27 Responses to this post

1. Lou on October 24th, 2008 10:07 pm

   What is this?Some second grader tried to draw something?This is disaster.

2. TIm b on October 24th, 2008 10:49 pm

   I think the .NET logo should be a graphic that evokes an actual, physical net.That would be clever.

3. Karen on October 24th, 2008 11:07 pm

   Very cool!

4. Ashic on October 25th, 2008 12:27 am

   Damn…liked the previous one. This looks like something from Java Land. I hate Java land.Guess I’ll have to learn to love the new logo 🙁

5. Leo on October 25th, 2008 7:25 am

   Thats OK, but I did’nt realise there was a problem with the old one.

6. michael on October 25th, 2008 10:14 am

   jesus, i’ve never seen something such ugly as this … uhm … logo?

7. Francois Ward on October 25th, 2008 2:02 pm

   Old logo was much, much -MUCH- better. On top of it, Microsoft seriously needs to stop deluting their brands by switching them around so much (like MSN -> .NET -> Live -> Whatever Messenger)Once you have a logo people recognise, why switch it around? Is the marketing dep THAT bored?

8. Andrey on October 25th, 2008 6:18 pm

   I hope it’s not too late to stall it.In my opinion, both new logos for SQL Server 2008 and this one are actually worse than the previous ones. Both provide unserious impression, kinds of these java/linux university toys, you know…This particular one, it will be difficult to associate it mentally with .NET or for that matter with anything, make it low resolution and without text below, it won’t be distinguishable at all.There is no point in dismissing the older quality logos, you’re obviously in no need of rebranding.

9. that guy on October 25th, 2008 6:21 pm

   This is horrible. How embarassing to be a .net programmer now. Why can’t we get a logo as smart as the sql 2008 logo. This is terrible.

10. tarik on October 26th, 2008 3:06 am

    I don’t like this new one, old one was better 🙁

11. Simone on October 26th, 2008 4:36 am

    It reminds me of this: http://www.codeplex.com/…/CommonServiceLo

12. red on October 26th, 2008 4:38 am

    I couldnt care less

13. amrelgarhy on October 26th, 2008 5:36 am

    Please don’t apply this, the previous one was fine.

14. Jandler on October 26th, 2008 1:46 pm

    The graphics is decent but the fonts for the words are not.

15. Vijay on October 26th, 2008 8:21 pm

    Very simple logo..Microfot never changed Windows Logo, Why chanage this one?

16. JAMESYAN on October 27th, 2008 12:29 am

    for me the new logo iscool and great. Sure others will like it ,those who really appreciate arts.

17. nr2ae on October 27th, 2008 3:56 am

    What on earth is that?Is this just a halloween joke?I love the old ".net" logo.When you see it, you know it’s ".net". And it looks cool.For the new logo, if you remove "Microsoft .net" label below, can you really tell me it’s ".net"?It’s a shame.

18. Divi on October 27th, 2008 4:50 am

    Please please please throw it away. That one is quite ugly. I can’t identify myself in any way with this.

19. Ashraf on October 27th, 2008 5:54 am

    this is not good looking.Please do no use that.

20. mike on October 27th, 2008 7:45 am

    It doesn’t affect me or my work, but that’s a silly logo.

21. leo on October 27th, 2008 9:30 am

    didn’t like it.

22. Koen on October 27th, 2008 10:23 am

    I’d expected something more spectacular if it gets changed. Can’t really see this as an improvement.

23. BenCh on October 27th, 2008 12:57 pm

    What’s the point of it?I’d rather they spent all that marketing money on adding more features to the .NET framework itself! The old logo was fine. Stop wasting time and money!

24. Colin on October 27th, 2008 4:33 pm

    The old logos always had a problem with casing (.net vs .NET) and the new logo fixes that but the new N graphic is just too wide. People don’t even see that it is supposed to be an N.

25. jrprogrammer on October 27th, 2008 8:12 pm

    …this is not happening…

26. asd on October 27th, 2008 10:15 pm

    i like it…asd

27. mohsen salehi on October 28th, 2008 3:46 am

    cool !have good Time.