What is Digg?133 Comments
- 1dash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Whoa, from the sixties straight to the eighties ;-)
I like this +digg - NeilM, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
- lavawalker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Direct link to image:
http://rochesterdandc.com/apps/pbcs.dll/misc?url=/misc/zoom.pbs&Site=A2&Date=20060106&Category=NEWS01&ArtNo=60106001&Ref=AR - katabatic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1When a legacy company is totally changing its business model and technology base, and trying to appeal to a new block of customers, about the only thing it has going for it is its brand and the reputation that brings to the table. Throw out a branding tool that is recognized around the world, at a time like this? Baffling....
- dirtyfratboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1the icon became worse with the update
- lavawalker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Doesn't look appealing to me, the typography style seems 30 years old— like the old NASA logo.
- theone3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It looks very "Intel-ly"
"Its styles from russian futurist graphic design."
Yeah, it's not hard to pick up.
I actually think this is somewhat of an improvement. - mikehilb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hot Damn!
That's some cool front page tech! - AndFrom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0doesn't anyone think that this new logo will look great on the vintage T's of the future? imagine explaining to future generations how a company like Kodak even existed. "Back in my day, cameras still used film!"
- AllenS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't like it. Period.
- a1lostnomad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Boooo. That logo pathetic. I acually liked the old logo better. Why couldn't they have just revamped the old one with some new shades of color and maybe different angles. Heck, they could have just put some glass or gel effects on the old one to make it all better.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0that logo is craptastic.
- glitchbit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0yea older logo gave them more class, it is almost like an icon that says we are still here and that won't ever change vs some new rip off company with some new snazzi cheap 21st century logo.
What I am trying to say is that it almost gives you superiority over the new companies when you have an old logo that has been through decades or even centuries. And to change is like saying we blow in the way the wind goes, we just want this stir people up, so we can be talked about for a week then forgotten for the rest of our existance then we will just blend in with every other new company out there, because we LOST our iconic logo. - smhill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Professional graphic designer as well. I agree with pretty much everything others have said.
The old logo looks better and has recognition. - dustjacket, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0ya ever been to buffalo? looks just like the logo- old and in bad need of repair. 1970's
what'd they tell the graffix geek? think "love canal"? - Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The logo is moot, Kodak will be bankrupt in a few years. Logo changes are a sign of desperation.
- allenu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I actually like it. It's simple and clean and forward thinking. What's funny, though, is that the more and more you stare at the word "Kodak" the more and more you realize it's a strange word.
- quisp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Heres' the history of the logo
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/pressCenter/cpqkodaklogo.jhtml?pq-path=2509/8762 - baloniaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0what was wrong with the old one?
- Polyakov, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Really, the old one was a classic, they are stupid.
- McoreD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why all these logos become *****?
AT&T
Intel
Kodak - Willy99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wonder how much that cost? i bet they could have gotten something cooler for a mere $1000 ... offering a contest via Fark or Digg.
Here's an old school Kodak Brownie commercial... as a reminder... sometimes, old is good.
(with Ozzie and Harriet getting down with this hot new techno camera.)
http://tesla.liketelevision.com/liketelevision/tuner.php?channel=864&format=tv&theme=guide - battlecat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0awful, just awful. get some art in there for god sake
- kzinti, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0YAAAAAAAWN zzz zzz zzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
- Silverbird, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This was a terrible idea. When I was overseas, I could always spot someplace where I could get film by looking for the logo. It was easily recognized and stood out well. Now its just another odd looking word that I'll overlook in the jumble.
- quisp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You need to realize that Kodak has changed their logo every 25 years or so. It was time, especially since this last quarter their digital products outsold their traditional (film) products.
I like it! - Dustyb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Comming from a graphics designer that specializes in text and logo designs, thats a step backwards. It looks like something right out of the 60's, no-thanks.
- anagoge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Perhaps one of the strangest, most useless logo updates I've seen. I think most people could do better. This new logo does nothing for Kodak and as others have said, looks more like a fast food restaurant now. I wonder how much the designer of this got paid?
- jedinate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I want to know, who honestly thinks a new logo will change how you are perceived ? If your product does not bring in customers, I doubt a new un-improved font will... This sort of stuff often goes unnoticed by the public at large. This kind of reminds me of when Office Max changed the name of "Copy Max" to "Office Max Print and Document Services" in order to make it seem more professional. 2 years later every customer still refers to it as Copy Max. People don't know notice this ***** and if they do, they don't care.
Obviously someone, somewhere, is making good money convincing executives, that it is names and logos, not service and quality products, that attracts customers. - diggerphelps, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0They should have kept the old typeface and lost the icon, if they were that desperate to make a break from the past. The new typeface looks straight out of the what people in the sixties/seventies 'imagined' the nineties would look like. The 'a' and 'd' look really bad.
Along with Quark and AT&T, this is one of the worst logo recent brand makeovers.
intel's change in comparison is at least somewhat lateral -- not much better, but not a disaster. - rmmcclay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0One shouldn't mess with tried and true branding. Think Coca-Cola. Kodak's original logo is globally recognizable, iconographic, timeless
and unique. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ugly, I prefered the old one.
- ipodman715, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It just looks kind of bland..
- SniperX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Whoa, from the sixties straight to the eighties ;-)"
-My thoughts EXACTLY
"Actually they still make and sell alot of film...." - mads
They still sell the stuff, but they havn't designed new items since them.
"Looks like they paid some guy $10 to do it."
When in reality you can probably add 3 zeros onto that, if not more.
In conclusion: It's hard to remember a time where the digg community has completely agreed on something, so you KNOW for a FACT that this is one COMPLETELY HORRIBLE logo "facelift". - Noelix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Terrible new logo, but thanks for the link +digg
- twogunsalute, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0After staring at the new logo for a few minutes I suddenly felt it ..yes that feeling,, a feeling that Kodak is now a cutting-edge, 21st century innovator. Try it guys . it works!!!!
- reverb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You think they could afford a letter 'a' and not have to use an upside-down 'e'.... The design geeks are gonna hate this with a vengeance.
- 4tygames, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0wow, that sucks.
I can't believe classic companies are changing their logos like that. First AT&T got rid of its boldness, all caps font into an ugly lower case anadale mono type (looks wimpy), now Kodak looks like its swinging into the 60's again with some funked up lettering. I know companies want to look cutting-edge (I have no idea what Kodak-Eastman was smoking when they came up with that), but this is turning into NBC's logo disaster of the 1970's with that ugly N.
One more thing, that sideways pinnacle gave the old Kodak label some class, i don't know, it just did. It is just a classic logo that really does not need changing. - jord, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0reminds me of the burger king logo....
- Postoasted, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Lame.
- Noloco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Michealbuddy thats just to Yahooish..Was that sarcasm,or you just being serious lol
This "new" logo. Is well completely worst then some of the designs I have made on my pc. But the old one. Now I mean the color scheme wasn't spiffy,but at least you know It had that big K you had to Imagine...It had meaning. It had power and now It just has bland boring Kodak with two lines..WOW THATS A GREAT LOGO! - snoudude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0As much as the old logo was "Marry Tyler Moore" style the new one looks like Logan's Run or a Chinese manufacturer for toilet brushes.
They should have just "sharpened up the edges and made the gold more of a bright yellow, but hey, what do I know I'm not a marketing guy. - G-RaZoR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The sad thing is they probably spent millions on that.
- Haplo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Kodek :-D
- smook, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It looks like a "boot" Kodiak logo. Very poor choice. This is a "NOW" look ?
The old is better. Why must people change their branding all the time? It's about a "brand/look" that we all know and recognize. (which they spend $$$$ to have us learn..!?!) - ronaldpoi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I like it... i just don't like the "a" but everything else is fine...
- tim1986, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Eww...
- themechanism, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0While the "d" and "o" have their merits, the character of the lowercase "a" in this typeface doesn't seem to work proportionately with the other letters. Kerning is fine, but something about it just seems "off-kilter" - perhaps the letters have been tweaked with a bit. Overall, I give it a "B-"
- skitsbox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Thats all they could come up with. That sucks!
- avatarpalin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I work for Kodak... and I can honestly say....
..sorry *yawn*.. but hey it's just a logo.. we have a lot of really great things coming out soon, but the comment about no one under 55 working for Kodak.. hmm well in IT you are pretty much right..
..but you didn't hear it from me.. more about it in my blog
http://alteredme.blogspot.com -
Show 51 - 100 of 130 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is