Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2020/09/03/intel-redesigns-logo.html
…
3 Likes
Well, to be honest, Intel is supposed to be the sort of dull, dependable company that doesn’t try to be fun, but like a good butler someone you never see.
It’s easy to forget, but the last time Intel was truly innovative was Your Grandparent’s Time©. It isn’t a start-up, it shouldn’t be running around in the same skinny jeans, so to speak. I for one find it does one thing right, it makes the logo seem boring by getting all the small details right, and in a way it does harken back to the good old days, without the glitchy e.
4 Likes
They even had their own corporate typeface created for this. They couldn’t make it any smaller than 10nm, though.
23 Likes
Ah yes, minimalist, flat, sans serif logo, just like every other redesign in the last few years. Don’t want to be left before the next big trend.
6 Likes
Never forget.
3 Likes
To quote Raymond Wong, it "now looks like the store brand of Windex."
Waiting now for a wipe-screen key to be added.
2 Likes
I dunno, I think compared to a lot of other re-brands, this one is basically Fine. Intel’s logo was already a block sans serif, so this isn’t some radical departure for them.
3 Likes
I still like their chips in my laptop, seem to run cooler, and I don’t have all those problems with Linux and Nvidia do.
1 Like
The swirl thing and pseudo-cursive was goofy.
I don’t know. It looks perfect for a company in terminal decline.
That thing where the font starts out Gothic New Serif or something and quickly acts like the ink is on a superhydrophobic surface would be goofy and cool, the Intel rebrand is…yeah store-brand generic. You’d think demanding that the circuit prover put out some art with 10% of its time would yield a decent and wonky logo better spent… Even ‘FinFETs at home’ would have branding to it, at least. Can’t say they don’t iterate.
2 Likes
Meh - it’s fine. Nice, even.
The first logo was fanciful and wonderful.
The second was garish, terrible, and almost a warning not to buy it. (From the font alone, I would expect that “sushi” is inside.)
The third is corporate and busy: what, exactly, is the halo doing? But tolerable.
Now comes this. A sickening color, a neutered typeface devoid of personality.
The tittle is intended to be… what? A computer chip? A typo? The result of corrupted graphics card memory? At least the third iteration had some futuristic flair.
This is the end.
7 Likes
What’s the TDP on that sick burn?
2 Likes
They really should have gone back to the 1969 version, freshened up, if they were going to make ANY change at all.
It’s also the wrong timing to be drawing attention with a completely new look on your name that is way too similar to INCEL.
And that “n” with the initial downstroke really doesn’t fit well, not like the original 1969 “n” and misses the point of why the 2005 designer chopped it off and made the shape simpler while shortening the x-height of the letters.
3 Likes
Look, we all know how it is, someone’s going to come here and leave disappointed if we don’t do this, so, well, here it is:
1 Like
I’d say that Xeon Phi accelerators were innovative, but are discontinued now.
Should have gone back to the original, really. Maybe reduce the brackets in the t a bit to make it look less 60s, and call it a day
1 Like
This is almost identical to rival chip-producer ARM. Booooooring
