>>255467
>Looks like some shit
That part, I agree with.

It's crap.

>>255581
>>255588
Wrong

>>255613
Says wrong, doesn't say why. Good job

>>255467
a little too busy

>>255912
>say's crap but doesn't say why
Why would you expect a proper response to a subhuman reply?

It's ok visually, but like previous poster said it's too much going on.

It's also pretty meaningless, it doesn't give any clue as to what the company does or what their values are.

changing the thickness of the type mid-word looks really unnerving.

>>256086
>doesn't give any clue as to what the company does or what their values are.
That's true for most logos including all time classics like Coca-Cola and Mercedes-Benz.
Representative logos are sort of a 00's meme

>>256086
Well the company is a DRM/anti-tampering outfit, so maybe the slashes is to represent slashing pirates and illegal downloading?

I'm just drawing at straws though.

>>256096
Except both the logos you pointed out express values and ideals of the company. Being representative is more than incorporating the product into the mark, pleb.

>>256585
That could be it, but I'd say that's a stretch.

For me it only conveys a sense of speed and possibly overcomplicating something that could be simple. It also tells me it's a modern, new, edgy, company. It doesn't inspire confidence in experience from first glance.

If I was about to hire someone to do a job and I got a glance at only the logos, I would probably go with a company who wants to maintain a less edgy image. But that's just me, obviously some will have a different opinion.

>>256608
>both the logos you pointed....
No they don't you fucktard. However they're classics so they've come to represent what those companies stand FOR YOU. And since you can't tell your opinions from facts here you are embarrassing yourself.
Here's what the actual companies have to say about their own logos.
https://media.daimler.com/dcmedia/0-921-614814-1-871937-1-0-0-0-0-0-0-614318-0-1-0-0-0-0-0.html
http://www.coca-colacompany.com/stories/coke-lore-trademark-chronology/

>>256616
If you actually read what you linked you would instantly be proved wrong, doublepleb. Now go back to being a hobbyist.

>>256619
The coca cola mentiones nothing other than being a well designed logo
me 1 you 0
the Daimler one mentions "universal motorization – “on land, on water and in the air"" which Mercedes neither pursues nor "stands for" in any way for the last several decades
me 2 you 0
It also mentions he wanted it over a factory to symbolize "prosperity" however this was not as a logo of the company, and "prosperity" isn't mentioned in the official symbolism, and finally "prosperity" is no way near the top if you ask people what the brand stands for.
me 3 you 0

Care to embarrass yourself more?

>>256622
Damn you ethered that nigga lol

>>256622
>Not knowing the difference between design and redesign

>>256086
logos hardly ever give a clue about the company
its not required at all

>>256674
"Design" as a hobby 101 :^)

>>256673
>THIS desperate
You're not even making an argument. Nothing about the redesign makes you less wrong
>>256676
see >>256096

>>256084
not guy you replied to

its barely readable and not very creative.
i wouldnt buy software from company whose logo is glitchy, tearing and has 3 different fonts in it.

between you and me you rekt that guy hard.

>ITT: trolls trolling trolls trolling designers trolling trolls