• @rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    08 months ago

    I wouldn’t even call this “aesthetics”. Rather “conceptual homogeneity” or something like that. It’s what happens when you strive for a uniform look over a useful or visually pleasing one.

    • @uis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      0
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      In some countries uniform look at least provided good for society. In this case it provides only profits for to 1%.

      Good for society:

  • @0ops@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    08 months ago

    Color is the first thing the eyes tend to notice, then shape, then lines and details. The new icons all look the same at the edge of my vision, I have to look at them straight on to distinguish them. Individually each one is fine but together, like what the hell?

    I don’t rawdog Google icons anymore anyway, I use an icon pack

  • NutWrench
    link
    fedilink
    08 months ago

    Not Google related, but whoever decide that the best color scheme for an Office suite should be light grey text on a white background deserves to be flogged.

    • Ignotum
      link
      fedilink
      08 months ago

      The camera app and spreadsheet app? Because that’s what i would’ve guessed they were based on the icons

    • magic_lobster_party
      link
      fedilink
      08 months ago

      Yeah, the old logos were all over the place. At first glance it’s not obvious they’re all Google apps.

      • @Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        08 months ago

        To me, that’s just the case for camera and calendar. Maps is IMHO perfect (except the unnecessary G) and the red-and-white envelope is quite well-known.

    • Ephera
      link
      fedilink
      08 months ago

      I think what really bothers me about the aesthetics is that the shapes are broken up by the coloration. For example, the pin icon for Google Maps looks almost like a hook, because the yellow has little contrast on this white background.

    • pewpew
      link
      fedilink
      08 months ago

      And the interface of their apps are still incoherent af. I don’t know how, but they manage to make things worse every time

    • @SuperSaiyanSwag@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      08 months ago

      And that’s why I don’t really hate it. I hate Google, but I think it’s a neat design choice. I still hate Microsoft’s icon design a lot though, they can’t seem to stick with one thing.

  • @acosmichippo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    0
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    i think they did need to unify the design and branding but i also agree they went too far with it. if they had only chosen 1-2 colors for each app icon that would have helped a lot.

    gmail - red

    drive - yellow

    maps - green

    meet - blue

    calendar - lighter blue

    problem solved

        • @TedZanzibar@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          08 months ago

          Nope. The icons are honestly good enough as they are, but the original post was being disingenuous in suggesting they’re no more distinguishable than squares.

          Running with that logic, having each square a different color does not solve the problem for those of us who can’t easily distinguish those colors.

        • @TedZanzibar@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          08 months ago

          Yes, but the original post is suggesting that they’re ambiguous enough to all be squares. Running with that concept, making a bunch of squares different colors doesn’t fix the issue for those of us who can’t easily identify those colors.

      • @jaybone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        08 months ago

        Most software pretty much doesn’t give a fuck about the visually impaired despite everyone talking big shit about accessibility. So I could certainly give a fuck what color someone’s logo is.

        • @TedZanzibar@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          08 months ago

          Except that the original post was contesting that those shapes are indistinguishable from each other. My point, therefore, is that the solution offered in the post I replied to would still be indistinguishable to 300 million people.

          • @pyre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            08 months ago

            the squares are there for comedic effect. the shapes are not actually indistinguishable. but at a glance, color is a much faster tool we use to identify these icons. so the problem here is that it takes longer for us to decipher a Google app icon, and the solution would be to differentiate the colors.

            also this would help colorblind people as well, because removing unnecessarily complicated colors would make the shapes easier to identify as well.

            • @TedZanzibar@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              08 months ago

              Yes I understand the meme and I’m not trying to get into an argument. I’m just trying to educate as to why relying on color as the primary differentiator is not a solution to the problem as proposed.

              at a glance, color is a much faster tool we use to identify these icons

              Think about what you’re saying here, and consider how ridiculous it would sound if you said that to someone who was completely blind.

              Sure, to a “color normal” person, something’s color is a great differentiator, but even when using a colorblind friendly pallette it’s just far easier for us to distinguish different shapes than colors. We’ve spent our whole lives adapting to a lack of color information so asking us to be able to work purely on color alone is like asking a blind person to see.

              Again, and this part is really important and oft overlooked - this applies even when a designer has gone out of their way to choose a colorblind friendly pallette. It’s just not that easy for us. I honestly couldn’t even tell you what Google’s corporate pallette is without looking and I’m sure that information is second nature to normies.

              • @pyre@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                0
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                this image has two groups:

                at first glance did you separate it into red v blue or circles vs squares?

                you’re absolutely making things up. we’ve evolved to differentiate shades as well, which supercedes colors. even for colorblind people this kind of image should be differentiated by color or shade first.

                not to mention not all people have perfect vision, in fact people with blurry vision probably outnumber colorblind people, and that would make the shapes not extremely reliable, especially when most icons would be more or less squares and circles with small details changed.

    • Ephera
      link
      fedilink
      08 months ago

      It certainly looks a lot like Helvetica. Probably could be any of these Helvetica clones:

      I will also say that it feels a lot like Inter to me, which it’s not as the i-dots aren’t round, but maybe you’ll enjoy that one anyways…

    • 𝕾𝖕𝖎𝖈𝖞 𝕿𝖚𝖓𝖆
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      My wife really really really wanted a MacBook in 2020 and the major plus is of having it is that I got to steal all the fonts. Mostly, I just wanted Helvetica lol

    • @prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      0
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Man… I might be showing my age, but checking out some of the links in these replies gave me nostalgia for the website FontsnThings.com (or was it “FontsandThings”?). I used to love browsing that shit as a kid and downloading all the coolest looking fonts lol

      Anyone else?

    • @FUsername@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      Deutsch
      08 months ago

      I stopped a time ago. Interestingly, the thing I miss most is maps. That sheer amount of user data paves the path for a fine traffic estimation.