Just why? I mean, I get why they’d like to change the logo, but why for that? It looks like straight from 2008 internet with that terrible, overly complex gradient and 3D edges. The shapes alone are ok-ish IMO, but still quite mediocre, especially considering that this is a huge international corporation which could definitely do better. In an era when every graphic element is simplified and flattened they go exactly the opposite way. Ok, almost exactly, the font is simpler than before, but less serious and still very average.
I’m not sure I understand what the fuss is about. If you rotate the “m” 90* it looks more like an “e” which of course is a nod to their future in electrification. It’s got a double meaning because rotating the entire logo 90* the underlined m becomes “EI” which is the initials for their new campaign slogan “Everybody In”. I think it’s creative.
You obviously don’t understand how to leverage dynamic synergies and generate new value-added paradigms while driving integrated global market solutions.
My fuss is certainly not about the poor little “m” which got the task of conveying 99% of the logo’s symbolic meaning (), but about the overall dated and, tbh, quite kitschy style.
Fair enough. I still feel like this is a case of “too much” change all at once. Like Automation’s fixture gizmo. I’m of the belief that it’s a step in the right direction and eventually everyone will get used to it. I recognize I’m in the minority. LOL
), but about the overall dated and, tbh, quite kitschy style.
I recognize I’m in the minority. LOL