Anonymous
9/26/2024, 2:01:38 AM No.457619
Explain yourselves, /gd/.
Replies:
Thread 457619 - /gd/
Anonymous
9/26/2024, 4:18:53 AM No.457620
we are post-goofy shit
Anonymous
9/26/2024, 4:04:28 PM No.457625
Except for maybe Pinterest, one thing all of those have in common is that all of those companies are seen as either too powerful and manipulative beyond normal business activity and/or as disruptions in their respective e fields that tend to be lightning rods for negative attention.
A bunch of them waded into social and political controversy over the last decade or two in ways that polarized potential customer pools and hurt their brands, and now they are backing away from overt displays of those ki ds of policies and just want to get back to a neutral PR stance and reputation.
It's exactly the kind of environment where standing out isn't so helpful (the sociopolitical posturing was nothing more than an attempt to do that for MARKETING purposes) so genericizing corporate ID with styles that convey nothing beyond their name makes a lot of sense.
Anything that suggests any kind of feeling or idea should accompany thoughts of their company is just a loose thread for critics to pull on in hopes of unraveling them.
It's literally like a POW or criminal suspect under questioning giving their name and ID number and nothing else when facing captors who really don't care if they're guilty or not and will twist anything else to use against them.
These constant threads are proof of that.
A bunch of them waded into social and political controversy over the last decade or two in ways that polarized potential customer pools and hurt their brands, and now they are backing away from overt displays of those ki ds of policies and just want to get back to a neutral PR stance and reputation.
It's exactly the kind of environment where standing out isn't so helpful (the sociopolitical posturing was nothing more than an attempt to do that for MARKETING purposes) so genericizing corporate ID with styles that convey nothing beyond their name makes a lot of sense.
Anything that suggests any kind of feeling or idea should accompany thoughts of their company is just a loose thread for critics to pull on in hopes of unraveling them.
It's literally like a POW or criminal suspect under questioning giving their name and ID number and nothing else when facing captors who really don't care if they're guilty or not and will twist anything else to use against them.
These constant threads are proof of that.
Replies:
Anonymous
9/26/2024, 6:35:10 PM No.457628
>>457619 (OP)
The Microsoft one is brutal
The Microsoft one is brutal
Anonymous
9/26/2024, 10:29:16 PM No.457634
>>457625
Great contribution, thanks for taking the time to write it. In a similar sense the change could also be a reflection of these companies ubiquity, they mesh with our daily lives. Also, since corporate design tends to be unoriginal, I wonder who started the trend (if I cared enough I could look at the dates).
Great contribution, thanks for taking the time to write it. In a similar sense the change could also be a reflection of these companies ubiquity, they mesh with our daily lives. Also, since corporate design tends to be unoriginal, I wonder who started the trend (if I cared enough I could look at the dates).
Replies:
Anonymous
9/27/2024, 2:35:40 AM No.457644
>>457634
>Ubiquity
Good point; all of them are arguably either monopolies or have massive market share within their respective niches and that usually changes the strategies regarding branding to some degree...it becomes an effort to maintain market share rather than expand it or convert loyalists to other brands and much of the work of setting the brand apart is already accomplished.
Where brand ID is concerned that can mean following expectations for that space so as not to seem outside of it or battling the status quo...if you are Coke or Pepsi or Ebay or Google or Microsoft you *are* the status quo.
Financial service and business/life insurance providers do this a lot with their ID and iconography; being the odd guy out in that niche is generally bad for business so they all stay within a pretty limited format that's about stability and reliability and avoids anything unserious.
>Ubiquity
Good point; all of them are arguably either monopolies or have massive market share within their respective niches and that usually changes the strategies regarding branding to some degree...it becomes an effort to maintain market share rather than expand it or convert loyalists to other brands and much of the work of setting the brand apart is already accomplished.
Where brand ID is concerned that can mean following expectations for that space so as not to seem outside of it or battling the status quo...if you are Coke or Pepsi or Ebay or Google or Microsoft you *are* the status quo.
Financial service and business/life insurance providers do this a lot with their ID and iconography; being the odd guy out in that niche is generally bad for business so they all stay within a pretty limited format that's about stability and reliability and avoids anything unserious.
Replies:
Anonymous
9/27/2024, 5:55:15 AM No.457645
>>457625
>>457626
meh
people just wana simple clear stuff on the fucking web
its not a fucking conspiracy and we aint fucking web.1 aol dialup never seen any good design before start ups anymore.
>>457626
meh
people just wana simple clear stuff on the fucking web
its not a fucking conspiracy and we aint fucking web.1 aol dialup never seen any good design before start ups anymore.
Replies:
Anonymous
9/27/2024, 10:56:32 AM No.457650
>>457647
>companies are seen as either too powerful and manipulative beyond normal business activity and/or as disruptions in their respective e fields that tend to be lightning rods for negative attention.
"""conspiracy theory""".
dumb mf.
>companies are seen as either too powerful and manipulative beyond normal business activity and/or as disruptions in their respective e fields that tend to be lightning rods for negative attention.
"""conspiracy theory""".
dumb mf.
Replies:
Anonymous
9/27/2024, 4:45:46 PM No.457652
>>457647
"Theory"
>Seven eBay employees pleaded guilty to charges involving criminal conspiracies.
>The seven employees included two senior members of eBay’s corporate security team. Two members of eBay's Executive Leadership Team who were implicated in the scandal were not charged.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBay_stalking_scandal
>The settlement resolved a 2012 lawsuit that accused eBay of having an agreement with the Intuit software company preventing each firm from recruiting the other's employees. The deal would bar eBay from enforcing any agreement that restricts recruitment or hiring of employees.
>Bill Baer, head of the Justice Department's Antitrust Division, said the only purpose of the agreement with Intuit was to limit competition between the two companies. He said the deal caused workers to lose opportunities for better jobs and higher pay.
>"The behavior was blatant and egregious. And the agreements were fully documented in company electronic communications,"
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/05/01/ebay-justice-settlement/8566925/
>Google committed “clear abuse of privilege” by implementing a policy that automatically deleted employee chat records, according to the judge overseeing a major Justice Department antitrust trial targeting its alleged digital advertising monopoly.
>US District Judge Leonie Brinkema shredded Google during a hearing to consider the DOJ’s motion for an “adverse inference” finding against the company for deleting records it was ordered to preserve. If granted, it would allow the court to assume that Google intentionally acted to destroy evidence relevant to the case.
https://nypost.com/2024/08/29/business/judge-blasts-google-over-destroyed-evidence-as-another-doj-antitrust-case-looms/
"Theory"
>Seven eBay employees pleaded guilty to charges involving criminal conspiracies.
>The seven employees included two senior members of eBay’s corporate security team. Two members of eBay's Executive Leadership Team who were implicated in the scandal were not charged.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBay_stalking_scandal
>The settlement resolved a 2012 lawsuit that accused eBay of having an agreement with the Intuit software company preventing each firm from recruiting the other's employees. The deal would bar eBay from enforcing any agreement that restricts recruitment or hiring of employees.
>Bill Baer, head of the Justice Department's Antitrust Division, said the only purpose of the agreement with Intuit was to limit competition between the two companies. He said the deal caused workers to lose opportunities for better jobs and higher pay.
>"The behavior was blatant and egregious. And the agreements were fully documented in company electronic communications,"
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/05/01/ebay-justice-settlement/8566925/
>Google committed “clear abuse of privilege” by implementing a policy that automatically deleted employee chat records, according to the judge overseeing a major Justice Department antitrust trial targeting its alleged digital advertising monopoly.
>US District Judge Leonie Brinkema shredded Google during a hearing to consider the DOJ’s motion for an “adverse inference” finding against the company for deleting records it was ordered to preserve. If granted, it would allow the court to assume that Google intentionally acted to destroy evidence relevant to the case.
https://nypost.com/2024/08/29/business/judge-blasts-google-over-destroyed-evidence-as-another-doj-antitrust-case-looms/
Replies:
Anonymous
9/27/2024, 6:43:31 PM No.457655
>>457653
typical reaction to style rather than substance.
these messages aren't even all from the same fucking person...
typical reaction to style rather than substance.
these messages aren't even all from the same fucking person...
Replies:
Anonymous
10/11/2024, 7:18:12 AM No.457891
Anonymous
10/20/2024, 8:57:45 AM No.458261
>>457619 (OP)
>DEI hires:
>So I've got an idea! Akzidenz-Grotesk-style sans serif that looks like everything else.
>Genius! Who needs originality?
>DEI hires:
>So I've got an idea! Akzidenz-Grotesk-style sans serif that looks like everything else.
>Genius! Who needs originality?
Replies:
Anonymous
10/20/2024, 9:31:29 AM No.458262
That's why no one takes GDs seriously
Anonymous
10/20/2024, 12:53:30 PM No.458264
>>457619 (OP)
Brands too big to fall, so they just use simplest logo possible so it couldn't be misread.
Brands too big to fall, so they just use simplest logo possible so it couldn't be misread.
Anonymous
10/20/2024, 8:10:13 PM No.458269
>>458261
>Who needs originality
Originality in a corporate ID symbology only matters when you are trying to set yourself apart from larger established competitors. When you ARE the largest established player in your space (as all of the companies in the OPs image arguably are) there's little if any value to be gained from trying to be different for its own sake.
The companies in that image that used the quirky, lighthearted "fun" look were all originally using it to identify as something other than the staid, serious, powerful corporate blocs they were up against...it was a way of thumbing their noses at the idea that you had to look, act and *be* one of them to take them on. It's a very astute approach at that start up phase when unproven investment vehicles rely more on "beat the system" ideology and gambling on a long shot to attract money.
Once they gained major market share and clout in their space they took on the same "serious" trappings as the earlier corporate blocs they displaced because that's what is expected of them by investors who now have something concrete to lose if they continue on the more radical and risky path of being upsetters.
Nobody wants or needs to upset a space they virtually own.
>Who needs originality
Originality in a corporate ID symbology only matters when you are trying to set yourself apart from larger established competitors. When you ARE the largest established player in your space (as all of the companies in the OPs image arguably are) there's little if any value to be gained from trying to be different for its own sake.
The companies in that image that used the quirky, lighthearted "fun" look were all originally using it to identify as something other than the staid, serious, powerful corporate blocs they were up against...it was a way of thumbing their noses at the idea that you had to look, act and *be* one of them to take them on. It's a very astute approach at that start up phase when unproven investment vehicles rely more on "beat the system" ideology and gambling on a long shot to attract money.
Once they gained major market share and clout in their space they took on the same "serious" trappings as the earlier corporate blocs they displaced because that's what is expected of them by investors who now have something concrete to lose if they continue on the more radical and risky path of being upsetters.
Nobody wants or needs to upset a space they virtually own.
Anonymous
11/5/2024, 1:54:16 PM No.458508
>>457619 (OP)
Typography is an art unto itself.
Typography is an art unto itself.
Anonymous
11/5/2024, 5:59:33 PM No.458510
Everyone is on their phones now, so design is done to look more appealing and legible for mobile devices
Replies:
Anonymous
11/9/2024, 3:20:31 PM No.458575
>>457619 (OP)
Standarization is the ugly daughter of this stupid bitch Globalization.
Standarization is the ugly daughter of this stupid bitch Globalization.
Anonymous
12/26/2024, 12:04:20 PM No.459109
>>457619 (OP)
Soulless cheap looking crap. Just use AI, don't waste money.
Soulless cheap looking crap. Just use AI, don't waste money.
Replies:
Anonymous
1/5/2025, 2:46:29 PM No.459190
>>459109
Ai is retarded
Ai is retarded
Anonymous
1/25/2025, 6:52:19 PM No.459467
>>457619 (OP)
It's so annoying because Google, Microsoft and Pinterest didn't even need any rework. Especially now that serif fonts are making a comeback
It's so annoying because Google, Microsoft and Pinterest didn't even need any rework. Especially now that serif fonts are making a comeback
Anonymous
1/26/2025, 5:01:54 AM No.459471
>>459109
yeah so it can make even uglier shit or spell my own company's name wrong. great idea fag
yeah so it can make even uglier shit or spell my own company's name wrong. great idea fag
Anonymous
2/3/2025, 11:14:48 AM No.459566
Anonymous
2/3/2025, 10:20:41 PM No.459569
post joy society I'm afraid
Replies:
Anonymous
2/6/2025, 10:48:49 AM No.459589
>>457619 (OP)
All uniqueness and difference is lost in these designs
All uniqueness and difference is lost in these designs
Anonymous
2/11/2025, 2:06:58 PM No.459668
>>457619 (OP)
Globalization. Left will be more difficult for people who primarily read something nonlatin like cyrilic or kanji.
Globalization. Left will be more difficult for people who primarily read something nonlatin like cyrilic or kanji.
Anonymous
3/10/2025, 10:33:06 AM No.459866
>>457619 (OP)
It's just for readability.
Old airbnb looked like
>ainlnl
Old pinterest looked like
>AintereA
Old ebay and spotify looked they were having a seizure.
Amazon still has plenty of character in their logo. Instead of just simplifying font, it's actually become recognizable by the arrow alone.
It's just for readability.
Old airbnb looked like
>ainlnl
Old pinterest looked like
>AintereA
Old ebay and spotify looked they were having a seizure.
Amazon still has plenty of character in their logo. Instead of just simplifying font, it's actually become recognizable by the arrow alone.
Replies:
Anonymous
3/10/2025, 10:36:08 AM No.459867
>>459569
Weed is legal and kids are doing fortnite dances.
Weed is legal and kids are doing fortnite dances.
Anonymous
3/10/2025, 6:56:39 PM No.459875
>>457619 (OP)
All of the new ones look objectively better, what are you smoking?
All of the new ones look objectively better, what are you smoking?
Anonymous
3/17/2025, 2:25:19 AM No.459917
>>457619 (OP)
Airbnb and google look better
Airbnb and google look better
Anonymous
3/19/2025, 4:21:25 PM No.459937
download photoshop from adobe
use login abc@abcwashsys.com
password 1200WHamlin?
use login abc@abcwashsys.com
password 1200WHamlin?
Anonymous
3/20/2025, 6:36:57 AM No.459943
>>457619 (OP)
People are cowards. Corporations are doubly cowards. Everything is trending towards boring and bland.
People are cowards. Corporations are doubly cowards. Everything is trending towards boring and bland.
Anonymous
4/8/2025, 2:35:18 PM No.460096
Anonymous
4/9/2025, 2:55:45 AM No.460101
>>457619 (OP)
the companies were forced to update their logo otherwise they would be considered outdated. imagine the old microsoft logo amongst all the other logos. it would seem outdated. also the reason that microsoft unnecessarily released windows 11. because 10's interface had been out for a good few years.
the companies were forced to update their logo otherwise they would be considered outdated. imagine the old microsoft logo amongst all the other logos. it would seem outdated. also the reason that microsoft unnecessarily released windows 11. because 10's interface had been out for a good few years.
Replies:
Anonymous
4/9/2025, 1:05:13 PM No.460104
>>460101
>the companies were forced to update their logo otherwise they would be considered outdated. imagine the old microsoft logo amongst all the other logos.
It would stand out.
It would have better legacy.
It would have brand recognition.
It won't just be another fucking bold san-serif text as """""logo""""" 10 or 20 years down the line.
Faggot.
>the companies were forced to update their logo otherwise they would be considered outdated. imagine the old microsoft logo amongst all the other logos.
It would stand out.
It would have better legacy.
It would have brand recognition.
It won't just be another fucking bold san-serif text as """""logo""""" 10 or 20 years down the line.
Faggot.
Replies:
Anonymous
4/9/2025, 2:33:47 PM No.460105
>>460104
they have to appeal to normies and investors sadly, that's the way the world works.
they have to appeal to normies and investors sadly, that's the way the world works.
Anonymous
4/11/2025, 8:48:16 PM No.460115
>>457625
>>457634
>>457644
this sounds smart and all but im psure they changed their logo for web reasons.
cant have whacky logos when your whole website is just gay neutral sans or gay neutral serif
>>457634
>>457644
this sounds smart and all but im psure they changed their logo for web reasons.
cant have whacky logos when your whole website is just gay neutral sans or gay neutral serif
Replies:
Anonymous
4/11/2025, 8:59:11 PM No.460116
>>460115
all these companies are web 1st companies. Compare that to stuff like MSI ASUS ViewSonic Kingston SanDisk, Sony etc whos logos are primarily seen on actual hardware not within a web page or some kind of other UI they keep their style.
all these companies are web 1st companies. Compare that to stuff like MSI ASUS ViewSonic Kingston SanDisk, Sony etc whos logos are primarily seen on actual hardware not within a web page or some kind of other UI they keep their style.
Anonymous
5/9/2025, 4:20:10 PM No.460257
>>458510
this. The redesigns are boring, but the simple fact is that they're just way more legible at a glance, especially at smaller sizes. Readability trumps style.
this. The redesigns are boring, but the simple fact is that they're just way more legible at a glance, especially at smaller sizes. Readability trumps style.
Anonymous
6/12/2025, 8:15:27 PM No.460511
>>457619 (OP)
Marketing Executives jack themselves off into the mirror thinking about how “modern” they are
In reality, they’re the most pathetic, boring, tasteless, and soulless creatures on the planet.
You’d have to be unfathomably retarded to believe that replacing every unique, recognizable branding on the planet with identical sans-serif fonts will “modernize” and “improve brand recognition”.
Marketing Executives jack themselves off into the mirror thinking about how “modern” they are
In reality, they’re the most pathetic, boring, tasteless, and soulless creatures on the planet.
You’d have to be unfathomably retarded to believe that replacing every unique, recognizable branding on the planet with identical sans-serif fonts will “modernize” and “improve brand recognition”.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/13/2025, 12:13:04 PM No.460517
>>460511
>You’d have to be unfathomably retarded to believe that replacing every unique, recognizable branding on the planet with identical sans-serif fonts will “modernize” and “improve brand recognition”.
You’d have to be even more unfathomably retarded to believe that the majority of the examples shown- all but two- weren't sans-serif typefaces to begin with
>You’d have to be unfathomably retarded to believe that replacing every unique, recognizable branding on the planet with identical sans-serif fonts will “modernize” and “improve brand recognition”.
You’d have to be even more unfathomably retarded to believe that the majority of the examples shown- all but two- weren't sans-serif typefaces to begin with