the dream is over http://arstechnica.com/business/201 6/08/

>>56184771

Everything Mozilla has been trash for half a decade, move on.

>>56184771

>This kills Mozilla

Why are all of these so fucking bad Jesus Christ

>>56184771
wow, that's gay

File: fox.png (3MB, 1497x1149px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1497x1149px

>>56184771

gaymen botnet conspiracy

>and asking the internet for feedback
hopefully they'll realize its fucking awful

File: 1454607356524.jpg (74KB, 497x960px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 497x960px

>>56184771
Literally shit.

Jesus Christ, those are some of the worst concepts I've ever seen. Even >>>/gd/ could do better.

File: TheeIsHope.png (15KB, 693x165px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 693x165px

There is hope.

File: 920x920.jpg (92KB, 920x840px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 920x840px

>>56184938

>>56184771
I like the dino better but this is pretty based.

Let 'em have it, girls:

https://blog.mozilla.org/opendesign/now-for-the-fun-part/

File: snapshot_12.18_[2016.07.29_04.20.27].png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>56184992
i like it

>>56185028
you go glenn coco!

File: 1461166193669.jpg (17KB, 611x465px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 611x465px

>>56184992
Oh yeah, we're on "that" internet

>>56185148
>you'll never leave the bernestain bears dimension, where internet is shit

File: 1258980794819.jpg (165KB, 854x480px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 854x480px

>>56185048

>>56185197
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMkmQlfOJDk

File: 90s rad.gif (478KB, 490x368px) Image search: [Google]

478KB, 490x368px

>>56184771
It's like we're back in the 90s.

Fucking horrible logos. I bet they used tens of thousands of dollars to get this shitty concept up.

File: netscape.gif (448KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 400x400px

>>56185438
>It's like we're back in the 90s.

>>56185569
Netscape was so good. I miss it dearly.

File: sketch-1471743018315.png (168KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1440x2560px

>>56184771
The logo would imply up and downs.
It should look moar like

There is nothing wrong with the current logo.

>>56185679

It doesn't appeal to a "youthful, values-driven audience" or represent "Gutsy, Independent, Buoyant, For Good" which are apparently things that Mozilla desires.

looks like something I can make in Affinity Designer eventho I don't even know how this fucking program works

File: communicatorthrobber.gif (27KB, 40x40px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 40x40px

>>56185569
Fuck Navigator. At least post the Netscape Communicator animation.

>>56185805
Never used that, but i'd watch that tray icon all day long.
Shit kinda reminds me if the win3.1 solitaire card animation when you won the game. Fun fact: i've played solitaire only cause of the animation.

>>56184771
voting for the Monsters Inc one

Litterally none of these work as a good wordmark.

>>56184771
they just can't stop falling

>>56184771
It's really nice of Mozilla to recognize the retrocomputing community by releasing a CGA-compatible logo that also works well on monochrome screens.

>>56184771

woah it looks like temple OS

File: BjdMgBu.png (336KB, 832x519px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 832x519px

What the fuck is this shit

>>56186179
the final frame spells "mozilla"

This is what happens when they don't copy Google.

>>56185679
This.

>>56185703
That's not even possible to convey in a logo anyway. People need to stop listening to """artists""".

>>56184771
The actually don't mind the lizard eye one but it triggers my autism how undefined some of the letters are. Everything else is absolute trash, especially that last one holy shit. What the hell were they thinking?

I actually don't blame Mozilla for wanting a new logo. I didn't even know they had one. Even Googling "mozilla logo" just brings up the Firefox icon.

i like the Moz://a one

>Mozilla wants to look like they're stuck in the 1980s

>>56184938
>hopefully they'll realize its fucking awful
Doesn't matter. Ignoring users is what Mozilla does best.

File: vapenayshall.png (153KB, 696x563px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 696x563px

>>56184771
VAPEE NAYSHALL

>>56186292

Isn't that good thou? 80s was great.

>>56186393
That logo would be suited for the header for official company papers, but it's an absolute eyesore otherwise.

The Moz://a logo is the only logo that approaches clever and worthwhile, but even then Mozilla should probably work on improving their products before they change their logo.

>>56184771
Whoever produced that garbage should have their urethra fucked with a rusty garden trowel.

>>56186419

Why the hell they want to changed the logo?

>>56186442
I assume their logic only went as far as "everybody else is doing it, why shouldn't we?"

File: oD0ZcZu.png (14KB, 800x252px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 800x252px

Meanwhile, in the comments section, a logo made for free that's far better.

Why don't they just put the dino head inside a circle? Kids love circle logos these days.

>>56186496
dont kid yourself


At this point though, though, all of them are missing a good well refinded, non gimicky wordmark.

Tbh they shouldnt have made such a big deal about trying to get community feedback. There is litterally nothing worse then other random peoples feedback when it comes to design.

The best thing to do, is just fucking finish the whole design process then release it. As with all logos there would then be both good and bad reception of it, then after a while, as long as it isnt absolutely fucking terrible it wont kill the company and everyone stops giving a shit about something so unimportant to the every day use of their products as the logo. With this whole feedback proccess they have given everyone the illusion that they have an actual useful say in the matter, so everyone will be super salty when they dont do exactly what they thought was right for the logo.

i like the "M" but its a bit tryhard
the moz://a one is really good concept but i wasnt a huge fan of the execution

>>56186366
\//\

>>56186647
\/\/3 1337 5p34|< |\|o\/\/

>>56184771
is this the early 90s?

>>56186419
>no progress for years
>dev team constantly arguing over pointless minutiae
>highest priority is a trendy logo

When did /g/ adopt Mozilla as one of its own projects?

File: jb_Mozilla_D_protocol_1-1400x990-980x693.jpg (38KB, 980x693px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 980x693px

>>56184771
moz://a
Looks actually kind of neat. Only if they don't capitalise the "m"

File: jb_Mozilla_B_connector_1-1400x990-980x693.jpg (57KB, 980x693px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 980x693px

SJW logo will win.

File: TempleOS_012114.png (16KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 640x480px

>>56188531
same exact colour scheme.

does terry know about this?

>>56188721
for
>>56186155

File: jb_Mozilla_A_pussy_1-1400x990.jpg (47KB, 1400x990px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1400x990px

>>56188718
>SJW
>some nigger shit

I think they'll prefer the abstract pussy Mozilla logo.

File: 1461556262632.jpg (8KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 225x225px

>freetards in charge of graphic design
the Moz://a one is the only decent one

>>56184771
that example is very 1990-esque

>>56188773
this one is ok, but the filled letters and colorsceme make it look like a power tool company logo

File: a.png (1KB, 32x32px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 32x32px

the old mozilla throbber icon looked nice, perhaps they can do something like it

>>56186204
Just bring back the dinosaur.

File: 1451731095879.jpg (229KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 600x600px

>guys the dinosaur head doesn't look stylized enough, what do we do?
>make it look new-aged with a wacky and cool style to it
I'm actually surprised they didn't try to make a material design logo

>>56188773
Shit looks like monsters Inc logo with minions color

>>56186299
what an odd way to spell "GNOME & GTK+ developers"

You can really tell the people who made these are women, niggers or beta cucks.

Also I bet none were made in a FOSS image editor/creator.

File: Mozilla.png (785KB, 3000x2500px) Image search: [Google]

785KB, 3000x2500px

How to enter this competition??

>>56189760
jesus man

>>56184771

1st design
>goatse, opera-ish
2nd:
>wiggly lines/sparkling wiggles
3rd:
>'player button'
4th:
Probably the one that makes the most sense. But I don't like the blue color scheme.
The rest:
>le avant-garde art garbage

>>56184771
Looks beautiful

>>56186635
Yeah because tons of really profitable companies get by with terrible wordmarks!

Oh wait, they don't. You need at LEAST a passable wordmark to get your brand out there. Nothing will kill a company faster than a logo that doesn't exude at least a bit of competence, let alone quality.

File: header-mozilla-stone.5a157cb2c70c.png (886B, 170x45px) Image search: [Google]

886B, 170x45px

There's literally nothing wrong with their current logo. Looks a damn sight more professional than any of these alternatives.

File: 1448811785618.jpg (53KB, 622x562px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 622x562px

>>56189874
And Mozilla has proven to have both, competence and quality

>>56188531

It's a proper noun. The 'M' should be capitalized.

Focusing on the important tasks while the whole company is in shambles.

>>56189960
iPhone is a proper noun too.

File: firefox.png (195KB, 528x258px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 528x258px

>>56186705
No it's 1983

File: spartan-golf-logo-large.jpg (43KB, 800x675px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 800x675px

These faggots should have asked about the logo in /g/ instead.
Pic related, they'll never get something like this.

>>56184771
>http://arstechnica.com/business/2016/08/mozilla-is-changing-its-lookand-asking-the-internet-for-feedback/
Jesus fuck that's what you get when you let talentless dropouts and "enthusiasts" come up with a logo. Atrocious and amateurish. There's not a single good idea to be found among those.

I dislike them all.

>>56188834
except freetards didn't design them

>>56190219
I really don't get the butthurt in this thread. The logo looks objectively pretty.

File: mozilla.png (197KB, 963x735px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 963x735px

done.

>>56190263
post to reddit for le maximum upboats xDD

Moz://a is pretty clever to be honest. It might look even better when the m isn't capitalised.

>>56184771
All of these fucking suck, though.

>>56186496
It's better because is simple and looks good in comparison to the other logos.
Isn't the best logo, tough.

>>56185851
This. Monsters Inc is the only good one

>wasting time and money on revamping a new logo
They could've hired an intern to make the dinosaur more flat design like and call it a day.

Monsters Inc. if they want something different but still tasteful. Moz://a if they want a nice looking me too.

>>56190379
>>56190389
pretty autistic

File: mozilla.png (24KB, 391x364px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 391x364px

>>56189760

is this what they came up with in the "what shall we fuck up next" meeting?

>>56190389
http://pt.seaicons.com/tag/xrabbit/

>>56190532
Probably in the 9am one

>>56190558
this

>Your comment is awaiting moderation.

>>56184829
What are other alternatives that can run the same add-ons or add-ons that have similar function?

File: Screenshot_20160818-065437.png (449KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

449KB, 1280x720px

>>56188531
Oh hell, I'd actually vote for that one.
The rest though... Pic related.

>>56184771
As long as they only change the logo of Mozilla and not firefox how does this affects me?

>Your comment is awaiting mozillaration.

>>56191260
Firefox will be next, just wait

>>56190204
that's quite unprofessional too

>>56184771
This is what happens when you hire feminists

>>56186179
Represents the internet

A massive tower of cards built on top of other cards, ready to collapse at any moment

>>56191416
/thread

>>56191390
Ignoring stuff directly related to Firefox (like Gecko/XUL/NSS/pdf.js and all that stuff), they do a lot of funding for open source codecs and shit (they pour money into Xiph)

>>56184771
What a load of shit. One is worse than the next. That's what you get when you hire tumblr's design enthusiasts that jump on any popular shit idea instead of creating solid work. Mozilla should be embarrassed about those.

>>56184771
move on and use a non-SJW browser like the rest of us

>>56184771
I read this somewhere but it's true. Design by committee just doesn't work.

>>56186179
>>56191416
>>56191427

it's obviously an owl and Sophia

l2 symbolism and abstraction

nvm, go back to sleep

>>56184992
>Boaty McBoatface

Why do I find this so funny?

>>56191654
because you accidentally posted on 4chan when you actually wanted to post on reddit

>>56191308
The result would still be a fire-fox, but mozilla means nothing so the logo can be anything.

File: 1126242521033.png (149KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 400x400px

There is literally nothing wrong with the existing red T-Rex logo

>>56184771
it looks good desu

>>56184829
well i never thought that i would live to a day when IE is one of best available browser and that people would use it unironically

>>56191766
it's probably sexist

>thunderbird is buggy shit
>firefox is now garbage
Mozilla has managed to fuck up everything else. Fucking up the logo as well was just a natural progression.

>>56184771
Holy fucking shit all of those logos look awful. They SPENT MONEY for this shit. They could have gone to the Krita forum, ask for a good logo, and get a dozen after 5 minutes.

>>56186366
\//\

>>56192162
I really don't know why companies like Mozilla do that shit. It would be much easier to have a logo contest with a cash prize.
They'd get 10,000 submissions for free and the one they pick would only cost them a few grand.

>>56188834
Are you legitimately retarded?

Have they honestly gone insane

>>56192129
Look on the bright side - there's a good chance the Document Foundation will take over Thunderbird development. If they can do for Thunrderbird what they did for OpenOffice, there would be a reason to be enthusiastic about desktop mail clients for the first time in over a decade.

>>56192196
I bet it was a way to pay off some friends.

File: Untitled.jpg (19KB, 391x364px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 391x364px

>>56190497

>>56192504
This
It's not so much the politics of Mozilla that are bad, it's the blatant corrupting
But the politics are also bad

>>56192832
they usually go hand in hand

The logos with purple and cyan are hurting my eyes. Who in their right mind would use those two colors (#f0f and #0ff) in a logo?

>>56184771
This looks fucking great (OP pic)

Thread is filled with 12 year olds

>>56193123
>t. the design company who made it

File: mozzarella firefox.jpg (78KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 500x500px

Should just use this.

>>56184771
how the fuck does this help that forsaken browser?

>>56193474

Gives it a temporary facelift so it briefly becomes relevant but then once people realise it's just the same shit it always was then people will again stop paying attention to it once more.

>>56193524
the execs really are just trying to milk the last drops out of firefucks before making it completely irrelevant.

>>56188531
The colors are retarded but the idea is pretty promising.

>>56193570
>>56188531
Although the idea is clearly a rip-off of this
https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2016/05/27/a-new-curl-logo/

>>56193627
now that's a good design there m8

>>56193663
and from what I understand they did it for free (well, and the publicity)

>>56193698
see >>56193546

>>56193627
using :// in a logo perfectly suits cURL

File: 1471762201482.jpg (79KB, 980x693px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 980x693px

>>56188718
this is what i see when i look at this logo

>>56193895
You're fired

>>56193901
I know

>>56193895
fading into obscurity
spot on

>>56193928
kek

Reminder, they're spending more than 100k on this nonsense rebrand project

>>56194214
remind me us please how much they used to remove the terms master/slave in their code?

>>56194257
not even their code, buildbot's code
where the master/slave concept is a crucial aspect

>>56194214
their logo should be a silhouette of a trans-woman throwing money away

>>56193406
TOPKEK
Easily the bestetest one.

>>56194257
>remove the terms master/slave

They did what now? Fucking hell why won't they work on making Firefox less shit instead of this superfluous bullshit.

>>56184829
Mozilla has run like trash for at least 5 years.

Nothing is lost.

>>56186393
drugs

>>56194303
because the execs care more about money and le node.js than improving firefox.

>>56192162
>crowdsourcing a logo

fucking kek, thats literally a surefire way to end up with total shit.

this is what you do to get a good logo:
you hire a competent design team, not friends, not the trendiest one, a competent one.

>>56188773
Dewalt.

>freetards in charge of design
wew lad

>>56194688
It didn't work out for Mozilla

File: nine.png (45KB, 400x403px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 400x403px

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_Eyes
really?

File: Screenshot_2016-08-21-12-52-35-1.png (28KB, 1440x258px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 1440x258px

>>56184771
motherfucking wew lad

>>56195810
can't allow unapproved opinions

A E S T H E T I C

>>56190754
Pale Moon

File: giphy.gif (197KB, 500x361px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 500x361px

>>56185569
>>56185805
>browsers will never again have throbbers
I stared at those netscape throbbers for what must've been hours full of anticipation and wonder waiting for pages to load over a 28k or 36k connection. The internet was a vast an mysterious place to me then, a practically inexhaustible cornucopia of fun and interesting things.

It seems rather droll now, by comparison. I wonder what happened.

>>56196623
>browsers will never again have throbbers
qutebrowser has a few loading bars. Would be conceptually simple to add throbbers

>>56195888
lmfao
this generation is full of pussies, clint eastwood couldn't be more right.
pathetic how free speach and opinions are being silenced by bigotted sacks of shit who are overly sensitive.

>>56184771
So we're back to Windows 3.1 times (except for stupid-high resolution)? The colors used even seem to fit into the 4-bit CGA palette (colors 0x2, 0xB, 0xE, 0xF).

>>56184771
lel

>>56188531

whole world is trying to get rid of :// because normies, mozilla puts it in a fucking logo

lelish

>>56184771
AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHA

what a fucking joke these guys have become

They should learn from the masters

https://wiki.haskell.org/Haskell_logos/New_logo_ideas

This is not a good idea.
People who use Mozilla is not designers. Most of them, who really cares, is coders and specif developers. Other users just dont care. Designers prefer use Safari or Chrome, even caus it use Webkit.
Now you guys are asking to coders and common users to decide wich is the better design? Its not make any sense. A good design is not about taste or preferences. A good design is about function and use.

File: netscape-logo-[Converted]-xl.png (293KB, 5760x4440px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 5760x4440px

Remember when we had good logos?

>>56184829
What makes it bad?

File: Untitled.png (57KB, 1166x1024px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1166x1024px

>>56198255
fix'd

>>56198358
The developers were replaced by idiotic hipsters

>>56198302
Nope.

>>56185661
underrated post

Is it just me or are all the comments on the mozilla voting site positive

>>56198519
see >>56195810

>>56198547
That explains everything.

File: mozilla.png (7KB, 481x181px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 481x181px

Firefox usage edition.

Goodnight sweet prince.

>>56186179
It represents an SJW's arguments.

>>56188773
What is Morilla?

The :// logo is exactly like the new curl library logo. Google it.

>>56191766
this logo

File: Now_for_the_fun_part._–_Mozilla_Open_Design_-_2016-08-21_23.18.19.png (338KB, 1428x740px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 1428x740px

fixed the names.

Protocol and Connector are the only ones I would consider

https://blog.mozilla.org/opendesign/now-for-the-fun-part/

"protocol" is literally the slashdot logo

File: new_mozilla_logo.png (199KB, 643x322px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 643x322px

>>56184771
the new mozilla logo has been voted for...

File: vdvmaxresdefault.jpg (33KB, 843x768px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 843x768px

Pic related is the new mascot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5zGkqAWsWE

File: totally radical.png (243KB, 586x312px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 586x312px

This is _real_ 90s styling

>Mozilla is clear that it's not crowdsourcing a design, asking anyone to work on spec, or holding a vote over which logo the Internet prefers. It's just asking for comments.

Well ok, here's your fucking comment:

IT FUCKING SUCKS
EVERY SINGLE ONE LOOKS LIKE COMPLETE GARBAGE
FUCK YOU
HOW ABOUT CONCENTRATING ON SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY MATTERS?
LIKE UNFUCKING THE DAMAGE YOU FUCKING CHROME FETISHISTS ALREADY DID?
PEOPLE WHO WANT CHROME WILL *USE* CHROME

File: 1464210513539.jpg (46KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 1024x768px

new logo

>>56198946
The Thinkpad in the background

File: LOGO.png (4KB, 462x138px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 462x138px

like 15 minutes in Sketch

Not miraculous but better than any of the provided options. At the very least, it complies to logo rule #1 which is "look good and be recognizable in black and white at any size"

>>56198840
but the fag rainbow has only six colors

>>56184771
why the fuck did they go to a design company when they have /g/ ?
lets face it, we're #1 when it comes to designing a logo.

>>56184771
That's kwl

>>56199013
you seemed to be well informed anon.

it's okay to come out, really...

File: uniform.png (4KB, 434x146px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 434x146px

>>56199006
uniform spacing variation

http://johnsonbanks.co.uk/logos/

That's some funny shit oh man...

>>56199108
>Many of our branding projects might take six-months to get anywhere near the visual stage as we research,

>>56199108
those look less like recognizable logos and more like one-off advertisements

>>56199108
>http://johnsonbanks.co.uk/logos/
kek, some of those examples are little better than average clipart.

>>56199077
Make everything a bit thinner and it will be good

>>56186179
>>56188718
>>56198771
What is it with people and making unreadable typography?

why the fuck do design companies use light grey text on a white background?

do they not know about graphic impact?

>>56184771
I think it looks pretty good to be honest.
not bait or anything, it honest to God looks appealing to me

>>56199262
Are you a hipster?

>>56198771
The google ripoff logo is another one no one will understand.

File: 1437441961125.jpg (176KB, 1663x1247px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1663x1247px

>>56199262

>>56184771
I'm fucking done with Mozilla. We seriously need a good fork of Firefox asap

File: literally rape.png (38KB, 235x276px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 235x276px

wtf man

>>56199262
Care to pick a favorite and try to explain what makes the appeal for you?
Because I don't get it at all. Even if I try to force myself to look at them positively, I just see garbage.
Just curious, not shitting on you.

>>56199334
I pretty much only like the blue one that OP posted.
I think it has a nice color scheme and retro feel to it. ( >>56199269 so ya i guess im a hipster now that i used the word retro)
I do agree though, all the others are garbage. The black one is a little less garbage but still garbage.

>>56199323
I don't understand the logo, but it does look kinda nice-ish.. in a way

No idea how that would represent the company, but as a piece of aesthetically pleasing shit-tier art.. it's ok

>>56199108
>WordPress 3.4.1

uhoh

File: ebay-old-logo.jpg (25KB, 560x240px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 560x240px

>you will never see pic related again

File: foresight_555px_21.jpg (65KB, 555x555px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 555x555px

>>56199108
absolutely wonderful

>>56184771
>le 4bit EGA face

File: ff.jpg (18KB, 587x537px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 587x537px

I am working on a new logo for Firefox, let me know what you guys think:
>1. jpg isntead of png to represent the software quality
>2. less contrasts represents mozilla's political point of views
>3. fox's health ain't good

File: 1413149927233-2.jpg (14KB, 255x243px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 255x243px

>>56200560

>>56184771
They literally all look like shit.

>>56194257
I think it was 50k for some shit 1 liner code.

File: il_570xN.308970811.jpg (58KB, 570x497px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 570x497px

>>56200560
love it
here is a blank check of gold stars
take as many as you feel you need

File: gg_mozerella_firefox.png (70KB, 416x298px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 416x298px

I can't be the only one who saw this...

File: screenshot.png (233KB, 651x609px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 651x609px

Do you think they will use it?

File: portrait-aged-doctor-medical-residents-25428439.jpg (32KB, 400x310px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 400x310px

>>56200818
The test results have come back.
You may have an addiction to pornograpy.

>>56200896
Sure, Jaakko

File: banner5.png (17KB, 292x55px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 292x55px

https://www.gnu.org/graphics/package-logos.html

>>56185438
The 90's retro craze finally hit. You nostalgia children hyping up the whole decade attracted market attention. Congratulations. Go back to Pokemon Go.

>>56201123
The logo in the OP looks more like early 1980s

>>56192773
Open her up

File: e2805174-ad5c-4371-9da5-64a1844fee20.png (21KB, 560x525px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 560x525px

Peep the 80s GOAT

GIVE ME BACK THE PAST
STEP 1: REMOVE NORMIES FROM INTERNET

>>56191701

>>56196623
probably the first time I see explorer's logo runs smoothly

>>56190754
Pale Moon.

>>56202116
Lol, the 80s one reminds me of Dragonforce or something.

>>56202116
1987 the best

File: MOS_Technology_Logo.svg (3).png (10KB, 1024x392px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 1024x392px

>>56199077
better, but reminds me of MOS

File: 2000_Summer_Olympics_logo.svg.png (13KB, 160x198px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 160x198px

>>56199474
it looks like some weird 90's sports logo

>>56190754
Ice cat

>>56189960
lowercase is attractive

>>56202851
By a pretty wide margin desu

>>56185197
Kek

>>56186287
Yep, objectively the best one.

>>56200896
seis

>>56186496
It's a few years late to the flat meme logos, it isn't hip anymore

>>56188834
Mozilla ain't even close to freetards anymore, and they paid an important amount to a top tier British scam firm

>>56193112
Schizos like Terry Davis

File: uniform.png (417KB, 2810x562px) Image search: [Google]

417KB, 2810x562px

>>56199006
>logo rule #1 which is "look good and be recognizable in black and white at any size"
glad you followed the rules, fits right in :^)

>>56184771
Just use QubZilla www.qupzilla.com/

File: jb_Mozilla_C_open_1-1400x990.jpg (114KB, 1400x990px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 1400x990px

They all look like shit
Especially pic related
They are printing their SJW bullshit

File: 1468526353048.jpg (91KB, 750x923px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 750x923px

>>56208407

>Maxthon

>>56208529

Trump will be elected soon. It'll all come grinding to a halt in short time.

File: logo%20uhu[1].jpg (19KB, 1663x733px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 1663x733px

>>56188773

>>56192773
wow

is it me or is ars technica becoming more and more like the verge/gizmodo

>>56210566

more like arse technigger

File: mozilla_new_logo_gear.jpg (101KB, 1024x724px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1024x724px

Best logo confirmed

File: good_curl_logo.png (71KB, 2228x852px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 2228x852px

>>56210785
Agreed

File: logo.png (10KB, 991x408px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 991x408px

this one is pretty dope

>>56184771
1989 just called. It angrily demands its super modern logo back.

>>56210785
it's the best of the ones shown, but still not an improvement over the old one

File: x.jpg (47KB, 460x500px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 460x500px

>>56199323
>>56202939
I agree, reminded me of the London Olympics logo for some reason

>>56204210
>>56210785
>>56212692
>best
You mean least-worst

>>56213135
yes

>>56200560
bretty gud :DDD birebox :DDDDDDD

File: Capture+_2016-08-22-20-55-57.png (2MB, 1440x2392px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x2392px

>>56200578

>>56190754
Chrome
Join the botnet

File: Capture+_2016-08-22-20-56-42.png (318KB, 499x542px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 499x542px

>>56213344

File: image:98289.jpg (29KB, 499x542px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 499x542px

>>56213367

File: mozillalogo.png (41KB, 350x350px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 350x350px

All those logos look so "succesful 80s concrete company". They need something a bit more hip, current, nerdy.

File: giphy.gif (271KB, 350x269px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 350x269px

>>56200560
Looks like vil-coyote cunched by a blue boulder...

>>56200560
I love it. I'm gonna use it as my icon from now on.

>>56200560
>firegooby
i like it, and im a ff user
now make a branch that will never amount to anything like palememe, brand it like that and post it on fagithub

>>56199226
it was called grafitti once

I thought humanity had collectively agreed that modernism and post-modernism was absolute garbage.

>>56202116
>>56202619
lmao I'd never seen their old logos
That 80s logo reminds me of Metallica font

>>56197747
Jesus christ

File: mozilla_maga_hat.jpg (19KB, 340x273px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 340x273px

>>56210785
kek

welp

>>56185197
Norwayyyylmao