I think that was actually the design brief...The old logo screamed "museum" and while it was hardly original or particularly good design, it adequately fit its purpose. The new one says...nothing whatsoever about the organization it is supposed to be a logo for. It could be an app, a social network, a stupidly-hard-to-pronounce restaurant. It's as if the design brief was to make it stand out as little of possible in a sea of "minimalist" logo trends. If it doesn't look ludicrously dated in a surprisingly short time once the basic trends change, it'll be solely because it's so empty of any meaning or distinctiveness (making it effectively worthless as a logo).
Not everyone.Everyone thinks it's going to implode. Sure, there's a chance it will. And sure, anyone who actually uses it should have a backup plan.
But I'd find it much more interesting if it actually survived (and, no, I am not a fan of the new guy in charge nor his approach whatsoever). Rather, it would be an incredibly interesting experiment to see if a couple hundred talented people could actually run it, as opposed to the 7,500 who were there. Big tech is super bloated (as of relatively recently). And it has been a brain drain away from the tech problems society actually needs solved (energy, transportation, healthcare, education, etc). It would be very interesting to know if a few hundred software engineers could run a thing like that, because if they can, that's the actual interesting game changer to me. Twitter imploding because of a megalomaniac billionaire imploding it is not that interesting, to me anyway.
The lines will be long to get a view of London from this 12 person platform on top of the power stationBattersea Power Station has come back to life as the iconic London landmark finally opened its doors to the public today for the first time after lying idereliction for decades.www.dailymail.co.uk