28 comments

  • P GBP GB, over 2 years ago

    One would be hard pressed to find something particularly unappealing about HP's previous logo mark. Yet we must always have 13 degrees of progress.

    Once again, Schiff demonstrates his total lack of design eye and taste in one simple sentence.

    29 points
  • Jim SilvermanJim Silverman, over 2 years ago

    Perhaps Bierut is right, a designer really can do "almost anything" once they accept their role as a mere triviality.

    this intentional misinterpretation of Bierut's quote is borderline slanderous. par for the course, i guess.

    24 points
  • Aaron SagrayAaron Sagray, over 2 years ago

    I enjoy reading Eli's articles. I don't always agree with his assessments, but they are nevertheless thought-provoking. It's nice to read an opinionated piece that is well-structured and covers topics more interesting than the typical design industry navel-gazing.

    21 points
    • Andy StoneAndy Stone, over 2 years ago

      I'm definitely in the same boat as you. Whether or not I agree with every sentiment in the article, it makes us discuss the new mark and possible interpretations.

      He usually does a fine job with describing work rather than just the "it's great!" or "it sucks" comments that are so easy to throw during a corporate rebrand.

      While our studio's work looks nothing like the type of work Eli would enjoy, we're happy that he's in the industry and forces everyone to re-examine if they do truly enjoy a particular branding project (canon or not).

      9 points
    • Terry OTerry O, over 2 years ago (edited over 2 years ago )

      I can't say I do. I find the constant misrepresentation and misunderstanding of ideas, partnered with his unflinching conviction in his ideas rather repellent.

      0 points
  • Brennan Smith, over 2 years ago (edited over 2 years ago )

    I don't even read these articles anymore, I just come for the comments here.

    14 points
  • Russ BrownRuss Brown, over 2 years ago

    Whilst I enjoyed Eli's alternative viewpoint for the first few articles, I do find his "minimalist design illuminati conspiracy" a bit tedious at this point.

    12 points
  • Patrick SmithPatrick Smith, over 2 years ago

    Was quite a good read. Yeah, that old HP logo was corporate and awkward, the font being the worst part about it.

    I think one thing about the new HP logo is that it is something to talk about. Say the closed laptop situation — “What’s that say?” “HP, see now…” “Oh yep!” It’s like a little secret, a club you can be part of. How ever lame that might sound, it’s better than being invisible.

    I think the same thing applies to the MIT Press logo, its lack of legibility is what made it stand out and unique, if for just a moment. The Apple logo and the Windows logo are not readable either, they are just familiar.

    These abstract logos are trying to become iconic symbols which have meaning just because you recognise them.

    I think most app icons actually work the same way, they might use a symbol or a prop to suggest meaning, but in actual fact the symbol is so broad, abstract, or subtle that you’d have little idea of what they represent until you understand what the app does.

    11 points
    • Andy MerskinAndy Merskin, over 2 years ago

      I agree. Part of being a brand is creating an association between a symbol and a product / service / mentality / thing, and making it recognizable. It doesn't have to hold your hand and tell you everything it does. If I didn't know what Apple did, I'd guess they're a produce company competing with Dole.

      My rule for a good brand mark that one of my design professors taught is: can it pass the favicon test?

      0 points
  • Luke GodwardLuke Godward, over 2 years ago (edited over 2 years ago )

    web "designer" with no education or knowledge talking about branding lolololol

    7 points
  • John KarlssonJohn Karlsson, over 2 years ago

    Daaaamn Eli, back at it again...

    6 points
  • Nic TrentNic Trent, over 2 years ago

    I really enjoy this talk by Michael Bierut on how the MIT Press logo influenced the new MIT Branding system. Pentagram missed the mark on design the first time and came back years later to try again. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NuKb9mk0acImage alt

    6 points
  • Eric StevensEric Stevens, over 2 years ago

    Why is Eli's logo an elongated 6 with a slash in it?

    5 points
  • Ben Patterson, over 2 years ago

    You know, I'm starting to think that Schiff just doesn't enjoy design, in any sense of the word.

    5 points
    • Terry OTerry O, over 2 years ago

      When no-one wants to buy your skeuno-gubbins any more, this is what you get. A bitter man and a keyboard desperately trying to stay relevant.

      0 points
  • J LiJ Li, over 2 years ago

    I think Schiff's perspective on the MIT logo is being looked at from the wrong angle. Instead of critiquing it from this point in time, we should be critiquing it from the time the logo was created. Most logos 60's/70's had a similar feel and style. But Cooper's logo was different and resembles logos in our modern day era, which proves that her thinking was ahead of her time and deserves the accolades.

    4 points
  • Jay ArrJay Arr, over 2 years ago

    This article starts with a complete misunderstanding/misrepresentation of the modernist philosophy and just gets worse from there. Has Schiff never read the crystal goblet?

    3 points
  • Thompson GeorgeThompson George, over 2 years ago

    He needs to wear an undershirt.

    2 points
  • Hamish TaplinHamish Taplin, over 2 years ago

    I thought Eli had given up being vocally butthurt about the modern minimalist conspiracy against the only style of design he likes/can produce. Back on the agenda with a vengeance here, I see. I guess his time will come again in a decade or two when bevels and dropshadows make a comeback?

    1 point
  • Terry OTerry O, over 2 years ago

    Here we go again. Jesus mate, get over it. I can recommend you a good surgeon to get that chip on your shoulder removed.

    0 points