Reminds me of this:
So why was Steve Jobs calling Google’s mobile apps guy on a Sunday morning? Because he had noticed that the yellow in the second “o” of the Google logo on the iPhone was wrong. He wanted it fixed
in a good way.
I mean, does this sort of thing matter? Is it OCD? or it is attention to the details of the quality of the individual experience?
If Jobs had been so concerned about his customer’s aesthetic preferences rather than his own, I might have liked him more.
I’m gonna give a pass to the non-centered square, too. Intentional or not, to me it creates perceived symmetry, similar to the way typographers extend the curved capitals (C, G, J, O, Q, S, U) slightly above and below the frame to make them “look right”. But that overhanging line is inexcusable!
If I was shown that logo without knowing and asked to name the company and or product/service it produced I am not sure I would get get anywhere close.
As a graphic design teacher I feel it’s part of my job to make sure all of my students enter the profession with at least a mild case of OCD.
But what is it? It looks like a backwards C. If it was rotated it would look like a U. which makes sense. I so want it to be a U. what the heck is it representing from a design stand point. Yes the execution is horrible but that can be fixed EASILY. but whats the concept? i dont see it.
Its hard to tell the square is off center, even with the center line. And changing the colors to find hidden elements is kind of cheating, not even relevant in the real world.
While I dont like the new design either, the amount of backlash feels like little people one upping the boss.
The threshold for things being considered “infuriating” is quite low these days.
I bet the of-center square is on purpose. The horizontal line on the left unbalances the white space surrounding the square, so if it were properly centered your eyes would see it as being a bit to the left.
the unsightly edge overlap - problem number 3 - is a travesty though.
edit - beaten on both counts by Tim_Heffernan!
i think it is exactly that he was concerned with his own preferences (and what he thought worked for others) that made it profitable. He must have been onto something, but I am not sure his personal preferences were at play, so much as a set of usability and look heuristics that created a not-overly-technical user experience, and a visually pleasing one as well, which he preferred to provide. I think there is a difference there. I’m sure we can agree the login page on his own home machine probably wasn’t the standard Mac login the rest of us used, right?
Some people really really really are distracted by things like flickering lights, low hums, and inconsistent fonts. Steve seemed to respect that, and it appears to have paid off. Getting that ‘look and feel’ into schools in the 80s was a good marketing plan, even if they didn’t know it. Not everyone is as distracted by design - overlapping lines, and off center squares. I personally prefer my mac to any command line machine I’ve ever used, and I think it really is because of attention to infuriatingly untidy details, like in the headline. I only use Jobs as an example.
I could go for Ford and his model T (standardized cars replacing bespoke auto makers) to make just about the same point, which was not about fanboiism, but design, and the people to whom it matters.
Which is not everyone, nor a putdown.
I have been obsessing over the details of my new product for quite a while now. Details do matter. Mainly because if you don’t get the details right, then people spend their time talking about how the details are wrong, instead of just enjoying the product.
This post is a good example of this idea.
You civvies don’t get it, man. I didn’t spend all those years dragging an x-acto blade through paste-up boards just so some upstart kid with a trial copy of Adobe Creative Suite can leave strokes hanging willy-nilly because he can’t be bothered to learn the “mask” function.
I agree 100%. Good designers don’t design by committee, because if you just give people what they think they want you’ll never get anything elegant or innovative. A mechanical engineer doesn’t base his designs on public opinion either.
mild case of OCD.
OCPD not OCD.
Disclosure: I suffered from actual OCD for the better part of a decade.
It’s a power button turned on its side. It’s a key in the ignition. It’s a drone hovering over a full moon. You know, all symbols bound to get you home in a hurry.
The marked up dotted red line should be 1 px over to the right, too. There are always levels of infuriating untidiness.
This post is a good example of this idea.
I doubt it. More likely it’s just because this travesty was created by the CEO, and CEOs aren’t detail guys. And it’s almost always a freaking disaster like this when they get involved in the design like this (Jobs aside).