
Twitter kills bubble letter logotype, replaces it with new ‘Twitter bird’ logo - flexeble
http://thenextweb.com/twitter/2012/06/06/twitter-changes-its-logo-to-a-simplified-twitterbird-crafted-out-of-overlapping-circles/?utm_source=HackerNews&utm_medium=share%2Bbutton&utm_content=Twitter%20kills%20bubble%20letter%20logotype%2C%20replaces%20it%20with%20new%20%E2%80%98Twitter%20bird%E2%80%99%20logo&utm_campaign=social%2Bmedia
======
citricsquid
It's an interesting move, my concern would be that Twitter is talked about
enough by name that people _know_ the name but might not necessarily use the
site and will no longer make a connection when they see Twitter online
(outside of Twitter.com) because it's a logo that doesn't represent the name.

For example if someone watches CNN and they hear Twitter mentioned they might
not think "that's something I should check out" but then if they're browsing
their favourite bands website and see "Find us on Twitter!" they might think
"I heard about this on TV _and_ my favourite band uses it, I should check it
out!". With the logo not representing the name they remove the possibility of
this happening. Maybe it's an inconsequential amount of users but there are
multiple products and brands I've heard about but not been compelled to check
out until I saw them mentioned somewhere else.

------
dlokshin
The twitter bird doesn't actually apear that much on the site, mobile app,
etc. I barely even tie it to the brand, and it doesn't feel like twitter does
either[1].

Compare that to Octocat and GitHub. Octocat is everywhere; I feel like the
logo, dressing it up, referring to it is more a part of github than the doodle
is part of Google.

[1] On the login screen the new bird is small and in the upper left hand
corner. Once you log in, it's inset black on black and I actually had to look
for it to find it.

------
ROFISH
Two issues:

* No typeface is interesting, but, logo-only does not lend itself to "super-wide formats", such as 200x100 banners.

* The bill and wings are detailed at high-res, and become muddled at lower resolutions.

------
lbotos
I thought it was interesting that it doesn't look the the favicon was updated.

I think it needs to be reworked for small sizes. It beak and wings look very
fuzzy at "normal" desktop resolutions on my Macbook.

------
taylorlapeyre
Seems like a step in the right direction. The old logo was very "Web 2.0" and
quite an eyesore, even though they have been moving away from it for a while
now. The new logo looks great.

------
aristus
Keep arty and put a bird on it!

------
benguild
The new Twitter logo looks like a bird having an orgasm.

------
dreamdu5t
The new one lacks personality because it's entirely made of overlapping
geometric forms. It's not as cute.

Really disappointed with this.

------
hk_kh
Almost completely OT:

It's been a while since I did not enter twitter's landing page.

Why is there an ugly brown background, or the too-much-intense-that-hurts
blue?

The pictures, I understand, they tell a story. But the background color has no
excuse. There should exist a more pleasant tone.

Is it just me?

