Post Update: 19th February 2012
Now that the official statement on the Windows 8 logo published by Pentagram the perspective issue that I pointed out in the post below is now a mute issue.
It also appears that the version of the Windows 8 logo referenced by myself and many other websites is NOT the version designed by Pentagram. You will notice that their design (image above) has the stroke thickness of the vertical and horizontal lines set much much thinner.
Pentagram also cover the reasoning for the equal thickness lines as being based on classical perspective drawing rather than computer perspective. I still think this looks odd, but at least there is an official line for that particular design direction.
“The perspective drawing is based on classical perspective drawing, not computerized perspective. The cross bar stays the same size no matter the height of the logo, which means it has to be redrawn for each time it increases in size, like classic typography.”
This also is a good example of trying to be too clever for your own boots—that is a direct reference back to me—and not waiting for an official description before going off all half-cocked. I personally wouldn’t bother reading anything below mostly because it makes me look like a real dick.
A lot of press coverage over the announcement of the new Windows 8 logo design, and with that has come a substantial quantity of mixed thoughts. Note: There was a story running last weekend reporting that the Windows 8 logo was a fake design, and I pretty much got sucked up with that, but it now seems to be very much official.
The Official Windows 8 Logo Brief
To get right down to it I’m not overly offended by this new Metro style of design that Windows 8 is based on.
In fairness to the Windows brand, we have a common theme being addressed (the window pane) as well as the rather specific name in Windows which doesn’t leave a whole lot of visual choices for us to base a logo design around. Hard to reinvent a window without resorting to something dramatically stylised which is not really an option given the Windows logo design heritage.
If this has been a logo for something totally different and from a totally different brand than Microsoft then my overall thoughts would likely be quite different, and by different I mean not so, “I’m not overly offended…“. There is, however, one design detail that does bother me, and I just can’t stop being bothered by it. I have tried to see a plausable reason for it, but I just keep coming back to it being a design flaw rather than a purposeful feature.
Those pesky window frames.
It’s all about the perspective and the simple fact that the white dividing lines would/should/ought to—I like to think this is a reasonable conclusion—increase in width the further left-to-right background/foreground it goes. Instead, the white dividing lines remain constant and seemingly don’t work/run/flow with that quite dramatic off-the-page perspective. It’s one of those details for me that makes it look like it’s either: trying too hard to not be realistic in any reasonable form, or it was just missed all together. There are no hard/fast right/wrong rules with logo design, but there are some things that just cause murmurings amongst the design fraternity. So going back to last weekend when I first saw reports that the Windows 8 logo was a fake: it was this feature that led me to assume that it could quite possibly be a fake as this surely would not have been in an official design? So I was wrong on that front.
I have, so far, not seen design feature this picked up by any other critic so am I am just being particularly particular?