What should a logo for NeXT look like? (1986)

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Overall perception of the NeXT logo

  • Strongly polarizing: some call it iconic, confident, and timeless; others find it primitive, ugly, or amateurish compared with Sun, SGI, or Nintendo 64/GameCube logos.
  • Multiple comments say the cube’s projection “looks wrong” — neither proper perspective nor true orthographic — which creates visual discomfort.
  • Colors and thin letterforms are criticized as muddy and low-contrast, clashing with the machines’ sleek hardware; others praise the bold multicolor look as the kind of personality modern brands lack.
  • The lowercase “e” is noted as intentional, to prevent “NEXT” being read as “EXIT”; some still find the “e” visually irritating.
  • Several point out the logo is memorable but question whether memorability alone is enough if many people find it unattractive; others argue that memorability is the primary job of a logo.
  • Some believe the design is locked to an ’80s–early-’90s aesthetic and would have required major evolution, unlike Apple’s more adaptable mark.

Design process, theory, and persuasion

  • The Rand presentation and booklet are admired as a masterclass in pitching: confidence, narrative, and process used to justify a single strong proposal.
  • Comparisons are drawn to famous logo pitches (AT&T by Saul Bass, Pepsi’s over-the-top rationale), with skepticism that designers can fully explain how they truly arrived at a design.
  • Several stress that logos are “empty vessels” filled by people’s experiences; early reactions without context are seen as shallow but common.
  • There is debate over whether good design should “just look right” without any backstory (e.g., Nike, FedEx), versus needing conceptual explanations.

NeXTstep legacy and tooling

  • Thread branches into nostalgia for NeXT hardware, OS, and UI, with claims that using NeXT once felt more “futuristic” than today’s tech.
  • GNUstep, Étoilé, and Haiku are discussed as heirs or alternatives to the NeXTstep/Cocoa model; challenges include small ecosystems, compatibility gaps, and community traction.
  • Some still run NeXT-inspired environments (e.g., WindowMaker-based Linux distros) and enjoy the aesthetic.

Branding costs and reuse

  • Rebranding is portrayed as enormously expensive (examples: AT&T, Verizon), which explains corporate reluctance to change bad logos.
  • A notable anecdote describes a political campaign reusing the NeXT cube concept as a ballot box, seen as both “hack work” and disturbingly effective.