ for low-bandwidth users.

~~~
robryk
Why? This is one of the most cacheable resources. Also, it's displayed
reasonably often, so I'd expect it to be rarely evicted from the device-local
cache.

~~~
mehta
Even if it isn't evicted very often, the first time it is loaded, it will be
~3 times faster, it will take up less storage thus better for others and
(probably) easier to render.

~~~
sondr3
And on the scale Google operates on it'll save quite a bit for them as well to
serve it.

------
mortenjorck
What's most interesting to me is not so much the logotype itself (which is
nice; the tilted 'e' is the perfect sans reference to the angled stroke in
Catull), but that one of the top-tier identity components is a unified loading
spinner.

While Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft all have their own branded spinners,
Google has probably had both the most visually adventuresome and the most
inconsistent spinners across all its products. Beyond unifying these, though,
one can see this as a step past mere unification, and an attempt to take
ownership of an unavoidable part of the cloud paradigm, latency. It's a pretty
interesting move in terms of branding-UX coordination.

~~~
digikata
Maybe they're backing the spinner with latency data collection across all
their apps...

------
mahouse
I'll be the first one to say it: I liked the older better. There was literally
nothing wrong with it, it did not look dated at all.

~~~
raldi
We've been using the new logo internally for a week. Give it a day, and then
go back and look at the old logo, and _then_ tell me how dated it looks.

~~~
ilovecomputers
My series of responses within the span of 30 minutes:

* "It looks like fridge magnets for kids! I don't like it; the iconic lower case g is gone cause of designers obsession of san-serif == modern."

* "Glad that they continue to embrace their playful culture tho."

* "You know what, it's growing on me."

* "Haha, they tilted the e, how cute. Oh god what is happening to me!?"

* "Geeze, how old is Google books? They haven't even updated the logo!"

~~~
svckr
Same here. Amazingly, the first inflection point was after about 60 seconds of
pure disgust.

Not into that G yet. I think I'll call them oogle from now on.

------
makecheck
Oddly, I _prefer_ the "crayon-grained" version of it that appears at the end
of their home page's scribbling animation just before it turns into solid
colors.

The solid colors seem too "loud" to me; they should probably be pastel. I
think they are more noticeable now because the letters are so thick.

Also, the capital "G" looks wrong; I think the part that looks most strange is
the upper curl, which doesn't seem to go far enough.

~~~
ececconi
You're totally right, the solid color version hurts my eyes looking at it
because it's so bright and loud.

------
TazeTSchnitzel
This makes me sad, much like how Microsoft's logo change made me sad.

Microsoft's italic bold lettering was iconic. It was the logo the company had
used for the longest time, the logo that adorned their best (and their worst)
products. It was a logo that everyone had seen, everyone knew, that was
incredibly recognisable.

And then they threw that all away, and created intentional brand confusion by
swapping their logo for the _Windows_ logo, then completely replacing Windows'
logo with a grayscale tilted pane of glass.

Why? Why fix what's not broken? Why replace the well-known with the
unrecognisable?

Google's logo, the one they used from 1999-2010, was also iconic. It was
easily readable: it had a typeface made for legibility and style, not made to
be mathematically simple. It contrasted well with any background. It was the
logo that everyone knew.

And while this particular change isn't quite so drastic as Microsoft's was,
it's still strange to me. Why is it necessary? People surely won't think less
of Google for sticking with the one they've used for so long. It doesn't make
them look dated: they had already tweaked the hues and the drop-shadow
slightly so it fits in. And the company's not headed in some radical new
direction that they need to symbolically gesture about.

I don't get it. I probably never will.

~~~
geowwy
People felt the same way when Microsoft got rid of their old 80s logo. There
was a 'Save the Blibbet' campaign to bring it back.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
Huh, so they did:
[http://blogs.msdn.com/b/larryosterman/archive/2005/07/14/438...](http://blogs.msdn.com/b/larryosterman/archive/2005/07/14/438777.aspx)

------
artursapek
The favicon still hasn't changed:
[https://www.google.com/favicon.ico](https://www.google.com/favicon.ico)

I can't imagine the nightmare it must updating the logo for a company like
Google. There must be so many forgotten places that will be missed.

~~~
josso
I visited Google Dublin last year and found that they still used the old
beveled Google-logo for e.g. letters and papers. Not the slightly beveled logo
from 2010-2013, but the old one from 1999-2010.

~~~
dheera
The Google app engine also still uses the beveled logo with the shadow.

------
roymurdock
Just when I thought we might be starting to pivot away from flat design - does
anyone know of a different design paradigm that is being used by
smaller/fringe designers who are tired of flat/minimal UX/UI?

~~~
hodwik
Flat design is easy to accomplish for designers who never learned how to draw,
or do computer modeling.

Unfortunately, most design programs don't actually teach these foundational
skills. That means there are a lot of designers out there who are forced to
work in an oversimplified print-design style to hide their incompetence.

As someone who hires for this stuff, finding skilled designers is unimaginably
hard.

I hear designers constantly complaining about the lack of jobs. They're full
of it. The problem is the lack of skilled applicants. Design has become filled
with lazy people, while being arguably one of the hardest fields to be good
at. I've had ads out in a major US city for months for a very good paying
design job, and have yet to see a portfolio that looked even moderately
professional.

That's really where this all comes from, flat design hides designer
incompetence.

~~~
triangleman
Do you have an email where I could forward you a resume for a designer?

~~~
hodwik
I assume by resume you mean portfolio?

richard [|)07] laborde [@7] gmale

~~~
triangleman
Yes, portfolio. Thank you.

------
monochromatic
Doesn't really do anything for me one way or the other. It's fine, but so was
the previous design. It's just... meh.

I find myself reminded of an xkcd strip:
[https://xkcd.com/915/](https://xkcd.com/915/)

------
bluthru
So how far can Google take the "kid friendly" aesthetic?

Anyone remember Colorforms?
[http://www.liveandlearn.com/shop/images/Original_Colorforms....](http://www.liveandlearn.com/shop/images/Original_Colorforms.jpg)

~~~
deveac
I was always a Lite-Brite man myself...

[http://i.imgur.com/8efMGD0.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/8efMGD0.jpg)

------
jaysonelliot
I understand _why_ Google needed to update their identity, but it feels like
this logo has gone through endless committee after committee.

It doesn't actually convey any brand to me, just a very safe interpretation of
Material Design. That seems short-sighted to me, since an identity typically
lasts much longer than a design language.

~~~
EarthLaunch
The animation on google.com even implies it was designed by committee, as
apparently separate hands reach up to place each letter. I thought that was
funny.

------
leavjenn
Not only the logo, they have changed the size of search box:
[http://searchengineland.com/google-adds-more-height-to-
their...](http://searchengineland.com/google-adds-more-height-to-their-search-
box-229474)

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
And not for the first time! I remember when the buttons and search field had
your OS's default button height and styling. Those days are sadly long-gone.

~~~
kuschku
Fear not! You can have the 1999 logo and search experience again right now!
[http://www.google.com/custom](http://www.google.com/custom)

------
vladdanilov
I expected more attention to detail for a project this big. They are using the
new logos in a few places now. All suffer from various problems. The one on
the Google Official Blog ([http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/google-
update.html](http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/google-update.html)) has
hinting problems most noticeably on "l" symbol (zoomed version –
[http://i.imgur.com/1kRZB5o.png](http://i.imgur.com/1kRZB5o.png)). The same
with the logo on the Google Translate
([https://translate.google.com/](https://translate.google.com/)) and with the
presented Google Logotype on the Google Design blog
([https://design.google.com/articles/evolving-the-google-
ident...](https://design.google.com/articles/evolving-the-google-identity/),
[https://g-design.storage.googleapis.com/production/v5/assets...](https://g-design.storage.googleapis.com/production/v5/assets/renditions/g-logo-360@2x.png)).
The black SVG logo at the bottom of the last page has some unkempt figures and
a leftover line.

On a positive note, the logo image
([http://googleblog.blogspot.ru/2015/09/google-
update.html](http://googleblog.blogspot.ru/2015/09/google-update.html)) is
well optimized with Zopfli
([https://github.com/google/zopfli](https://github.com/google/zopfli)).
However, I don't see why the new logo is smaller (from here –
[https://design.google.com/articles/evolving-the-google-
ident...](https://design.google.com/articles/evolving-the-google-identity/)).
I could bring down the size of the previous one
([http://i.imgur.com/lfmoqgP.png](http://i.imgur.com/lfmoqgP.png)) to 8 174
bytes (originally 14 022 bytes) vs 13 804 bytes for the new one. Of course,
SVG versions are both much smaller.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
This reminds me of how Microsoft, when they changed their logo to a squared
off Windows flag, didn't even _try_ to hint it and it was a blurry mess
everywhere.

------
bsaul
Great design, but it's funny how you can infer what a company actually _is_ by
contrast to what it's trying too hard to be. Google has a very childish logo
(the doodle even emphasis that) to have the company look like a fun and happy
company, whereas people fear it's going to become the next big brother.

When you see it that way, it's almost an admission of guilt. No company would
put so much emphasis on child imageries if it weren't fearing so much. Google
is accused of controlling your life, so it's using the symbol of the exact
opposite of "in control", aka small children.

~~~
CardenB
I think you're trying a bit too hard here. Google has had this sort of
branding for a long time, including pre-snowden.

~~~
bsaul
They went from "lively and fun" with bright colors to "childish" with the font
on this latest iteration ( once again, the doodle says it all). Given the
company's bank account, and the fact that we're talking about the company's
main logo, i don't think this kind of evolution is only due to one designer's
decision.

------
ianbicking
I like it except I wish they had kept the old kind of lower case g (TIL it's
called a "double story g":
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G#/media/File:LowercaseG.svg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G#/media/File:LowercaseG.svg)),
there's something pleasantly unnecessary about that kind of g.

~~~
biot
Yeah I like it too. And thanks for the "double story g"... I always referred
to it as "those scissor handles g": [http://www.ekal.pk/barber-scissors/fancy-
scissors-070s.jpg](http://www.ekal.pk/barber-scissors/fancy-scissors-070s.jpg)

------
sosuke
This font fits in perfectly with the Alphabet theme. Straight out of a kids
book.

~~~
xwes
In hindsight, the Alphabet page has had the uppercase G from the new Google
logo all along.

[https://abc.xyz/](https://abc.xyz/)

------
27182818284
Wait, what. At roughly the 1:34 mark, the voice pulls up photos of her kid
with a pumpkin. Do you have to tag your photos with "pumpkin" first or is the
recent "Choose the picture of waffles" in Recaptcha fueling that?

~~~
bad_user
No, they are automatically classifying photos. If you have photos in Google
Photos, you can try it out with words such as "forest", or "dog", or "grill".
It's pretty cool and scary at the same time :-)

~~~
27182818284
I did not know they were doing anything other than identifying faces that
you've already tagged. Grabbing the pumpkin, whatever out of the photo is just
wonderful.

~~~
thrownaway2424
It's even better than that. It can recognize landmarks. I can ask it "Show me
pictures of myself in Paris" and it finds 25-year-old scans that I uploaded
that haven't got any kind of geographic data in the EXIF.

------
aaronbrethorst
From the video: "Think about how far Google has evolved from the ten blue
links."

I do, and it's not always a good thing.

Also, I don't think I'm a fan of that new typeface. The cutesiness with the
rotated 'e' on the end is sort of teeth-grating to me: it breaks up the rhythm
of the rest of the wordmark.

~~~
Lewisham
The slanted e is a callback to the previous Google logo, which also had a
slanted e.

~~~
phragg
The O's were slightly tilted too, no?

~~~
shaftway
They still are in the new logo. They're perfect circles, but they've been
rotated to the exact same angle as the old "o"s.

~~~
mahouse
how do you rotate a perfect circle

~~~
ben1040
that's... the joke.

------
zmxv
I ran a survey to gauge the reaction toward the logo change and shared the
results at [http://blog.zmxv.com/2015/09/crowds-reaction-to-googles-
new-...](http://blog.zmxv.com/2015/09/crowds-reaction-to-googles-new-
logo.html)

HN discussion thread:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10161043](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10161043)

------
harrumph
Not an improvement in the multicolor "G" icon - the weakest color (yellow)
effectively bisects the G vertically at a hot point along the horizontal axis
- hot because it's the very leftmost spot that most eyes will encounter first.

------
ArekDymalski
I'm really glad they have finally left the serif font behind. No matter how
much I read about the benefits of serifs, I can't fight the immediate
association: serif = old, sans-serif = modern.

~~~
iso8859-1
That's too simplistic, don't you agree? This is exactly why I prefer serif.

------
unicornporn
Many tech companies seem to be rolling out new designs at an increasing rate
rate.

A bit of a side note, but I've recently been pondering for how long material
design will stay with us. I'd guess when the developer for that last Jelly
Beanish app in my phone has finally made the switch, Google releases their new
design guidelines and the process begins again...

~~~
spankalee
Material Design is more of a living standard. It's constantly being updated,
clarified and expanded. They even have changelogs. I'd guess that it's
extremely likely to be replaced anytime soon, but will evolve over time.

~~~
EarthLaunch
This reads like fashion discussion. "Skinny jeans just look better
aesthetically, they'll never go out of style." Give it a few years.

------
jader201
Wow, Gruber's not a fan [1]. Can't say I'm surprised, but this seems harsh
even coming from him.

[1] [http://daringfireball.net/linked/2015/09/01/google-
logo](http://daringfireball.net/linked/2015/09/01/google-logo)

------
mh-cx
I'm using an original Google Nexus 7 (2012 with latest Android) and try to
view this page using an original Google browser (Chrome) and this is one of
the few pages that make chrome crash. Same on my motorola razr i.

I love it when pages that talk about “cross platform“ behave this way.

~~~
jraedisch
Same on Vanilla Android/Chrome on Motorola G2.

------
compbio
I only noticed this when I saw it on LinkedIn side-by-side.

The Microsoft logo and the Google logo are very similar in style:
[http://i.imgur.com/s7kR6jJ.png](http://i.imgur.com/s7kR6jJ.png)

The blocks in the middle are the colors from both the logos.

~~~
Nadya
I found it hard to compare colors using your blocks, so I remade your image:
[http://i.imgur.com/auB75fj.png](http://i.imgur.com/auB75fj.png)

The yellow is very, very similar.

------
arianvanp
Seems very similar to the new lenovo logo

~~~
Noonespecial2
And in style to the 'new' eBay logo.

------
mudil
That looks like Bauhaus font, that used to be so common for all things Atari.

Here is an example:

[http://www.atarimania.com/2600/boxes/hi_res/yars_revenge_col...](http://www.atarimania.com/2600/boxes/hi_res/yars_revenge_color_cart_6.jpg)

(look at the first line, with its slanted e -- like the last e in Google.)

More observations on Atari Abahaus here:

[http://atariage.com/forums/topic/164954-deans-foods-using-
at...](http://atariage.com/forums/topic/164954-deans-foods-using-atari-font-
to-market-to-our-generation/)

~~~
bhauer
I love Atari, and I can see some small similarities (the capital 'G' and the
lowercase 'e'). But overall, I can't say that I agree. For what it's worth, I
like the Bauhaus font a bit more.

------
christop
I'm sure Groupon will be just thrilled to see all the Google app icons
updating to contain a bold, sans-serif letter G.

[http://www.androidpolice.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/09/nexu...](http://www.androidpolice.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/09/nexus2cee_Gs-728x392.jpg)

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.groupon](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.groupon)

------
lackbeard
The logo they used from 1999 - 2010 [1] was the best. It was clear,
distinctive, and pleasing to the eye. The one they used after that until 2013
was a step backwards, but not too much worse. Those two are better than the
rest by a huge margin.

This latest logo is... I don't have the right words. Looks daycare copy.
Welcome to Google. We're not useful, we're safe.

1\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_logo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_logo)

------
therealmarv
Do not like the "Sans Serif" trend. Serifs can be good and Google looked
awesome with serifs.

------
c3534l
None of Google's logos seem particularly good or interesting to me. From a
business standpoint, pre-school style design is probably the image they want
to portray; that Google is very simple and easy to use. If you're going to
criticize the logo, criticize it on it's merits as a logo: giving the first
impression you want to foster in it's users. Not just whether or not you think
it looks prettier.

------
compbio
Some weird alignment with the "l" in Google. It's 2 pixels off the baseline:
[http://i.imgur.com/BeSYG3a.png](http://i.imgur.com/BeSYG3a.png)

It also does not work with the country subtitle. These are touching the letter
"e", perhaps showing they forgot to test this with different country names and
x-height.

------
shiftpgdn
For a company with so much money I find it amazing how often they turn out
products with ugly/unfriendly user interfaces.

~~~
shogun21
Google is putting a much greater emphasis on design, and their recent products
show.

What recent products are you thinking of?

~~~
d23
I don't usually find their interfaces ugly per se; if anything I find they've
made sacrifices in the user experience for the sake of making things prettier.

I can't count the times Google Maps inexplicably zooms out to show me my
directions to a coffee shop 10 minutes from me at the level of the entire
state. Or when I type in "home" (which I have set), it suggesting I travel to
a place in London called "Home Sweet Home" (I'm from the US). Or sometimes
just zooming all the way out to show me my location at the global scale when I
want to know what's near me.

------
johnchristopher
The video reminds me of [EPIC
2014]([http://idorosen.com/mirrors/robinsloan.com/epic/](http://idorosen.com/mirrors/robinsloan.com/epic/)).

------
dchichkov
Nice design, but dynamic logos for two days in a row... I don't know...

If anyone needs that, to disable these logos just add this URL:

    
    
       https://www.google.com/logos/doodles/*
    

To your ad-block list...

------
jbellis
I'm going to miss Catull.

~~~
malkia
First I thought you meant Catmull, as in Catmull curves, then I've found out
that there is a font called Catull :) Thank you!

------
byset
I didn't think they could make it look any more as if it were aimed at 5-year-
olds, but they've done it.

Seriously, though, it's probably a better logo. It's simpler and has a more
weight while the old one was kind of overly light and spindly. I wouldn't be
surprised if the next step in the logo's evolution would ditch the candy
colors and go with a single color, in which the new logo would look just fine.
That might strike some as sacrilege but it would work much better as a logo
and look less like a set of plastic toys for preschoolers.

------
pdknsk
I first noticed the new logo in Google Mail, where I use the light grey theme,
so the logo is grey as well, and small. My first impression was: bad, very
bad. Too bold, and unbalanced. It's better on Google Search, but still
somewhat unbalanced. I'll get used to it, I'm sure.

I'm curious how Brand New will rate it.

[http://underconsideration.com/brandnew/](http://underconsideration.com/brandnew/)

------
amelius
Hmm... the spacing between the letters in "Goo" seems optically wider than the
spacing between "gle". But it might be just me.

~~~
equil
Quite the opposite, actually.
[http://i.imgur.com/bKBcIyX.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/bKBcIyX.jpg) [1]

[1] [https://design.google.com/articles/evolving-the-google-
ident...](https://design.google.com/articles/evolving-the-google-
identity/#understanding-the-system)

~~~
amelius
Yes, I said "optical" spacing. Not real spacing.

The link you provide is interesting. However, any technical explanation
doesn't solve the optical illusion that the last three letters appear to be
closer together than the first three letters.

~~~
kuschku
Yes – that’s why normally you use serif fonts and modify the width of the
strokes dynamically. Also the reason why the old 'o's were tilted.

------
Aissen
It seems they didn't update
[http://www.google.com/press/images.html](http://www.google.com/press/images.html)
yet, but the doodle is available here:
[https://www.google.com/doodles/googles-new-
logo](https://www.google.com/doodles/googles-new-logo)

------
lighthawk
A critique, "Google’s new look is tragic sans":
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2015/09/01/g...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2015/09/01/googles-
new-look-is-tragic-sans/)

------
krick
I don't know why "news" like that are always considered so important. That
logo is ugly, but so was the previous one. It doesn't seem like it terribly
hurt their business. Not that I don't care about style — I admire good style.
But it is secondary, at least for google. They do well with whatever logo
there is.

------
bingobob
they have a Doodle of the change its live now
[https://www.google.com.au/logos/doodles/2015/september-1st-d...](https://www.google.com.au/logos/doodles/2015/september-1st-
doodle-do-not-translate-5078286822539264-hp.gif)

------
arrowgunz
In case the link is not working:
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/09/google-
update.html)

------
pbhjpbhj
Interesting to me is that in the video they use "you can Google it" and "let's
Google it". In the past they - apparently - have made pains to avoid using
Google as a verb as that's a type of genericisation of the trademark in to a
term for internet searching in general.

~~~
ascorbic
They've always been fine with people using it as a verb, as long as it's only
used to mean searching with Google, not searching in general. That's what
would risk genericisation.

~~~
kuschku
Well, in German dictionaries are already listing "to google, searching in the
internet for something, more specific, searching in the internet with a search
engine, usually Google™."

That pretty much means the trademark is essentially gone.

------
shade23
Completely off topic,but can anyone point me to any google-related post which
has not crossed 500 pts?

~~~
qwtel
[https://hn.algolia.com/?query=google&sort=byDate&prefix&page...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=google&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)

------
hyperpallium
The animation crashed my android stock browser (and reset other running apps).
It ran fine in firefox.

------
galago
I feel like we-don't-care-about-design is kind of Googles thing. The new logo
seems terrible, but that's appropriate. It could be a picture of pretty much
anything, or there could be no logo. Regardless, I plan to continue using
Google to search the WWW.

------
evolve2k
> "Google has changed a lot over the past 17 years—from the range of our
> products to the evolution of their look and feel. And today we’re changing
> things up once again"

My first thought, wait who's talking to me here?

~~~
WWKong
"evolution of [product's] look and feel"

------
kossTKR
ignoring all mandatory marketing gobbledygook, this change makes most sense to
me in the light of google's recent involvement in the NSA scandal, and their
general shift from being a search only service, to being a true conglomerate,
especially spanning the futuristic fields of robotics and AI research. They
don't want to be like the dystopian AI from the recent movie Ex Machina, they
don't want to be seen as the omnipresent creepy spy company. Therefore this
naive, happy and care free logo. Vulgar in my eyes. Most people in this thread
seem to miss this?

~~~
glitchdout
Yep. It immediately reminded me of this video: [https://ind.ie/the-camera-
panopticon/](https://ind.ie/the-camera-panopticon/)

Right in the first minute:

> What if surveillance didn't look this scary? What if it actually looked
> pretty friendly? Could we still identify it as a threat?

~~~
kossTKR
Interesting video. The presenter is pretty good. At 24.35 he talks about
Michael Novak, Facebooks engineer manager that states:

"Privacy is a set of experiences that help people feel comfortable", HAH, i
love this corporate-speak.

It reminds me of the way the new PR field of Content Creation, which defines
itself like:

[http://contentmarketinginstitute.com/what-is-content-
marketi...](http://contentmarketinginstitute.com/what-is-content-marketing/)

"Content marketing’s purpose is to attract and retain customers by
consistently creating and curating relevant and valuable content with the
intention of changing or enhancing consumer behavior. Basically, content
marketing is the art of communicating with your customers and prospects
without selling. It is non-interruption marketing. Instead of pitching your
products or services, you are delivering information that makes your buyer
more intelligent"

Lets enhance make our buyers more intelligent. Intelligent in this context
meaning, the customer buys our product. Lets give the user privacy. Privacy
meaning a thin veneer of privacy on top of complete data mining.

------
traviagio
A turning point in a company's history has to come with rebranding. Otherwise
the message won't be as strong. The emotional attachment will fade away with
time I am sure. I will miss the logo as well.

------
Jordrok
As much as I want to hate this for being change just for the sake of
change...I really don't. So I guess that's a point in its favor.

The amount of marketing-speak in the blog post does make me a little queasy
though.

------
compbio
I used this new logo and turned (rotated) it into a new Google Scholar logo:
[http://i.imgur.com/j7L0goJ.png](http://i.imgur.com/j7L0goJ.png)

------
gauravagarwalr
In some places the favicon is not completely updated, as of this writing:
[http://google.co.in/favicon.ico](http://google.co.in/favicon.ico)

------
ck2
What I still like about google is it (mostly) still works without javascript
and even without cookies.

Only groups is unreadable without javascript.

But they recently killed the old style google maps, the new one is horrid.

------
dammitcoetzee
It took me a bit to find the word I wanted to use to describe what Google's
old logo had vs. the new one. I think the old logo was classier. This new one
is sort of uninspiring.

------
tyingq
I can almost feel the awkward vibe that went into not directly comparing
search results over the years. It would have made the demise of real organic
search too obvious.

------
jd3
Nice changes today, google! Really classy retro look! [0]. lol

[0]: [http://i.imgur.com/ni6pCdb.png](http://i.imgur.com/ni6pCdb.png)

------
0xFFC
Have they used polymer for buttons in google main page? It is interesting, it
kinda shows polymer will become one of google's main project's.(If i am
correct)

------
lazzlazzlazz
I love it, especially the singular "G". Wonderfully clean and modern - even
though I didn't think the old "Google" was dated at all.

------
capkutay
Would any of the font-aficionados call this a slab-serif? There's a slight
serif on the second g but other than that it looks kind of like comic sans.

~~~
archycockroach
I'd say it falls into "geometric sans-serif" because of its adherence to
primitive shapes and near-lack of adornment.

------
iceyhugh
Im almost sure that they are trying to eventually, replace the G with the E as
their primary brand identifier. Its a longer strategy and probably smarter.

~~~
savanaly
What's the advantage of the e?

------
Gravityloss
It's a very similar move that Facebook recently did. Move to a rounded sans
serif. Facebook said it was to look more "friendly".

------
sambe
I can understand the reasons and like the dots/G but the whole word looks
childish to me. Liked the old one and its longevity as well.

------
empressplay
The l in the new logo is shorter than the G and it's driving me bonkers! Also
the spacing doesn't seem quite right.

------
tortilla
Looks like [http://www.partycity.com/](http://www.partycity.com/)

------
alblue
It reminds me of a coloured arrow rotating backwards in time. Sort of like
OSX's beachball but going the wrong way.

------
ajonit
Rarely it happens a design change looks good on first sight. This is that
instance. Well done GOOG / abc.xyz

------
dredmorbius
The tilted 'e' immediately reminds me of Enron.

You know: "Even the 'E' was crooked."

~~~
EarthLaunch
Internet Explorer.

------
zipop
Yellow type on white is always bad design no matter how much the rest of the
logo improves.

------
dietlbomb
The new favicon resembles some sort of gay pride logo. It's a bit off-putting.

------
afterburner
I ha-- I'm used to it.

------
jcadam
The new Web UI for Google Play Music is horrendous. Sure, it _looks_ nice, but
the older interface was much simpler and easier to use (not to mention more
responsive).

On the new logo... just went to google.com for the first time today. Ugh, no.
I winced when I saw it.

------
runewell
Anyone else feel the need to do a parody video demonstrating how the ads have
encroached on the organic link space over the years?

Not hating, I actually like the new look, it was just the first thing I
thought of when they mentioned the original "ten blue links".

------
adamc
I like the 'e'; looks like it's laughing.

------
sgtnasty
Folks really seem to care a lot about a silly logo.

------
pastyboy
Urgh preferred the original 2013 flat serif font.

------
kanche
It feels kiddish and playful (in a positive way)!

------
miah_
Who ever actually goes directly to google.com? The only way I noticed this
insignificant change was in my interactions with the results page. Why does
this non-news have 375 points?

~~~
tempestn
As you point out yourself, the Google logo exists in many places besides their
homepage. (Plus many people still visit the homepage, even if you and I
don't.)

------
fabiobruna
I like the "Dots in Motion" language.

------
SpendBig
The G looks very similar to the G in the GuldenCoin logo
([https://guldencoin.com/](https://guldencoin.com/))

------
arnklint
THIS IS HUGE! Totally worth the points, not.

------
gnuarch
Google will own RGB(Y) and sue and buy ebay.

------
pearjuice
First one to guess what effect this will have on $GOOGL? I mean, after all
Google does things for a profit...

------
zkhalique
This is definitely good :)

------
Noonespecial2
New CEO, new logo. Nothing new there. Probably changed the carpet too. They
always do.

------
Noonespecial2
Looks like the change that eBay did to it's logo last (?) year.

------
hodgesmr
The G looks like a power button. Quick, someone critique that.

------
supertruth
gay

------
ocdtrekkie
I don't know why someone changing the font in their logo should ever be HN's
top news item. There is definitely more interesting stuff going on in tech
this week.

~~~
nosnos
Yeah, this is stupid. Who gives a fuck?

------
hiou
Wow, this is an very bold and risky move. The familiarity with the Google
search prompt plays a significant role in user retention. Is this a sign of
Google worrying about their current situation?

~~~
compbio
If they are worrying about this, they may have just alienated their old users.
I think it is simply the result of a more design-oriented culture at Google.
After Google+ tool unification, now a design unification.

I myself do not like this redesign, but I also did not like the old one. I am
basically very averse to changes like this (probably a mental issue). I also
do not like how Chrome hijacks the window style, or how Android automatically
updates to a new Youtube app with a drastically new UI. I am probably a
minority though, and still capable to use custom styles to change the logo
back to the old "Backrub" logo, but I wonder if there are more who see these
major redesigns as an invasion of sorts into their daily routines. Just as you
created a mental map of the application, they change the location of the
buttons, or show a different favicon.

If it is not too much to ask (or risky to maintain), think of keeping an
"old.*.com" domain. There are users who will gladly make use of that. Being
able to use your own design, or turn off "with this new logo we save 9999
bytes on mobile" distractions is also UX. And it would be good UX for me.

With this new logo, for me, the counter now starts at zero for Google. A clean
slate. For all I care they may be the Facebook they so desperately desire to
mimic.

------
KevinEldon
I don't know about the logo, but I'll do know about Google's voice
recognition. Yesterday, on my commute home I came across an accident that
blocked the road. I pulled out my iPhone, loaded the Google app, and asked
"give me directions home" and Google gave me directions home. Siri wouldn't
have been able to do that. Siri can schedule my timers... and not much else, I
don't trust it to take me home. I followed the Google directions and came
across a road that had a lot of traffic. I glanced at my phone and saw another
road (Google Maps) and followed it and enjoyed a lovely drive down a dirt road
and saved myself some time (and other waiting for me on a backed up road). I
got home only a few minutes later than normal.

Blah blah... I don't care about Google's logo, but I use my iPhone like a
commodity and use Google's apps and services for the most important things.
There are iPhone only apps I like, but when it comes to my mobile needs it's
all about making calls (phone, a commodity), getting on the web (Chrome), and
directions (Google Maps) dominates 2 of those 3.

