Design Fail Vol. 2

Posted by Jakub

Today I was riding the subway and was dorking out a little more than usual trying to explain to my roommate kerning on a subway poster. The poster was so awful, not the kerning but the overall layout that I was almost willing to email the company and tell them I’d do their next poster for free and i’m not even a graphic designer. Then I got home and just thought about logos that I have to stare at daily, I’d be willing to do that same favor or at least hire a friend to get them an upgraded logo for free. The first one that came to mind is the biggest eye sore that sits on my desk: the Logitech logo. I mean come on, you’re a popular brand and I have no clue what i’m looking at. I’m not asking them to make something that is similar to everyone else by copying Apple branding or by making everything a glossy bubble, but I have no idea what i’m starring at day after day. Is it a gel stick figure running by a green door? because if it is then why? Am I in the wrong here?

63 Comments Leave A Comment


Scott says:

December 2, 2008 at 3:16 am

haha, and after all the hype I gave them yesterday…. btw, Alex has a good story about the guy who did this if he wants to share it.
I always thought saturn and the moon were somehow involved, but the more I look at it, the more I don’t get it. here’s the old school version, I guess it’s an eye?


Kenny G. Villacorta says:

December 2, 2008 at 3:36 am

I never thought about it, but it’s true. Something about it that I don’t like. It’s up for a remaking.


Max says:

December 2, 2008 at 3:39 am

Reminds me of something like an blinking eye. Especially the old version.
But it is hard to tell, what the eye should have to do with hand-controlled input devices.


Adrian says:

December 2, 2008 at 4:35 am

i think they tried to update their early nineties-neville-brody-logo into something more “web 2.0-ish” and underpaid an untalented designer to do it. The result is this ugly chimera you just posted. I’m pretty sure things took the same road like in that stop-sign-video that you posted some months ago.

the best thing would have been to ditch the old logo cause its stuck in that era, and to do a complete redesign. this doesn’t means that old logos suck, but most of the stuff out of the eighties and early nineties is just dated. But Those Old-school modernist stuff from the 70s, 60s and 50s is timeless and doesn’t goes out of style in my opinion.




James says:

December 2, 2008 at 5:52 am

I always thought it was kinda like an ugly paw print, but I guess after Scott posting the original version, it’s just a wackassed plasticy evolution of a crapiola eyeball thing.


Leigh says:

December 2, 2008 at 6:29 am

Yeah, I’ve always hated Logitech’s logo and their turquoise color preference. It’s one of the main reasons I feel detracted by them.


Markus says:

December 2, 2008 at 7:42 am

I agree, Logitech’s logo is one big pile of suck! What the crap is it? Is it making anyone else pissed just looking at it?


sjostrom says:

December 2, 2008 at 8:28 am

Doesn´t it look like a mouse as seen from the side. The stuff to the right of the mouse could represent the laser/light.

Anyway, not pretty but it´s a logo you´ll never forget.


jessemellon says:

December 2, 2008 at 10:13 am

Logitech’s right up there with Wacom and Intuit. Fine companies, but all in desperate need of a top-level identity overhaul.


Clint says:

December 2, 2008 at 10:26 am

I say its a hand. the black squiggle is your palm and the three lines are the 3 fingers that rest on your mouse. the one is red because thats your click finger and i guess it gets hot from all that clicking.


Alex Cornell says:

December 2, 2008 at 11:20 am

Haha yes! The Logitech logo! A wonderful mess of shiny…goop?

I had never really considered it until recently, when a friend of mine’s new company enlisted the Logitech logo designer to do their new logo. (presumably thinking that he would still be pretty talented. Although, based on most of these comments, perhaps that was a mistake haha) After a couple weeks, they got back a logo rendering which my friend ran by me for some extra feedback. I couldn’t believe how unbelievably bad it was. Total mess. It looked like the designer had run a Google image search, chose the first hit, live traced it, and then colored it purple and green. I didn’t know what to say! I felt terrible telling him how bad it was because I knew it had cost a fortune. And what could he do? He had assumed that the designer of one famous logo could design another one, and now was stuck with a logo even worse than Logitech’s.

Not a bad assumption, but I guess just because it’s famous doesn’t mean it’s any good. That’s the tricky thing with logos, sometimes people wrongly attribute the “success” of a logo with what it looks like. The ugliest logo in the world can still become a global success if it’s branded properly and represents the right company.


Eric says:

December 2, 2008 at 11:50 am

Yeah, I kind of feel like the Logitech branding is really a waste of a great name. The name “Logitech” seems to evoke something a lot more interesting than their logo does.


frank says:

December 2, 2008 at 12:01 pm

The original logo makes a little more sense. It looks like an eye and then directional arrows symbolizing the moving of your mouse. The eye is used instead of a mouse to show that a Logitech mouse is a direct link to your brain and it takes you where you want to go.

Haha, just kidding, it’s clearly a vagina spraying piss.

I kind of like that Montreal logo.


joshua says:

December 2, 2008 at 12:14 pm

Come on people! It’s sooo obvious. It’s a piece of Kryptonite, a rose pedal and… um… some melted titanium?

This is all very hip/Salvador Dalí.



M72 says:

December 2, 2008 at 12:56 pm

Speaking about bad logos generally…
Did you notice how bad was an idea o NIKE logo? I always thought it’s brilliant logo looking from all points of view. But!
Then I actually read about initial concept of logo – do you know what does it suppose to mean? I’ts the wing of godess Niké, godess of victory. Who the bloody hell know who Niké is? And how is this clear from the logo???

Don’t get me wrong graphicaly I think this logo actually is brilliant but conceptually it failed completely. Fortunetely people usually thinks that the logo means something like “This is allright” or “Marked as great”. So there is still positive thinking about the concept. But graphic designer should by imo also a shrink (just a little bit) in order not to make such conceptual mistakes.


Dave Krstin says:

December 2, 2008 at 1:01 pm

The worst part of the Logitech logo is the crappy embossing.
Otherwise, I think it does a fine job as a logo. I can recognize that anywhere.

What is it? Who knows… And who cares?

I had a professor in school tell us a logo’s only real purpose is to serve as an immediate identifier, not a piece of art. You can argue this one, I’m sure. But the point I’m trying to make is that I remember that stupid logo from my childhood and it was the first name to come to mind when I started shopping for mice as an adult.


NAVIS says:

December 2, 2008 at 1:25 pm

At first I thought Scott posted this and I got really confused when you wrote, “…and I’m not even a graphic designer.”

Then I went through a whole roller coaster of emotions and paced nervously around my room for a minute until I noticed it was Jakub’s post. Suddenly, life continued its regularly scheduled chi.

Honestly, the thing looks like it was inspired by a cave drawing.


Max Weir says:

December 2, 2008 at 1:29 pm

I’ve always been puzzled myself too, I still can’t quite work out what it actually is supposed to be. Personally I think it is supposed to represent a human hand.

– Thanks.


Klaus says:

December 2, 2008 at 1:53 pm

I think the logo stands for an eye that “discovered” something that´s why it has the 3 strange things in front of it. The red one i don´t have any ideia… but i i think it is an eye … stoked with something … but who really knows….


Florian says:

December 2, 2008 at 3:47 pm

Yeah, the 2012 title freaked me totally up today as well. At first seconds of the trailer I hoped it maybe had something to do with a file number or door number so that the spaced make a sense. Well, I was disappointed. Great trailer nevertheless.


Stef says:

December 2, 2008 at 3:54 pm

Wow, that Logitech logo really is bad. I wish I could have been a fly on the wall when they were making that one … it would be interesting to overhear the process or see some of the sketches that went into it. I have no clue what they were thinking.

and that 2012 title … *shudder*


Jag says:

December 2, 2008 at 3:58 pm

While I’ve seen the Logitech logo countless times in the past, I never actually *looked* at it until just now.

Design Brief: “Make it shiny.” ?


Marc says:

December 2, 2008 at 6:50 pm

I’m family friends with one of the founders. Think I should forward him on the post? Heh… He may actually agree!


Toot & Snort says:

December 2, 2008 at 8:59 pm

no, it looks like some spacey party mix. . . a big cashew, a few small nuts, and a pretzel in the middle.


Daniel Carvalho says:

December 2, 2008 at 11:25 pm

I know the Logitech logo had a large part to play in why I never bought a logitech mouse before. I’ve always found that eye thing appalling. I am immediately pushed away from products that have bad branding, I lose confidence in their professionalism and quality.

This is one of those logo’s, where if I was offered to redo it, I’d feel relieved.

This is definitely a design fail. It’s actually an EPIC FAIL.


Brandon says:

December 3, 2008 at 9:23 am

Hmmm, yeah I think I’ve always suspected ‘eye’… Not sure if that makes it more ironic or not.


Treeline says:

December 4, 2008 at 12:46 pm

the red bit annoys me so much, it’s just there, and the more you notice it the more I hate it.

but all in all, I don’t think this is an awful logo. nothing wrong with a bit of gloss and odd shapes, how boring would it be if everything was perfectly to your (or my..) tastes? It’s a logo of a company that makes mice and stuff, I really don’t mind. As far as that particular style goes there are far worse examples where the shapes and colours don’t work out at all. this one does, for me. not that I’d ever design it!


rain girl says:

December 5, 2008 at 10:36 pm

hey there! am a silent reader of your blog, but this time, i had to comment.

how do we define what constitutes or doesn’t constitute a good poster? and, even if we know, is it necessary to follow the rules?

am not questioning you, sir, but am a fan of your work and just want to clear these points.


Christian says:

December 8, 2008 at 8:31 am

@ Glen: I take it you read the fourth comment? If you read the one right beneath it, written by the designer himself, it says that there is “Nothing much to understand – just an ‘energetic gesture'”. Seems to me that it’s entirely abstract.

Even further down in the comment space he claims that he isn’t the one behind the “3D-ing” of the logo, I suppose the dude who did that is the guy Alex is talking about, because the original designer’s work doesn’t look to horrible to me:


The Honest Ape says:

December 8, 2008 at 9:33 am

Logitech makes pretty good products and it seems like the only people that would let their logo affect their buying decisions are pretentious designers. The old version definitely looks a bit dated now and this new version is crap, but who really cares besides us?


Mr. Rodriguez says:

December 8, 2008 at 2:37 pm

Good point. I have never thought about it that way. I think I must have just ignored the logo and just accepted that the product it represents is a great product. How stupid is that? Here I am with a degree in graphic design and I have totally overlooked one of the biggest product logos in the computer accessories world and just got on with criticizing every other logo that is not even half as bad…

Thanks for pointing this out.



erik soderquist says:

December 8, 2008 at 2:45 pm

Maybe its the bottom of a mouse! The thing in the middle is the squiggly movement, and the tabs are fingers. Either way I’m sure that the interpretation of the first logo to current is not the same nor supposed to be. The original logo is with out a doubt an eye ball.


robert gabriel says:

December 9, 2008 at 1:12 pm

Wow, Jakub, you created quite a good discussion. Probably the most comments I’ve seen on one of your blogs. Well in my mind, it does need some work. Why is the “red head” not glossy? I think it’s supposed to blend in with the Logitech font which is not glossy. I don’t know honestly. But I agree with Dave Krstin, the logo does serve as an immediate identifier. Any time you see that logo you think Logitech; even though it is poorly designed from a designers point of view.

It does NOT resemble the Sony Erickson logo eating a fat guy and why would you want that as a logo? It almost seems like the designer took 15 minutes to complete this. Does anyone know who the designer is? I’m interested in seeing this purple and green logo that Alex Cornell talked about.



Jim says:

December 14, 2008 at 6:18 am

Something tells me that the Logitech logo is supposed to be some stylized mix of a mouse and a lightbulb.

No matter what, it’s freakishly horrible.


Chris says:

December 14, 2008 at 1:23 pm

I think the logo is actually okay. It is UGLY and the colorized version is atrocious, but it is distinct.
You could never confuse that logo for some other company — and really that’s the point of a mark.

It may not transcend into perfection by being flexible, but it is distinct and by Randian logic, that is enough.


Ralph says:

July 27, 2009 at 3:16 pm

I think it’s meant to be something representing a webcam. :|

The second-rate glossy treatment and makes me feel ill. It’s not quite as bad when just one flat colour, but still awful…and to think this monstrosity of a logo sits beneath my palm for countless hours (logitech MX rev). :(