There was a lot of noise last week when Google announced it had given its visual identity system a complete overhaul for the first time in 17 years (we won’t count the tweak from a couple of years ago as anything more than what it was: a tweak).
When you think of Google, what comes to mind? Simple? Uncluttered? Maybe friendly?
Now let’s ask another question: does the new identity still communicate that same feeling?
It certainly does.
We’ve been asked to weigh in on the change (thanks @markpouteaux), but before doing that, let’s clarify some language. Google didn’t rebrand. A rebrand would imply a fundamental shift in who the company is and how it wants to be perceived by users and customers. That didn’t happen. Same omnipresent internet giant. Same role in people’s lives. No rebrand, just an updated visual identity.
Google has always been about innovation on and around the web. Search, Maps, Gmail, Earth, Chrome, even Android, arguably, are web-native products. The updated identity reflects that reality more clearly. The logo is now designed to scale seamlessly from mobile interfaces to future display formats, while retaining a sense of play through its color palette and the subtle rotation of the “e.” It’s still clean. Still simple. Still unmistakably Google.
And honestly, that’s exactly what we would expect, regardless of what the redesign looked like. Good design has long been part of Google’s DNA. Removing the serifs simply brings the logo fully into the 21st century, where it belongs. As an aside, there’s an interesting piece from BBC that examines how serif typefaces are often associated with legacy institutions. Notice a pattern? Many of them trace their origins back to the late 19th or early 20th century.
But really, when was the last time you saw the Google logo in isolation?
Most of us encounter Google through its ever-changing Google Doodles, or we bypass the homepage entirely by using the browser’s address bar as our search interface. In that context, the logo functions less as a static symbol and more as a flexible system component.
We tend to agree with Fortune’s take: a collective “meh” is a win. The update isn’t earth-shattering, and it doesn’t need to be. What matters is that the identity now better reflects the brand behind it.
Yes, there’s been plenty of commentary. Reviews have ranged from enthusiastic (Fast Company) to skeptical (Daring Fireball). But through all the noise, the same impression comes through: Google still feels friendly, innovative, uncluttered, and simple.
In that sense, the new identity is a success.
But a rebrand? Not quite.
If you’re navigating a brand update of your own, contact us to talk it through.
