The Next Microsoft
July 6, 2012 3:30 PM Subscribe
Interesting, but it looks so ... Appley. The uncluttered white surfaces with a simple font and a basic element? That reads like "Apple" to me.
Unfortunately, only one brand can be Black Text on White Background and still stand out.
posted by filthy light thief at 3:41 PM on July 6, 2012 [4 favorites]
Unfortunately, only one brand can be Black Text on White Background and still stand out.
posted by filthy light thief at 3:41 PM on July 6, 2012 [4 favorites]
That Surface packaging reminds me of something, I just can't quite put my finger on it.
posted by entropicamericana at 3:45 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by entropicamericana at 3:45 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
If Microsoft's going in the direction of Apple from 4 years ago, it's a heck of a better direction than following Apple's current design strategy.
Personally, I think that the Metro UI is functional, completely original, and good-looking. It impressed me a lot more than anything I've seen out of Apple during the past few years.
If Microsoft want to imitate Apple's UI successes, that's awesome, since Apple themselves aren't doing it.
posted by schmod at 3:53 PM on July 6, 2012 [2 favorites]
Personally, I think that the Metro UI is functional, completely original, and good-looking. It impressed me a lot more than anything I've seen out of Apple during the past few years.
If Microsoft want to imitate Apple's UI successes, that's awesome, since Apple themselves aren't doing it.
posted by schmod at 3:53 PM on July 6, 2012 [2 favorites]
The new logo is the only cool part. The rest is just imitation.
The packaging combined with the product names "surfacetablet" and "surfacephone" seems too obvious of a ripoff to be even an acceptable starting point for ideas.
Also, Microsoft can aim higher than repeating the terse and cocky sentence style that all tech marketing uses these days. I'm talking about the ads towards the end, the all white backgrounds with the terse declarative text, e.g.: "Science Fiction. / Introducing Surface. A new vision of the personal computer."
Apple didn't gain its current iconic status by imitating predecessors. It had a brand new vision.
posted by qivip at 3:58 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
The packaging combined with the product names "surfacetablet" and "surfacephone" seems too obvious of a ripoff to be even an acceptable starting point for ideas.
Also, Microsoft can aim higher than repeating the terse and cocky sentence style that all tech marketing uses these days. I'm talking about the ads towards the end, the all white backgrounds with the terse declarative text, e.g.: "Science Fiction. / Introducing Surface. A new vision of the personal computer."
Apple didn't gain its current iconic status by imitating predecessors. It had a brand new vision.
posted by qivip at 3:58 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
A PROMISE MADE, A PROMISE KEPT is hilariously bad for a slogan but I guess fake intimacy and corporate spirituality is a current branding trend.
If any part of Microsoft needs rebranding it's Balmer and by rebranding I mean getting thrown down the ättestupa.
posted by Foci for Analysis at 4:00 PM on July 6, 2012 [4 favorites]
If any part of Microsoft needs rebranding it's Balmer and by rebranding I mean getting thrown down the ättestupa.
posted by Foci for Analysis at 4:00 PM on July 6, 2012 [4 favorites]
I could do without the lowercase Helvetica word mark though (and shouldn't it really be Arial?)
FWIW, it's not entirely Helvetica. The c, s, and t are not correct. They're more closely in the Gill Sans family, though I don't think that's exactly it, either.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:02 PM on July 6, 2012
FWIW, it's not entirely Helvetica. The c, s, and t are not correct. They're more closely in the Gill Sans family, though I don't think that's exactly it, either.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:02 PM on July 6, 2012
We all know it may start off with empty white backgrounds, but will end up like this.
posted by entropicamericana at 4:02 PM on July 6, 2012 [9 favorites]
posted by entropicamericana at 4:02 PM on July 6, 2012 [9 favorites]
that's a distinct, modular, ownable shape. human-scale imagery plays nicely within it; less grandiose language might also help.
accompanied by air-tight presentations (featuring 100% less ballmer), i might actually buy it.
MS has never needed a simple, cohesive rebrand more than now.
posted by angelplasma at 4:05 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
accompanied by air-tight presentations (featuring 100% less ballmer), i might actually buy it.
MS has never needed a simple, cohesive rebrand more than now.
posted by angelplasma at 4:05 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
His "slate" mark reminds me of the red "switch" (as it's known internally by the company) that AXA has been using on its logo for years, and more recently as a key part of their advertising. See page 15 on this "they're going to be angry when they find someone's put this online" document.
posted by TheDonF at 4:05 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by TheDonF at 4:05 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
I agree 100% with tossing out the Windows name on everything but actual Windows.
posted by zsazsa at 4:20 PM on July 6, 2012
posted by zsazsa at 4:20 PM on July 6, 2012
We bought an XBOX last Christmas, and it had just undergone an interface update. The information with the package was useless. I wanted to store games on the hard disk, so I had to go to their website for 'how-to' information.
Because the update was so new, the instructions there were more or less completely out of date. The sequence of moves/commands to find a particular configuration were at odds with what the interface showed. On one hand, I was appalled at the poor execution by Microsoft. On the other it was oddly re-assuring to see that it was indeed a Microsoft show through and through.
Now we find that this flat amalgam of wide blocks with small print will become the future of Windows.
Is it not possible to actually allow multiple interfaces? I wouldn't mind Office if I could revert to pre-ribbon bar. I know, I'm an old moo cow who knows nothing. But why do we have to replace the wheel every decade or so? Why can't we sell interface skins so that we don't continually have to re-learn the grammar?
Anyway, this exercise strikes me as an improvement on the wide blocks, but that's about it.
posted by bc_fred at 4:23 PM on July 6, 2012 [3 favorites]
Because the update was so new, the instructions there were more or less completely out of date. The sequence of moves/commands to find a particular configuration were at odds with what the interface showed. On one hand, I was appalled at the poor execution by Microsoft. On the other it was oddly re-assuring to see that it was indeed a Microsoft show through and through.
Now we find that this flat amalgam of wide blocks with small print will become the future of Windows.
Is it not possible to actually allow multiple interfaces? I wouldn't mind Office if I could revert to pre-ribbon bar. I know, I'm an old moo cow who knows nothing. But why do we have to replace the wheel every decade or so? Why can't we sell interface skins so that we don't continually have to re-learn the grammar?
Anyway, this exercise strikes me as an improvement on the wide blocks, but that's about it.
posted by bc_fred at 4:23 PM on July 6, 2012 [3 favorites]
The uncluttered white surfaces with a simple font and a basic element? That reads like "Apple" to me.
Seriously? Would that be in the same way that black and white movies read like The Artist to some?
posted by juiceCake at 4:25 PM on July 6, 2012 [5 favorites]
Seriously? Would that be in the same way that black and white movies read like The Artist to some?
posted by juiceCake at 4:25 PM on July 6, 2012 [5 favorites]
The packaging combined with the product names "surfacetablet" and "surfacephone" seems too obvious of a ripoff to be even an acceptable starting point for ideas.
A ripoff of themselves? I was working at MS doing design work in the early-mid-1990s and everything was (essentially) franklin gothic book followed by franklin gothic heavy, no word spacing.
posted by maxwelton at 4:32 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
A ripoff of themselves? I was working at MS doing design work in the early-mid-1990s and everything was (essentially) franklin gothic book followed by franklin gothic heavy, no word spacing.
posted by maxwelton at 4:32 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
Interesting, but it looks so ... Appley. The uncluttered white surfaces with a simple font and a basic element? That reads like "Apple" to me.
This identity is about embracing Microsoft as the evil overlord. Desaturated photography, harsh angles, stark imagery of planets and skyscrapers. It takes the negative connotations associated with Microsoft brands and flips the message. Microsoft is no longer a sleeping giant, bureaucracy incarnate, now it represents prosperity, the future, power. That's appeals to a completely different emotion than Apple's marketing, despite their same relative simplicity. This is exactly the kind of image a reorganized, reenergized Microsoft would want, and I don't think any other company on the planet could be represented this way, regardless of the questionable font choice.
This doesn't read as "Apple" to me. Apple's branding is about being cool, or more recently being helpful. Their marketing is simple, but it sets a completely different tone.
posted by JimBennett at 4:33 PM on July 6, 2012 [24 favorites]
This identity is about embracing Microsoft as the evil overlord. Desaturated photography, harsh angles, stark imagery of planets and skyscrapers. It takes the negative connotations associated with Microsoft brands and flips the message. Microsoft is no longer a sleeping giant, bureaucracy incarnate, now it represents prosperity, the future, power. That's appeals to a completely different emotion than Apple's marketing, despite their same relative simplicity. This is exactly the kind of image a reorganized, reenergized Microsoft would want, and I don't think any other company on the planet could be represented this way, regardless of the questionable font choice.
This doesn't read as "Apple" to me. Apple's branding is about being cool, or more recently being helpful. Their marketing is simple, but it sets a completely different tone.
posted by JimBennett at 4:33 PM on July 6, 2012 [24 favorites]
I think "a promise made, a deadline blown" will be my new and extremely accurate slogan.
posted by maxwelton at 4:35 PM on July 6, 2012 [4 favorites]
posted by maxwelton at 4:35 PM on July 6, 2012 [4 favorites]
I'm pretty sick of minimalism by now.
posted by octothorpe at 4:38 PM on July 6, 2012 [3 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 4:38 PM on July 6, 2012 [3 favorites]
I agree 100% with tossing out the Windows name on everything but actual Windows.
At least they've stopped putting Windows Live on everything. WTF did that even mean? It seemed to be "anything that had any connection to the building MSN used to be in plus some other random stuff" for a while.
posted by Artw at 4:42 PM on July 6, 2012
At least they've stopped putting Windows Live on everything. WTF did that even mean? It seemed to be "anything that had any connection to the building MSN used to be in plus some other random stuff" for a while.
posted by Artw at 4:42 PM on July 6, 2012
Agreeing with anyone who thinks that the "sentence fragments ended by periods" thing is very Apple-like.
I actually liked this overall, because the scheme seems to embrace the direction that "metro" is going. It also made me aware of the fact that Microsoft's new tablet PC is called the "Surface". (Maybe it's just Surface, like iPod, and doesn't come equipped with articles.)
posted by King Bee at 4:51 PM on July 6, 2012
I actually liked this overall, because the scheme seems to embrace the direction that "metro" is going. It also made me aware of the fact that Microsoft's new tablet PC is called the "Surface". (Maybe it's just Surface, like iPod, and doesn't come equipped with articles.)
posted by King Bee at 4:51 PM on July 6, 2012
I'm pretty sick of minimalism by now.
Me too, but at least the parallelogram logo is really minimalistic.
I'm less a fan of the increasingly pervasive monochromatic color schemes.
posted by furiousthought at 4:52 PM on July 6, 2012
Me too, but at least the parallelogram logo is really minimalistic.
I'm less a fan of the increasingly pervasive monochromatic color schemes.
posted by furiousthought at 4:52 PM on July 6, 2012
you might say minimalism is overdone.
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:53 PM on July 6, 2012 [6 favorites]
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:53 PM on July 6, 2012 [6 favorites]
I liked the small pi in the new wordmark. And the parallelogram. I kind of like it for a starting point. But I'm sure a few actual meetings in Redmond would change that.
posted by Toekneesan at 5:03 PM on July 6, 2012
posted by Toekneesan at 5:03 PM on July 6, 2012
That Surface packaging reminds me of something, I just can't quite put my finger on it.
Heh. Let me help you jog your memory.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:08 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
Heh. Let me help you jog your memory.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:08 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
A box with a picture on it.
posted by juiceCake at 5:10 PM on July 6, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by juiceCake at 5:10 PM on July 6, 2012 [2 favorites]
A box with a picture on it.
Sure.
Anyhoo, Microsoft's new site is heartening to see. Instead of more Apple packaging ripoffs, their new site is such an improvement — and not derivative! I hope we see more of that.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:14 PM on July 6, 2012
Sure.
Anyhoo, Microsoft's new site is heartening to see. Instead of more Apple packaging ripoffs, their new site is such an improvement — and not derivative! I hope we see more of that.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:14 PM on July 6, 2012
i meant what i said and i said what i meant
a software behemoth 100%
posted by mazola at 5:15 PM on July 6, 2012 [13 favorites]
surfacebob. surfacej++. surfacemediaroom. surfacekin. surfacecourier.
surface ME.
posted by sonic meat machine at 5:19 PM on July 6, 2012
surface ME.
posted by sonic meat machine at 5:19 PM on July 6, 2012
's Ur Face
posted by schoolgirl report at 5:23 PM on July 6, 2012
posted by schoolgirl report at 5:23 PM on July 6, 2012
I wish they could just break through all kinds of barriers and just say what they want to say:
Microsoft - This shit just got real
posted by Muddler at 5:45 PM on July 6, 2012
Microsoft - This shit just got real
posted by Muddler at 5:45 PM on July 6, 2012
Unfortunately, only one brand can be Black Text on White Background and still stand out.
The XKCD idea pretty much describes the entire Tesco Value brand identity.
posted by rh at 5:48 PM on July 6, 2012 [2 favorites]
The XKCD idea pretty much describes the entire Tesco Value brand identity.
posted by rh at 5:48 PM on July 6, 2012 [2 favorites]
It's perfect for Microsoft. But let me redo their tagline.
Microsoft
Skating to where the puck was.
posted by charlie don't surf at 6:03 PM on July 6, 2012 [4 favorites]
Microsoft
Skating to where the puck was.
posted by charlie don't surf at 6:03 PM on July 6, 2012 [4 favorites]
Bwithh - "a promise made, a promise kept" sounds like a 1950s slogan for a regional bank or insurance company
For me, it immediately brought up the image of the old IBM logos, and an old IBM sense of being an airtight business solution.
But what has Microsoft actually promised?
posted by porpoise at 6:06 PM on July 6, 2012
For me, it immediately brought up the image of the old IBM logos, and an old IBM sense of being an airtight business solution.
But what has Microsoft actually promised?
posted by porpoise at 6:06 PM on July 6, 2012
Ubiquity.
posted by notyou at 6:13 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by notyou at 6:13 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
Instead of more Apple packaging ripoffs...
Examples? Are their mice in some sort of box now? Their keyboards? When they sell software at stores is their software in boxes?
posted by juiceCake at 6:16 PM on July 6, 2012
Examples? Are their mice in some sort of box now? Their keyboards? When they sell software at stores is their software in boxes?
posted by juiceCake at 6:16 PM on July 6, 2012
I'm not crazy about minimalism, but it's sort of interesting to see what different kinds of minimalist styles can appear- Apple's minimalism is different from Google's after all.
And isn't minimalism the future of computing, anyway? More and more abstraction, more user-friendliness, less complexity.
posted by Apocryphon at 6:59 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
And isn't minimalism the future of computing, anyway? More and more abstraction, more user-friendliness, less complexity.
posted by Apocryphon at 6:59 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
The presentation is great.
I my opinion though the slanted stripe logo doesn't stand well on its own. It looks good accompanying other text and graphics as a colorful flourish. It looks like it is a boarder for something else. In the image of it trying to stand alone on the back of the surface tablet and on the opening screen of the metro phone, it looks too plain.
It would be interesting to see the next iteration of this artists project.
posted by Hicksu at 7:18 PM on July 6, 2012
I my opinion though the slanted stripe logo doesn't stand well on its own. It looks good accompanying other text and graphics as a colorful flourish. It looks like it is a boarder for something else. In the image of it trying to stand alone on the back of the surface tablet and on the opening screen of the metro phone, it looks too plain.
It would be interesting to see the next iteration of this artists project.
posted by Hicksu at 7:18 PM on July 6, 2012
I don't think any one will ever beat the IBM "8 bar" logo. Paul Rand did their visual identity in 1956 and it has been basically the same ever since. It is pretty much the definition of understated authority. I just pulled up an IBM support web page and I could probably show a direct correspondence between its design elements and paper documents they produced 30+ years ago.
posted by charlie don't surf at 7:26 PM on July 6, 2012
posted by charlie don't surf at 7:26 PM on July 6, 2012
Agreed. Apple may be a bit minimalist, or sparse even, but everything they do is so cutsey. They are like the Au Bon Pain of computer companies. I expect that sometime in the next 5 years they will transition away from the ascetic precision engineering image they cultivated in the recent past and embrace a "Made by grandma with love" brand as more of their hardware gets wider adoption.
World Microsoft, with images of planets and cities branded with Windows logos, is perfect. You use Microsoft because you are a Master of the Universe who will not be locked into walled app stores and cutesy apple OSs.
posted by Ad hominem at 8:08 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
World Microsoft, with images of planets and cities branded with Windows logos, is perfect. You use Microsoft because you are a Master of the Universe who will not be locked into walled app stores and cutesy apple OSs.
posted by Ad hominem at 8:08 PM on July 6, 2012 [1 favorite]
Am I the only one who thinks Microsoft should dust off their old 1.0 logo from '85 again? It actually looks quite nice and works in the context of Metro.
posted by jason_steakums at 8:27 PM on July 6, 2012 [3 favorites]
posted by jason_steakums at 8:27 PM on July 6, 2012 [3 favorites]
At least they've stopped putting Windows Live on everything. WTF did that even mean?
That was part of their brilliant plan to throw more than $8 billion in the incinerator trying to build an online division.
posted by Rhomboid at 9:29 PM on July 6, 2012
That was part of their brilliant plan to throw more than $8 billion in the incinerator trying to build an online division.
posted by Rhomboid at 9:29 PM on July 6, 2012
Am I the only one who thinks Microsoft should dust off their old 1.0 logo from '85 again?
Yeah, the page loaded rather slowly for me, thanks to my rural Australian internet, and those logos appeared before the text below them...I saw that logo on the left and thought "Oooh, that's nice, is that what the designer's proposing?"
posted by Jimbob at 9:57 PM on July 6, 2012
Yeah, the page loaded rather slowly for me, thanks to my rural Australian internet, and those logos appeared before the text below them...I saw that logo on the left and thought "Oooh, that's nice, is that what the designer's proposing?"
posted by Jimbob at 9:57 PM on July 6, 2012
Am I the only one who thinks Microsoft should dust off their old 1.0 logo from '85 again?
Huh? Do you mean this logo? That was their second logo, in use from about 1975 through 1985.
Now that was a brand identity. All their software came in 3 ring binders with dark green covers, with the logo reversed out of it, sometimes in a pale, sickly yellow.
One of my most prized possessions is a Microsoft coffee mug from about 1979, it's that dark green with a yellowy logo, and the color of it makes drinking coffee or tea from it into a stomach-turning experience.
posted by charlie don't surf at 10:12 PM on July 6, 2012 [2 favorites]
Huh? Do you mean this logo? That was their second logo, in use from about 1975 through 1985.
Now that was a brand identity. All their software came in 3 ring binders with dark green covers, with the logo reversed out of it, sometimes in a pale, sickly yellow.
One of my most prized possessions is a Microsoft coffee mug from about 1979, it's that dark green with a yellowy logo, and the color of it makes drinking coffee or tea from it into a stomach-turning experience.
posted by charlie don't surf at 10:12 PM on July 6, 2012 [2 favorites]
I meant this one from the article, but I love that green and yellow one. I've got half a mind to do a faux-retro Rainmeter theme based on that...
posted by jason_steakums at 10:23 PM on July 6, 2012
posted by jason_steakums at 10:23 PM on July 6, 2012
Great logo & package design. Shows what can be accomplished with even a minimum of effort at color (hear that, you MS eye-sear no-color-sense-having fiends?).
But the Ronald McDonald Engrish slogan job? That's only slightly better than a Microsoft branding effort.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 10:31 PM on July 6, 2012
But the Ronald McDonald Engrish slogan job? That's only slightly better than a Microsoft branding effort.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 10:31 PM on July 6, 2012
I don't recall ever seeing that Win 1.0 logo, I am certain it is a complete fabrication. Windows didn't have any logo until version 3.1. Here are some shots of the actual Windows packaging, dating back to v1.0. They just used the Microsoft logo.
I did some google image searching, and I see where he got the faked logo. It isn't even the right font. This is the peril of doing your research online, and using untrusted sources that copied their work from other unreliable sources. Maybe those graphics were used by some ad that wasn't authorized by Microsoft, but it definitely wasn't the product logo.
posted by charlie don't surf at 10:43 PM on July 6, 2012 [5 favorites]
I did some google image searching, and I see where he got the faked logo. It isn't even the right font. This is the peril of doing your research online, and using untrusted sources that copied their work from other unreliable sources. Maybe those graphics were used by some ad that wasn't authorized by Microsoft, but it definitely wasn't the product logo.
posted by charlie don't surf at 10:43 PM on July 6, 2012 [5 favorites]
Pretty strong overall but I can't believe the text logo. You can't get rid of the notch in the O! And the dotless I is disconcerting. Reminds me of the hack job on Xerox a few years back.
posted by scose at 10:48 PM on July 6, 2012
posted by scose at 10:48 PM on July 6, 2012
Apple's UIs don't seem that minimalistic at all. Like Ad hominem said, there are a lot of cutesy, cartoon graphics in the actual system UIs.
Anyway, the apple fanboys in this thread are ridiculous "A white box with a picture of the product? TOTALLY AN APPLE RIPOFF!" "Black text on a white background? TOTALLY AN APPLE RIPOFF!!!"
It's completely ridiculous.
Microsoft's branding has always been kind of weird. It almost seems like they want to recede into the background and not be noticed. It's all flat squares of color (there graphic design has been that way long before win 8) and it's very understated. Not minimalistic which can still be jarring or noticeable, but like they don't want you to think about Microsoft as having a visual aesthetic at all. Just there in the background.
Anyway, this is kind of an interesting idea, but in practice I think the coldness would turn a lot more people off then turn on.
It seems like it would be a good branding campaign aimed at corporate IT people, but Microsoft wants a broad range of people to buy their tablets.
Ultimately, I wonder how much any of this even matters. Ultimately, if you have a good product people will use it. Google is an obvious example. Their logo, let's face it, was kind of goofy. They were never sleek.
Outer space is a cool theme, but you want to humanize it, make it cute and friendly if you want to appeal to the broad population, which isn't all about imposing highrise structures.
posted by delmoi at 10:54 PM on July 6, 2012
Anyway, the apple fanboys in this thread are ridiculous "A white box with a picture of the product? TOTALLY AN APPLE RIPOFF!" "Black text on a white background? TOTALLY AN APPLE RIPOFF!!!"
It's completely ridiculous.
Microsoft's branding has always been kind of weird. It almost seems like they want to recede into the background and not be noticed. It's all flat squares of color (there graphic design has been that way long before win 8) and it's very understated. Not minimalistic which can still be jarring or noticeable, but like they don't want you to think about Microsoft as having a visual aesthetic at all. Just there in the background.
Anyway, this is kind of an interesting idea, but in practice I think the coldness would turn a lot more people off then turn on.
It seems like it would be a good branding campaign aimed at corporate IT people, but Microsoft wants a broad range of people to buy their tablets.
Ultimately, I wonder how much any of this even matters. Ultimately, if you have a good product people will use it. Google is an obvious example. Their logo, let's face it, was kind of goofy. They were never sleek.
Outer space is a cool theme, but you want to humanize it, make it cute and friendly if you want to appeal to the broad population, which isn't all about imposing highrise structures.
posted by delmoi at 10:54 PM on July 6, 2012
charlie don't surf: I don't recall ever seeing that Win 1.0 logo, I am certain it is a complete fabrication.
Click through from the article you linked to, and you'll see that Windows 1.0 logo was from an official Microsoft blog on designing the Windows 8 logo. I don't think Microsoft retconned the Windows 1.0 logo.
posted by zsazsa at 10:56 PM on July 6, 2012
Click through from the article you linked to, and you'll see that Windows 1.0 logo was from an official Microsoft blog on designing the Windows 8 logo. I don't think Microsoft retconned the Windows 1.0 logo.
posted by zsazsa at 10:56 PM on July 6, 2012
It's weird, though. Searching around, I've seen the logo in question in a lot of articles about Windows 1.0/2.0, but I haven't seen any pictures of it on packaging or anything like that.
Wikipedia (I know, I know) says that Windows 1.0 and 2.0 were officially listed as unsupported on December 31st, 2001 (which, if true - wow!), maybe Microsoft changed the logo somewhere in those 16 years it was still technically supported? Surely they had branded collateral internally - manuals and such - for whatever bare bones support they were giving all those years later.
posted by jason_steakums at 11:08 PM on July 6, 2012
Wikipedia (I know, I know) says that Windows 1.0 and 2.0 were officially listed as unsupported on December 31st, 2001 (which, if true - wow!), maybe Microsoft changed the logo somewhere in those 16 years it was still technically supported? Surely they had branded collateral internally - manuals and such - for whatever bare bones support they were giving all those years later.
posted by jason_steakums at 11:08 PM on July 6, 2012
Well, MS is notorious for it's corporate amnesia. Win 1.0 was a dud and there are a lot of details they would probably like to forget. The author of that page, Sam Moreau, only joined MS in 2006 and I suspect he just went out and googled for logos like everyone else does for their blog.
It is absolutely impossible for that to be the Windows logo if it never appeared on any product package or on any of the manuals or docs at any time from 1985 through 1992. Maybe it appeared in advertising once but that doesn't make it THE Windows logo. I sold hundreds of copies of all the Windows versions from 1.0 forward, and I handled a lot of MS marketing materials, but I have never seen that before.
posted by charlie don't surf at 11:16 PM on July 6, 2012
It is absolutely impossible for that to be the Windows logo if it never appeared on any product package or on any of the manuals or docs at any time from 1985 through 1992. Maybe it appeared in advertising once but that doesn't make it THE Windows logo. I sold hundreds of copies of all the Windows versions from 1.0 forward, and I handled a lot of MS marketing materials, but I have never seen that before.
posted by charlie don't surf at 11:16 PM on July 6, 2012
Yeah, I just spent 20 minutes trawling old issues of PC Magazine and InfoWorld from the Windows 1.0/2.0 era on Google Books and none of the ads for Windows have that logo (or any logo). Curious. The first Windows logo I remember is the second one in the timeline in this image.
posted by zsazsa at 11:32 PM on July 6, 2012
posted by zsazsa at 11:32 PM on July 6, 2012
Unfortunately, only one brand can be Black Text on White Background and still stand out.
I immediately thought of the Dharma Initiative, but maybe that's just me. Namaste.
posted by Pryde at 1:04 AM on July 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
I immediately thought of the Dharma Initiative, but maybe that's just me. Namaste.
posted by Pryde at 1:04 AM on July 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
"Anyway, the apple fanboys in this thread are ridiculous "A white box with a picture of the product? TOTALLY AN APPLE RIPOFF!" "Black text on a white background? TOTALLY AN APPLE RIPOFF!!!""
It does echo Apple in the packaging. That's why it's a shitty branding exercise. You could go any direction at all with the packaging, why choose a solution so close to Apple? You can look clean, progressive and innovative without doing black sans serif on white with a silhouetted product. Apple owns that, this is a personal project, so why would the designer not explore something really different?
If this showed up in one of my design classes, I'd give it a C- for pissing away the brand by inviting confusion with a competitor.
posted by Mcable at 7:24 AM on July 7, 2012 [2 favorites]
It does echo Apple in the packaging. That's why it's a shitty branding exercise. You could go any direction at all with the packaging, why choose a solution so close to Apple? You can look clean, progressive and innovative without doing black sans serif on white with a silhouetted product. Apple owns that, this is a personal project, so why would the designer not explore something really different?
If this showed up in one of my design classes, I'd give it a C- for pissing away the brand by inviting confusion with a competitor.
posted by Mcable at 7:24 AM on July 7, 2012 [2 favorites]
Apple owns that.
They do not. They are not entitled to "own" something that is the result of design work and principles that have been around for ages. Design, like everything else, does not exist in a vacuum. Black on white. Sans-serif or serif, in combination, and now Apple owns that. This is Fox news level absurdity.
posted by juiceCake at 8:08 AM on July 7, 2012 [2 favorites]
They do not. They are not entitled to "own" something that is the result of design work and principles that have been around for ages. Design, like everything else, does not exist in a vacuum. Black on white. Sans-serif or serif, in combination, and now Apple owns that. This is Fox news level absurdity.
posted by juiceCake at 8:08 AM on July 7, 2012 [2 favorites]
The only thing Apple owns is cattle.
posted by CautionToTheWind at 9:56 AM on July 7, 2012
posted by CautionToTheWind at 9:56 AM on July 7, 2012
I don't want to put words in Mcable's mouth, but I think he may mean "Apple owns that" in the sense that Apple has so effectively marketed themselves with that style that any competitors using a similar style just look like they're trying to be more Apple-like, and defining themselves in terms of their relationship to Apple.
posted by jason_steakums at 9:59 AM on July 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by jason_steakums at 9:59 AM on July 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
To some sure. But then to some not so because we recognize that just like black and white movies, it's been done before. Things that work are used by individuals all the time. Many companies partially define themselves in relation to others. Apple themselves have often defined themselves in relation to Microsoft as well.
But using minimalism doesn't in any way say to many of us that MS (or in this case fake MS) is trying to be more like Apple. If anything, in recent years, the reverse is true.
I wonder if we got statements like Apple is trying to be like the Beatles and the Beatles own black on white due to the White Album.
posted by juiceCake at 11:48 AM on July 7, 2012
But using minimalism doesn't in any way say to many of us that MS (or in this case fake MS) is trying to be more like Apple. If anything, in recent years, the reverse is true.
I wonder if we got statements like Apple is trying to be like the Beatles and the Beatles own black on white due to the White Album.
posted by juiceCake at 11:48 AM on July 7, 2012
At least they've stopped putting Windows Live on everything. WTF did that even mean?
Simple! It's just another way of referring to ".NET" .
Anyhoo, Microsoft's new site is heartening to see.
It might be an improvment on earlier efforts, but it's still a confusing mess. I count 19 graphic elements (logos and custom icons), none of which are a Microsoft logo (unless it's the italix text on the top left). There are links to seven other Microsoft websites - not helpful, as I thought I already was at the Microsoft website. It's got a stupd slideshow that runs without telling it to run, and every item in that slideshow is from a different industry (phone hardware, operating systems, and a 'store'). There is a link to "Get the browser built exclusively for Windows" as if that's a selling point.
I could go on, but even this thread brings out the fact that there is confusion both within and outside of the company between 'Windows' and 'Microsoft'; resolving this conflict would be a good place to start a rebranding process.
posted by not_that_epiphanius at 11:51 AM on July 7, 2012
Simple! It's just another way of referring to ".NET" .
Anyhoo, Microsoft's new site is heartening to see.
It might be an improvment on earlier efforts, but it's still a confusing mess. I count 19 graphic elements (logos and custom icons), none of which are a Microsoft logo (unless it's the italix text on the top left). There are links to seven other Microsoft websites - not helpful, as I thought I already was at the Microsoft website. It's got a stupd slideshow that runs without telling it to run, and every item in that slideshow is from a different industry (phone hardware, operating systems, and a 'store'). There is a link to "Get the browser built exclusively for Windows" as if that's a selling point.
I could go on, but even this thread brings out the fact that there is confusion both within and outside of the company between 'Windows' and 'Microsoft'; resolving this conflict would be a good place to start a rebranding process.
posted by not_that_epiphanius at 11:51 AM on July 7, 2012
"Apple owns that.
They do not. They are not entitled to "own" something that is the result of design work and principles that have been around for ages."
Yes they do, from a branding point of view. It looks like Apple, a customer sees it, they think it's an Apple product. That design territory belongs to Apple in the mind of a consumer, and any other tech manufacturer would be foolish to go there. You seem to be interpreting this in a very literal way, jason_steakums explains it correctly.
I wonder if we got statements like Apple is trying to be like the Beatles and the Beatles own black on white due to the White Album.
We're talking about branding. Everything in design history has something it can call back to as a design influence, and there is rarely confusion. When you have two companies in the same field making competitive products, there is confusion.
And, it's not like there haven't been conflicts with Apple computers and the Beatles. And there's a good lesson in that conflict.
posted by Mcable at 12:14 PM on July 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
They do not. They are not entitled to "own" something that is the result of design work and principles that have been around for ages."
Yes they do, from a branding point of view. It looks like Apple, a customer sees it, they think it's an Apple product. That design territory belongs to Apple in the mind of a consumer, and any other tech manufacturer would be foolish to go there. You seem to be interpreting this in a very literal way, jason_steakums explains it correctly.
I wonder if we got statements like Apple is trying to be like the Beatles and the Beatles own black on white due to the White Album.
We're talking about branding. Everything in design history has something it can call back to as a design influence, and there is rarely confusion. When you have two companies in the same field making competitive products, there is confusion.
And, it's not like there haven't been conflicts with Apple computers and the Beatles. And there's a good lesson in that conflict.
posted by Mcable at 12:14 PM on July 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
BTW, Here's an example of something Apple can call back to as a design influence.
posted by Mcable at 12:57 PM on July 7, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by Mcable at 12:57 PM on July 7, 2012 [2 favorites]
I wonder if we got statements like Apple is trying to be like the Beatles and the Beatles own black on white due to the White Album.
Maybe the day when they sell computers shaped like records, and ship them in record sleeves.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:58 PM on July 7, 2012
Maybe the day when they sell computers shaped like records, and ship them in record sleeves.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:58 PM on July 7, 2012
BTW, Here's an example of something Apple can call back to as a design influence.
I hope you're aware that Jobs idolized Edwin Land and went to visit him a couple of times.
posted by charlie don't surf at 2:43 PM on July 7, 2012 [2 favorites]
I hope you're aware that Jobs idolized Edwin Land and went to visit him a couple of times.
posted by charlie don't surf at 2:43 PM on July 7, 2012 [2 favorites]
I hope you're aware that Jobs idolized Edwin Land and went to visit him a couple of times.
Yes I am.
posted by Mcable at 5:44 PM on July 7, 2012
Yes I am.
posted by Mcable at 5:44 PM on July 7, 2012
Did noone here grow up with yellow packaging/block letter generic items in the supermarket? PAPER TOWELS or the like?
Looks remarkably like the No Name brand, but everything I read says that was only in Canada.
posted by aspo at 8:34 PM on July 7, 2012
Looks remarkably like the No Name brand, but everything I read says that was only in Canada.
posted by aspo at 8:34 PM on July 7, 2012
Yellow packaging? I believe the originator of this generic white label was Ralphs, back in the early 1980s. Their white label with the blue stripe was the first generic "brand" with this design. It was so iconic in California, it became a running gag in the movie Repo Man. I looked and looked and I could not find a pic of the classic scene where Otto is eating out of a generic can labeled "food."
posted by charlie don't surf at 9:11 PM on July 7, 2012
posted by charlie don't surf at 9:11 PM on July 7, 2012
rh: "The XKCD idea pretty much describes the entire Tesco Value brand identity."
Yes, but it occasionally goes too far.
And, yeech. You'd be hard pressed to find a brand identity that's more closely associated with products that are complete and total shit. However, for some reason, Tesco have managed to embrace that...
They're not even attempting to target the "decent-quality affordably-priced kitchen basics" segment that Aldi and Trader Joes love targeting -- Tesco has a different brand for that. Tesco Value products are explicitly sold as things that are being sold at rock-rock-bottom prices, for which the quality has very obviously suffered as a result.)
posted by schmod at 9:20 PM on July 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
Yes, but it occasionally goes too far.
And, yeech. You'd be hard pressed to find a brand identity that's more closely associated with products that are complete and total shit. However, for some reason, Tesco have managed to embrace that...
They're not even attempting to target the "decent-quality affordably-priced kitchen basics" segment that Aldi and Trader Joes love targeting -- Tesco has a different brand for that. Tesco Value products are explicitly sold as things that are being sold at rock-rock-bottom prices, for which the quality has very obviously suffered as a result.)
posted by schmod at 9:20 PM on July 7, 2012 [1 favorite]
There are some products that just don't need to be very high quality. Speaking of "decent-quality affordably-priced kitchen basics," one of my favorite kitchen tools is a big, cheap pasta strainer I bought almost 30 years ago, for something like 59 cents. The quality is absolutely terrible, I can still see lots of plastic flashing around the edges, due to poor quality molding and manufacture. But it is good enough, and it is virtually indestructible so it has outlasted almost everything else in my kitchen. You know, come to think of it, it has outlasted almost everything I own.
posted by charlie don't surf at 10:24 PM on July 7, 2012
posted by charlie don't surf at 10:24 PM on July 7, 2012
I find that tilted lozenge shape just as nauseating-looking on the back of a computer as the tilted window shape. Not an improvement at all.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 10:52 AM on July 8, 2012
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 10:52 AM on July 8, 2012
JimBennett: "This identity is about embracing Microsoft as the evil overlord"
There's also the other uncomfortable truth. Microsoft is embracing open-source and improving its products, while Apple simultaneously escalated to being the most notorious patent troll in the IT industry in almost the blink of an eyelid.
Maybe it's just PR, but if that's the case, Microsoft have gotten considerably better at it, while Apple seems to have completely abandoned the notion of interacting with their customers.
I certainly don't want to excuse Microsoft from its past (and even current) misdeeds, but I think they're legitimately the lesser of the two evils at the moment. I'm typing this from my Macbook, and MacOS has been my platform of choice for about 12 years now, and yet I have serious concerns about the level of seriousness with which Apple is treating its desktop OS, or the ethics with which it conducts its business (unrelated to their manufacturing issues which admittedly seem to plague the entire industry equally).
posted by schmod at 8:39 PM on July 8, 2012
There's also the other uncomfortable truth. Microsoft is embracing open-source and improving its products, while Apple simultaneously escalated to being the most notorious patent troll in the IT industry in almost the blink of an eyelid.
Maybe it's just PR, but if that's the case, Microsoft have gotten considerably better at it, while Apple seems to have completely abandoned the notion of interacting with their customers.
I certainly don't want to excuse Microsoft from its past (and even current) misdeeds, but I think they're legitimately the lesser of the two evils at the moment. I'm typing this from my Macbook, and MacOS has been my platform of choice for about 12 years now, and yet I have serious concerns about the level of seriousness with which Apple is treating its desktop OS, or the ethics with which it conducts its business (unrelated to their manufacturing issues which admittedly seem to plague the entire industry equally).
posted by schmod at 8:39 PM on July 8, 2012
It looks like Apple, a customer sees it, they think it's an Apple product.
I disagree. Some might, some might not. I certainly wouldn't, and I totally disagree that Apple owns the minimalism brand in the computer retail space. No one owns it.
We're talking about branding.
We certainly are.
Everything in design history has something it can call back to as a design influence, and there is rarely confusion. When you have two companies in the same field making competitive products, there is confusion.
I disagree. It might be confusing to very few people in the sense that some people would confuse Al Franken's book with being endorsed by Fox News. I really don't want to cater to that sort of lowest common denominator. It's dangerous and would allow corporations to own far more than they already do. I think any company "owning" a design style that belongs to everyone is atrocious just because they are currently using it affectively.
Maybe the day when they sell computers shaped like records, and ship them in record sleeves.
Or you know, CD cases, which software has been known at one point to be shipped in.
posted by juiceCake at 11:26 AM on July 13, 2012
I disagree. Some might, some might not. I certainly wouldn't, and I totally disagree that Apple owns the minimalism brand in the computer retail space. No one owns it.
We're talking about branding.
We certainly are.
Everything in design history has something it can call back to as a design influence, and there is rarely confusion. When you have two companies in the same field making competitive products, there is confusion.
I disagree. It might be confusing to very few people in the sense that some people would confuse Al Franken's book with being endorsed by Fox News. I really don't want to cater to that sort of lowest common denominator. It's dangerous and would allow corporations to own far more than they already do. I think any company "owning" a design style that belongs to everyone is atrocious just because they are currently using it affectively.
Maybe the day when they sell computers shaped like records, and ship them in record sleeves.
Or you know, CD cases, which software has been known at one point to be shipped in.
posted by juiceCake at 11:26 AM on July 13, 2012
« Older Conspiracy to Commit 'Conspiracy' Conspiracy. | FOR SALE Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by 2bucksplus at 3:38 PM on July 6, 2012 [6 favorites]