I’d really like to see @kreestuh 's commentary on this on next week’s news.
We have Red Hat guys at work justnow. They do not have the new hat
I’m not sure i’m a fan though, It seems like its missing some definition for the sake of the flatness craze, what happens when everyone’s over that in 3 years?
Shadowman is a symbol from our early days. He represents a time when our founders embraced our outsider status and ran with it. Part superhero, part private detective, Shadowman reflects our origin story, especially our early market strategy of “sneaking” open source into datacenters.
(emphasis mine), isnt that a core part of Red Hats job? To help when you’ve ran out of ideas, to fix code upstream when their stuff breaks your systems? To be shadowmen of your IT?
The old typeface was better IMO
Sneaky isn’t necessarily what you want your corporate logo to say.
No one said sneaky.
The previous had style, the new one looks like it’s made by me, or a two year old it doesn’t matter it will produce about the same quality.
The quote you posted did. But that doesn’t matter, the old logo looks sneaky, like a surreptitious spook in an 80s spy novel, or a Raymond Chandler film noir style detective. These is evocative imagery to be sure, but not what you want your brand logo to say unless you’re selling something decidedly more grey hat than red.
A downgrade imo.
The old one had some character to it, the new one looks like a unicode character.
That is the most boring design they could come up with and that is probably why it has been successful. I don’t like the old logo either but at least it was something different, something unique in this day and age. And I am totally with @SesameStreetThug on the typeface.
Looks like a crappy Michael Jackson rip off now.
Tips hat, grabs crotch, stands on toes… Redhat
They have had such a beautiful and timeless logo.
The new one seems too plain and i do not like the new hue of red.
I disagree with most of you and think this is an improvement, at least on the icon side of things. Yes it’s more boring, but that also likely means it’s going to reproduce effectively at more sizes. The previous logo had a lot of tiny corners that would lose crispness at tiny resolutions I’d imagine. The new version can also be reduced to one color more effectively if necessary.
I do agree about the font assessments, I think the lettering feels divorced from the icon and isn’t particularly interesting. I probably would’ve kept similar lettering to what they had previously, the varied weights look better (though again, for reproducibility issues, they may have ditched the super light weight to avoid it disappearing in some media).
Ultimately a safe move, but I’d say more effective than the previous logo. I’d be interested to see some other applications it’s used in.
EDIT: some more applications are here: https://www.redhat.com/en/about/brand/standards
I prefer the old logo too. The new one looks bland and lacks character as others have said.
throws darts at IBM poster in evil lair
I agree, they can iconify it easier. But its boring as fuck, and so indistinguishable its hard to see any definition to it at all at smaller size.
This is what it looks like as a favicon, its so bright and small i can hardly distinguish what it is.
The old one
Take the guy out maybe, but the retna burning red with zero lines to show any definition to it at all?
I dunno, it seems like they could have made at at least not completely flat.