

New Chrome Logo - Garbage
http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2011/03/new-chrome-logo.html

======
petercooper
_a new Chrome logo that's more plain and boring_

Or less chintzy and less like a VCR manufacturer's logo from 1979. It looks
good! It seems typical to have a strong reaction to a new name (iPad, Wii,
Vista) or a new logo but it passes. Everyone will be used to it within months
:-)

~~~
thesethings
Yes! Yay, you made me feel less crazy. I like the new logo better, too.

Subjective retro-ness aside, the new logo is more of a _logo_ (less textures,
passes the silhouette test, etc).

~~~
bostonpete
I'm new to the notion of the silhouette test (had to google it) so forgive my
ignorance, but how does this logo pass that test? Isn't its silhouette just a
circle...?

~~~
kerryfalk
If it were to be converted to a 1-bit image (Black/white) you could still make
out what it is. That's basically the silhouette test.

This one doesn't quite work because there's no separation between the three
colors that make up the circle. Not that it needs to, though. This one is
better than the last for this test. In this case the silhouette would be the
larger outer circle and the smaller inner circle.

It's really only used in print design, or at least that's how it started
because logos needed to be versatile enough to work in many different color
spaces, including being sent via fax. It is useful to keep in mind so that we
create clean and uncluttered logos, though.

~~~
thesethings
Word. You're right. I was over-hypey :D It doesn't totally pass the silhouette
test. It could with a thin edge of negative space in between each color block,
OR... if we allowed a grey "cheat" in our silhouette test.

These kinda shape logos aren't just awesome for print, but in tiny places like
web footers, twitter avatars, etc.

And for anybody in the thread rackin' their brain trying to figure out what
we're talking about. Picture the Nike swoosh, or the Apple-missing-a-bite
apple. With no gradients, colors, or shadows, their shape alone is
recognizable.

This doesn't mean their every use + instance is this plain, but their logos
survive such a deconstruction. It REALLY comes in handy.

------
sgentle
My favourite quote from the comments: "looks ugly and is not the original"

Sums up every UI change reaction ever.

~~~
jrockway
That's why I only use applications that use the Athena widget set!

------
mahrain
I feel this logo looks better when sized way down to "Windows quick launch
bar" or "GNOME launcher" size, but for instance on a Mac dock it's completely
out of place with it's 2D look & feel.

------
orionlogic
Glossy embossed days are far behind. Subtle gradients, trying to achive 3d in
2d space with less cluttered effects. I would say very in tune with Apple's
next design iteration. <http://www.usabilitypost.com/2011/03/01/simpler-ui-in-
lion/>

~~~
GeneralMaximus
> Glossy embossed days are far behind.

Could this really be happening? Could the universe be so kind?

Glossy might look good for five seconds, but when you spend eight hours
staring at shiny windows flying across your screen you tend to get sick.

~~~
evilduck
I can't wait until the 70% transparent, white-fill gradient half-circle is no
longer masked over logos and icons.

~~~
wlievens
What exactly do you mean? Do you have an example?

~~~
a5huynh
I believe the white glossy circle is referring to that glossy shine on top of
icons, much like the app icons you usually see on an iPhone/iPod.

For instance: <http://www.flickr.com/photos/ikoka/3660963620/>

~~~
wlievens
Oh, right. Now I understand. Yeah, you see those a lot.

------
TorbjornLunde
While I think the original Chrome logo maybe had a bit too much “3D”, I think
this is a bit too far in the other direction.

Something in between this new logo and the previous would probably be
appropriate IMHO.

------
bambax
> _The latest Chrome Dev Channel release comes with a new Chrome logo that's
> more plain and boring [...] Chrome lost some of its magic by switching to a
> visual identity that's no longer vibrant and picturesque_

Wow. My thoughts exactly when seeing the new logo, but I'm surprised Google
would put it this way!

> _An unofficial blog..._

Ah, that makes sense.

~~~
iaskwhy
Well, plain is not necessarily boring. In most cases, including this one, I
prefer the plain version. One example other than Chrome is Pepsi, the new
plain logo looks so much better to me than the sort-of-3D old one. I guess
it's very subjective.

~~~
bambax
> _I guess it's very subjective_

Yes it is ;-) There was a post on HN some time ago showing how old logos were
in many cases so much better than new ones, and Pepsi was amongst them.

But, Google being Google, maybe they tested it? The problem with tests, I
think, is that it favors bland versions because they upset the least; this new
logo kind of smells of "design by committee", no?

~~~
GHFigs
Brand New is a blog devoted to old/new logo comparisons:
<http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/>

------
mcantor
I _still_ think the old logo looks just like the "Morph Ball" from the Metroid
games.

[http://www.google.com/images?rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS397US397&q=...](http://www.google.com/images?rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS397US397&q=metroid%20morph%20ball&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1323&bih=908)

~~~
rodion_89
Just a curious question that has nothing to do with the Chrome logo.

Your link has the rlz string that is presumably for your Chrome/Chromium
browser. Can that be personally identifiable information for anyone other than
Google?

~~~
thinkalone
"non-unique, non-personally identifiable" -
<http://blog.chromium.org/2010/06/in-open-for-rlz.html>

------
MarkSimpson
The old icon looks more at home on Windows and Mac desktops.

The new icon looks more at home among the other Google products.
(<http://www.google.com.au/intl/en/options/>)

Whether there's any significance to this, I don't know.

------
mitcheme
Ouch. My personal feeling now is that there's no intuitive connection between
the logo and the thing it represents anymore. Firefox has a red panda curled
around a globe, representing both the name and what it does (the globe being a
common symbol for the WWW). Internet Explorer has a Windows-blue 'e' for
"explorer" [of the internet]. Safari has a compass, which is related to both
safaris and navigation. The old chrome logo wasn't great, but at least it was
really shiny. When I think 'chrome', I think really shiny, so it made sense to
me and I could easily make the association backwards, that the really shiny
logo meant 'chrome'. The colors might represent Google, but honestly I didn't
notice that until just now. When I see red, yellow, blue and green, I just
think primary colors -- RGB for light and RBY for pigment. In my head, red,
yellow, blue and green are just the "default" colors for anything where you
want something to have four different "equal" colors without it getting clashy
or garish. (As much as I love the secondary and tertiary colors, using them
all together can sometimes make things look younger than intended.)

To me the new logo looks vaguely like someone went paint-by-numbers on the
James Bond shutter. There's nothing there that I'd associate with the
internet, the word "chrome", the concept of a navigation tool, or anything
else like that. It might be more aesthetically-pleasing but that's not what
logos are for.

------
davej
The colours need a bit more saturation to really pop, they're a bit too
washed-out and pastel. I like the concept, but the execution is poor.

~~~
bane
I agree, the old logo wasn't without its problems, but the new one, while
different, is not really an improvement. It looks very..."flacid" to me.

~~~
nxn
Yep, in fact I like this version I found earlier a lot more than the one they
went with: <http://www.frazpc.pl/b/275384>

------
nhebb
I like it. The old one looks like an electronic eye, monitoring my every move
on the internet.

~~~
bane
I always thought it looked a bit like a Pokemon ball.

------
kylec
The new logo does not appear to have been designed with smaller icons in mind
- the white circle around the blue center is too small (or shouldn't be there
at all). In its present form, it looks pretty bad on my dock.

------
yzhengyu
I find that it actually looks better. Then again, as a zen master would say,
it does not look better or worst, it has simply changed.

------
protomyth
So, they took a logo with depth (3Dish) and flattened it, plus did something
kinda weird with the color. It doesn't look quite right with all the other
icons on my dock.

------
digitaltothem
Simplicity. That is one of Google attractions. So, the new Chrome logo fits
that image better than the old one.

------
dmauro
It looks like they wanted to simply flatten the Chrome logo, but the gradients
radically change it from a sphere with a central "node" facing us to an
unappealing doughnut shape with some sort of "nipple" in the center.

And while the gloss of the original may have been a bit much, it allowed the
colors to be a bit more vibrant. Now they've been diluted down to these pastel
colors which are also very unappealing.

The original Chrome logo isn't perfect, it looks a little too slick, but it
was the best visual design to come out of google (besides some amazing google
doodles of course) and now it seems that they've dumbed it down to match the
more simple and design-agnostic approach that is typical for google.

------
tel
I love the flatter aesthetic, but man does that strong white ring make me want
to push the center blue "button". It actually brings that feature so far to
the foreground that I ignore the rest of the logo. I would seriously prefer a
thinner white circle.

------
nborgo
If everyone starts aiming for the little blue center, I wonder if people have
a better chance of clicking the icon. Maybe they thought of it like extra
padding around navigation links. When we aim for the original icon and miss by
a couple pixels, nothing happens. If we are drawn to aiming for the little
blue circle and miss by a couple pixels, Chrome still opens.

Here's a more design oriented discussion:
[http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/chrome_l...](http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/chrome_loses_volume.php)

I, for one, just switched to the Dev channel for the updated icon.

------
stevenp
The comments on the post lead me to believe that most people would prefer an
icon that blinks or rotates.

That said, I like the new icon. It's far less of an eyesore in my OSX dock.

------
ch0wn
I like the new logo, but I didn't expect to see a logo change of the official
Chrome that early. There are still a lot of advertisements showing the old
logo around in my city.

------
kifou1
I don't think the new one looks better than the old. New = too basic Old = too
much details

------
tenaciousJk
I saw this yesterday and loved it. I'll spare you my critique - the logo new
logo is great!

------
Jach
I'm on the fence for whether I like shiny logos that everyone is doing these
days more or the same or less than non-shiny logos. The new logo makes it
stand out, but I'm not sure in a great way among all the other gloss. I'll
wait and see.

------
jrubyer
Is there any design related reason that explains this change? Or is this just
random?

~~~
ugh
One reason might be that the change brings the logo more in line with the
Google identity. Google usually doesn’t do shiny and photorealistic, the
Chrome logo was always a strange aberration in that respect.

~~~
ern
This reminded me of the 2008 Google Reader redesign, where some of the rounded
borders and shadows were dropped.

[http://googlereader.blogspot.com/2008/12/square-is-new-
round...](http://googlereader.blogspot.com/2008/12/square-is-new-round.html)

In the case of the simplified logo, "square is the new round" would seem to
apply again.

~~~
cpeterso
When do we get the new _square_ Chrome logo? :)

------
ComputerGuru
/sad - I submitted this yesterday:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2332488>

------
uvTwitch
It went from 'impressive and high tech' to 'dull and uninteresting'

------
giberson
I feel like I would like the logo more without the gradients.

------
SeanLuke
It looks like a 9.

Once you've seen it, you can't unsee it.

~~~
liquid_x
i just see 666

~~~
snippyhollow
Of an infinity of 69s! ;) My brain looped.

------
jeffbarr
I was more excited when I thought that this said Chrome LEGO.

~~~
jrgifford
Same here.

------
minikomi
From pokeballs to frisbees

------
alsomike
It's OK as a logo, except for the inconsistent light source on the shadows. As
a toolbar icon, it seems like they decided to redesign it so that it violates
every OS icon guideline in existence, except on Windows Phone 7.

