If you hold the diagram backwards, it looks like a steady evolution from a muddy and nearly indistinguishable set of random blobs and into a set of strong, minimal designs that scan instantly and are easily distinct and clear.
It’s pretty competitive with it TBH. I guess Google is probably worse just because of deliberately choosing exactly the same general visual appearance for literally every single logo for some reason. This one at least has different colors, for some of them.
I think the 2013 set was probably peak UX, common design language, quick at a glance differentiation via colors, a giant letter, and a logo to convey functionality.
If you hold the diagram backwards, it looks like a steady evolution from a muddy and nearly indistinguishable set of random blobs and into a set of strong, minimal designs that scan instantly and are easily distinct and clear.
At least it’s not google’s product logo differentiation failure.
It’s pretty competitive with it TBH. I guess Google is probably worse just because of deliberately choosing exactly the same general visual appearance for literally every single logo for some reason. This one at least has different colors, for some of them.
I think the 2013 set was probably peak UX, common design language, quick at a glance differentiation via colors, a giant letter, and a logo to convey functionality.