First off, here's a site covering all the logos from Ma Bell to whet your appetite. Now, I'm glad I got the night to think about the logo before putting my thoughts down on paper/blog. My first impression? I hated it. It looked like candy. Eye candy, sugar candy, whatever it may be, it lacked the elegance and stature of the original logo. The reason AT&T's original logo was so powerful was because in some way, it was understated. The viewer was engaged and filled in the gaps between the blue lines to see the globe. And the use of the extra white spacing to form the light bouncing off the face making the logo somewhat 3-dimensional? Brilliant. Saul Bass' Death Star logo won't die easily.

Instead it has been reincarnated. I’m not too big on the reversal of the colors, nor do I see the point in doing so other than to make the more noticeable color, blue, come into the foreground more. An odd choice since the darker color should in most circumstances imply the background while the lighter color implies the foreground. This new logo really messes with you in getting you to drop that preconceived notion. Anyhow, back to the blue being in the foreground, even after the reversal, this is only achieved because the reflective spot is now angled towards the viewer. But wait is it still reflected light or just a design element? If you view the animation available here of the new logo, you’ll notice that the spotlight now turns WITH the logo, in essence, since the logo is already 3-D through the use of shading and the see-through blue bands, they’ve retained the spotlight largely as a design element only, no longer a result of lighting.

I can’t help but think of DC Comic’s recently redesigned logo, probably because of the similarities between the color palette, and the objective of making the logo go digital. As long as the printed version can keep up with the demands of the new logo, I’m a fan. Why? Because it still engages the viewer. Yes it’s a bit obnoxious, the eye candy makes me choke, but given the small size it will be printed in, you’ll have to do a little squinting to see the see-through blue stripes, and for that you will be rewarded and somewhat engaged. As for the animated version, I believe this logo lends itself to the moving images arena more readily than the original.

So I’ve already stated some of the minor gripes I have with the new logo, but the one thing I still can’t get around or accept is that the white now has a border and gradation. It’s really just a circle rather than a bunch of blue stripes implying the circle. Totally lame, how does it look without the white? Well in the little experiment I did to the right, I think it looks better without the white border when it’s small, but blow that image up and it’s a bit awkward. Oh well… guess we’ll have to live with the white border regardless. By the way, if you look closely at the stripes in back of the globe, do they match up to the ones in the front? Doesn’t look like it.

Now onto the logo type, FANTASTIC. I love lowercase type, and their reasoning behind doing so, “because it projects a more welcoming and accessible image.” Not a bad reason. And finally, “Your world. Delivered.” If anything, this one line is really the most successful part of the rebranding. It continues the path set out by the original Ma Bell in trying to make the company seem more approachable and customer oriented.

And before you ask me who designed the new logo, I don’t think anyone is sure. But word on the street is that Interbrand is the firm behind AT&T’s new branding.

One last thing before I let you readers have a go at this, if anyone at sister site Slashfood is reading, does the logo have a familiar feel? Looks like peeled fruit. Flat, the logo is awful, no more gradation, no more transparency.

By the way, our other sister site, AdJab has an entry about the marketing aspect of the new logo.