The new logo still plays on the idea of the butterfly, but in a more abstract form. The body of the butterfly is missing, but they expect you to make out the shape of the butterfly by the four wings. I was able to recognize that the new logo was still a butterfly because it has been the MSN logo for a long time. However, I don’t think it would have been as easily recognizable to someone not aware of the original MSN logo. They kept the original colors, although in slightly different shades, which I thought was a good call because those colors are also very representative of MSN. The typeface of “MSN” changed as well, into a thinner, more modern typeface. Although I liked the old typeface for the old logo, I think the new typeface matches the new logo well. The new logo is also very modern and abstract, similar to the feel of the new typeface. I like the old MSN logo a lot better, but I think the new one used wise combinations of typeface and design to make it work.
The new layout of the website is definitely an improvement. The old layout was cluttered and bombarded the reader with too much – and sometimes unnecessary – information. The new layout is a lot cleaner, and although the white background can look plain, there is a nice balance and play with colors with the headings. There is less information on the page, which makes it seem more inviting than the old layout. It is not completely different from the old layout, and MSN decided to keep parts of the layout the same (such as the placement of the advertisement), which tells the audience that they have not changed completely – they are still what they once were, but better and more improved.
Overall, I do not think the new MSN logo was a necessary move because there was nothing wrong with the old logo. However, the decision to change the layout of the website was definitely smart.
Overall, I do not think the new MSN logo was a necessary move because there was nothing wrong with the old logo. However, the decision to change the layout of the website was definitely smart.
There was nothing wrong with the old logo, but a good move to change it if they are updating their website. The new website and logo will cause hype and more people will visit the site. I like the new logo better than the older one. The new logo has a cleaner, more modern look. Which fits well with their cleaner updated website.
ReplyDeleteI don't like the new logo and think it's a waste of however much they spent on it...First off, the logo was fine. The first thing that I noticed actually was that the first logo was stronger and made more of a presence. The blue color is more corporate and professional, while the gray is more prone to fade into the background...Secondly, the butterfly in the first logo actually looks like a butterfly while in the new logo it looks like four circles that were awkwardly separated...I don't really understand why they did this.
ReplyDeleteI agree, I definitely do not like the new logo either. It looks too technological and and corporate...not a good move for the company. The website is fine, but the blue of the old logo really made the logo stand out.
ReplyDeleteI agree. The old logo was perfectly fine. I also like the old website. Whenever I think of msn, the color blue comes up to my mind immediately. The new website is definitely cleaner, but the white background makes it seem boring. If they had added some colors (i.e. blue), it would have been better.
ReplyDelete