Opinion BY Armin

Vanishing Visual Effects

It used to be, back in the late 1980s and early ’90s, that you couldn’t talk about Hollywood visual effects without mentioning Silicon Graphics, Inc. (SGI), the company responsible for the hardware and software behind blockbusters like Jurassic Park, Terminator 2 and Abyss among many others. With such high profile projects it seemed unlikely that SGI would eventually become obsolete, but by the mid-2000s, that’s exactly what SGI had become as other players pushed into its market with faster and cheaper technology, leading SGI to declare bankruptcy. Its most recent technological foray was in “large-scale clustered computing [and] storage,” or, to boil it down, servers. In May, another server company, Rackable, purchased SGI and despite the battered reputation it adopted the SGI name and introduced a new logo.

I want to think I know who did the old logo but I just can’t remember, so if anyone knows chime in. There was something decidedly high-tech about the old logo designed by Landor in 1999, with its awkward “g,” like something only a nerd could have come up with. Actually, all the letters were just plain weird with their hybrid rounded and flat edges but they communicated an attitude and personality. In contrast, the new logo is, simply, flat. A trio of uninspired letters sitting around and waiting for the next bankruptcy to happen and be replaced with another set of boring letters. So the dot of the “i” is green, woo-frickin’-hoo. There is smart simplicity and there is boring simplicity and, while it’s generally hard to discern between the two, this one is clearly the latter. An equally exciting brand guidelines document is available for perusal here.

Thanks to Wu John for the tip.

DATE: Sep.09.2009CATEGORY: Technology 50 COMMENTS

Iulian’s comment is:

Flat, flatter, the flattest.

On Sep.09.2009 at 07:20 AM

Freddy’s comment is:

As you said, much like the Commodore or the Atari brand, SGI is only a pale shadow of what it once was. In a way, the new logo now also brings a visual closure to the time where SGI was on the forefront of cutting-edge creative technology. Corporate identity in its truest form: reflecting the bland and generic company SGI has become.

However, I'm neither shocked nor sad, as it would be appropriate for such a half-hearted effort in re-branding. I for one will always remember the original SGI for their design, whether it was the industrial design of their products - or their logo. With the "new SGI", I don't have any emotional attachment anymore.

On Sep.09.2009 at 07:29 AM

Tinus Guichelaar’s comment is:

I like how the very first page of the brand guidelines document violates the guidelines on page 3.

On Sep.09.2009 at 07:43 AM

Eric’s comment is:

The only thing I think of when mentioning sgi isn't sgi its SiliconGraphics following the no-beginning/no-ending cube seen here: http://insidehpc.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/silicon_graphics_logo_new.jpg

On Sep.09.2009 at 08:01 AM

*** Dave’s comment is:

The old logo reminds me a bit of a circuit board with its odd meanderins, angles, and loops.

The new logo could be anything from a tech company to a mortgage lender to a producer of cocktail napkins.

On Sep.09.2009 at 08:12 AM

Jonathan Blocksom’s comment is:

That logo was introduced in 1999, right in the middle of their numerous strategic blunders as the high end graphics market moved from workstations to PCs -- and long after SGI missed the boat on the internet. To those of us who worked there in the 90s that logo is another reminder of everything that went wrong with a once great company.

On Sep.09.2009 at 08:34 AM

Mario’s comment is:

Their new logo is a step up from the old one. Needless that’s not saying much. The bar was set really low. I agree with Dave in that the logo is not proprietary at all. That logo can be for anything.

On Sep.09.2009 at 08:40 AM

Manolis Gerasidis’s comment is:

According to wikipedia:
"At the same time in 1999, SGI announced a new logo consisting of only the letters “sgi” in a proprietary font called “SGI”, created by branding and design consulting firm Landor Associates, in collaboration with designer Joe Stitzlein. The new logo drew criticism for wasting the professional goodwill associated with the previous box-outline logo (known inside of the company as "The Bug"). SGI later re-adopted the cube logo, using both logos for the remainder of the company's existence."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Graphics

On Sep.09.2009 at 08:40 AM

Chip O'Toole’s comment is:

All hail the dispatcher.

I have fond and foul memories of my sgi days, pounding out hour upon hours of modeling on an indigo.

I agree with Jonathan, the old sgi featured here was representative of a last ditch effort by Silicon Graphics and the neverending cube/wordmark was the true logo of their hayday.

The new sgi is just a bore, but if it means leaving behind a failed business model, ok sure. Not like anyone gonna see it anyway.

On Sep.09.2009 at 08:46 AM

Bill Dawson (XK9)’s comment is:

I was a consumer of SGI products in the mid 90s. Specifically their Oxygen line that ran sophisticated desktop graphics software like Discreet Logic's Flint. At that time, the first logo Armin displays was a simplified logo that was light years apart from their previous 80s hi-tech look.

This original logo screamed "Hey our computers are powerful enough to render 3D graphics!" The switch to the "before" lower case version was a reaction to a change in the industry where they needed a wider consumer base if they were to survive. The new logo and the industrial design of their new computers was much more accessible. These were beautifully different boxes that were shaped more like bundt cakes than PCs.

But alas, SGI was not revolutionary enough. The real revolution was software and that was being produced by smaller, leaner companies who were then bought up by bigger, well-capitalized companies like Adobe. (See also Pagemaker and After Effects).

For me this logo seems to have surrendered that pioneer spirit that made this company so great.

Although I do love the font they used. I thought it was CorporateSBQ from Berthold, but the "s" is wrong. It?looks a bit like Gill Sans, but it's not that either. Anyone?

On Sep.09.2009 at 08:48 AM

Bill Dawson (XK9)’s comment is:

"...woo frickin-hoo." Nice touch, A.

On Sep.09.2009 at 08:51 AM

ScottyM’s comment is:

True dat, Tinus, they violated the "minimum space" border. So funny, it's pathetic.

On Sep.09.2009 at 09:07 AM

Armin’s comment is:

> created by branding and design consulting firm Landor Associates,

Thanks Manolo! Can't believe I missed it. I haven't made a good habit to look for logo information on Wikipedia. Now I know why it felt familiar. The work of Landor San Francisco at the end of the 1990s was some of the best in corporate identity.

On Sep.09.2009 at 09:17 AM

Joachim’s comment is:

Bill:

The typeface used in the new wordmark is FF Kievit.

On Sep.09.2009 at 09:39 AM

Jonathan Blocksom’s comment is:

Here's the Slashdot thread on the 1999 SGI logo change:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=99/04/12/1739248

Meet the new logo, same as the old logo.

On Sep.09.2009 at 09:43 AM

Mog’s comment is:

Am I the only one who saw a face in the old "g"?

On Sep.09.2009 at 09:43 AM

vanderz’s comment is:

No, Mog, you are not the only one. When the new logo came out, someone did a morph from the 'g' into Homer Simpson's head.

On Sep.09.2009 at 09:53 AM

JonSel’s comment is:

The work of Landor San Francisco at the end of the 1990s was some of the best in corporate identity.

Thank Exec CD Margaret Youngblood for that. She was a serious force in the company for a long time and really pushed out some great work from the SF office.

On Sep.09.2009 at 10:46 AM

Robb Irrgang’s comment is:

The 'before' is probably one of my favorite 90s identities. The 'after' is blander than a cardboard steak, and is basically incomprehensible; the company buys the name + logo and then throws away the logo?

On Sep.09.2009 at 11:00 AM

Lauren B’s comment is:

Shocking. They could have conjured a myriad of treatments for the unique letterforms, yet instead it seems they didn't even attempt to utilize this opportunity. The "new" wordmark looks like it should be the old one. If this logo were a contestant on Project Runway it would be "out".

On Sep.09.2009 at 11:00 AM

AAaron’s comment is:

Paint straight from the tube.

The old is dated, but at least interesting.

On Sep.09.2009 at 12:00 PM

Kevin Tucker’s comment is:

They threw out the most essential element of the Silicon Graphics identity: purple. Sure, it's not as fashionable now as it was in their heyday, but it was pretty much all they had left. I can't help thinking it's a mistake not to find some way to incorporate the color, if they're trying to cash in on the SGI brand equity.

On Sep.09.2009 at 12:21 PM

James’s comment is:

Glad to see the sgi brand stick around. I had allot of fun on those machines in college. A good intro to a unix-ish environment and a new way of thinking about an os/hardware combo that wasn't mac or windoze.

as for the branding... blah but whatever it doesn't need to be flashy anymore as its a server company right... so maybe something bland is a better representation of what they are doing now as opposed to what the brand used to represent.

form follows function right?

On Sep.09.2009 at 01:48 PM

John Chastain’s comment is:

I remember the collateral material that was produced with the arrival of the last logo. The old T-26 typeface Monolein designed by Joseph Stitzlein was used for display settings, and there are a lot of similarities between the "s" and the "i" in the previous logo to those letter found in that typeface. However the "g" character in the previous logo is rather different to that in the typeface.

http://www.t26.com/fonts/394-Monolein

On Sep.09.2009 at 02:33 PM

Pedro’s comment is:

The old "g" is indeed awesome. Too bad the old logo on its whole is kind of strange and one thing doesn't seem to match the other. Overall, the new one is better, but lacks personality. Perhaps if they had reworked it from the "g" they would have had a really great result.

On Sep.09.2009 at 03:10 PM

Pedro’s comment is:

On a second thought, the new one isn't any better than the old one in any way. Perhaps better visually resolved, but that's not really the hardest thing when you're just using three regular letters just as they are, in comparison to the old experimental one. But it still has a total lack of personality.

On Sep.09.2009 at 03:18 PM

Glenn Sakamoto’s comment is:

...SIGh...

On Sep.09.2009 at 03:43 PM

Shauna’s comment is:

the old logo was much nicer, with both round and straight edges and the quirky g.
The new logo loks plain and boring and looks like it could represent anything while the interesting type of the old one looked like it definitly represented something that involved graphics and were good at it.

On Sep.09.2009 at 05:13 PM

Rob Marquardt’s comment is:

SGI has to be around until at least 2058, so that they can sponsor the Jupiter mission to Alpha Prime.

On Sep.09.2009 at 06:15 PM

Ivan’s comment is:

well...going down,, steadily. Even the "registered" sign is bottom aligned in the new logo...

On Sep.09.2009 at 06:29 PM

Tayfun Ozturkmen’s comment is:

This new logo is a real yawn.

It's funny to look around on ebay for SGI stuff, machines which once asked massive price tags are now just left over junk. The industrial design however of many of the units however is really good stuff. I was always fond of their machines when I was younger.

I think anyone who grew up with computers or computer graphics has a nostalgic soft spot for SGI. They could have been very successful producing high end PC cases and that kind of thing in the after-market PC parts industry.

On Sep.09.2009 at 06:31 PM

beeg’s comment is:

> I like how the very first page of the brand guidelines document violates the guidelines on page 3.

That's frickin hilarious. Brand Guidelines FAIL.

On Sep.09.2009 at 09:58 PM

daniel’s comment is:

Am i the only one that thinks it's similar to igo's logo?

http://www.igocars.org/

On Sep.10.2009 at 12:15 AM

Andrew’s comment is:

Forgettable.

On Sep.10.2009 at 01:05 AM

Rico’s comment is:

Uuaaaahhhhh. (the sound of me yawning)

On Sep.10.2009 at 01:08 AM

Stefano Picco’s comment is:

The old one was still stylish and the color very powerful, the new one could be something fpr nature projects ...

Where is the power of SGI?

On Sep.10.2009 at 04:55 AM

Tony Spaeth’s comment is:

Armin, you may have vaguely remembered my 1999 review of Landor's SGI. To quote, "As for the logo design, I am caught between 'why?' and 'why not?;' and I wonder what criteria led to the casual, informal letterforms. (Q: are we meant to see a face in the 'g,' looking left?)"

http://www.identityworks.com/reviews/1999/sgi.htm

On Sep.10.2009 at 03:21 PM

Armin’s comment is:

Tony, in 1999 I had just started my career... Didn't keep up religiously with corporate identity changes then as I do now!

On Sep.10.2009 at 03:25 PM

Mark’s comment is:

While I will miss the unique "g" in the old logo I think it's a big improvement.

On Sep.10.2009 at 07:42 PM

Eli’s comment is:

The blue that is showing up everywhere is starting to get very boring.

Let's see a new colour.

On Sep.11.2009 at 04:48 AM

nathan’s comment is:

Tinus Guichelaar’s comment is:
I like how the very first page of the brand guidelines document violates the guidelines on page 3.

And on the last page too!

On Sep.11.2009 at 10:10 AM

rob’s comment is:

Wow, they successfully sucked all the character out of their brand. I can't imagine why anyone thought this was a good idea.

I saw this and instantly thought of iGo car sharing (http://www.igocars.org/). Perhaps because its exactly the same font and colors.

On Sep.11.2009 at 01:26 PM

Rodrigo Müller’s comment is:

ohhh, blue and green. nah.

On Sep.12.2009 at 10:02 AM

Mongoose’s comment is:

I personally think this new boringness may be a step in the right direction, if for one reason only:

Man, I hated that old 'g'. It was a typographic nightmare in the aim of quirkiness that failed hard. I have detested it with a revulsion far more than it probably deserves, and any elimination of it is a grand step forward in my opinion.

I never before noticed the curved/flat ends to the 's' and the 'i'. Too distracted by the 'g'. I can't honestly say if I like them or not; coupled with a different 'g' there might have been something nice there.

The new one, begged nicely: Bland. So, is bland better than quirky and ugly?

I say yes, and give it a B-.

--Mongoose

On Sep.13.2009 at 12:03 PM

Vitezslav Valka’s comment is:

Lovely... I thought SGI is dead already... but it isn't! :)

On Sep.16.2009 at 07:14 AM

J’s comment is:

The old g had a face, with big round glasses and a goatee (looking to the left, if you didn't already see it). Uber nerdy!

On Sep.22.2009 at 05:46 PM

Mark’s comment is:

did some temp make this in-house with that $29.99 logo program?

On Sep.24.2009 at 12:25 AM

Alessandro Mingione’s comment is:

I totally agree with you.
The old logo may be ugly, but at least has something to say. The new one is just boring.

On Sep.25.2009 at 07:25 AM

Mike L’s comment is:

Only SGI can take a bad logo and make it worse.
When I think of SGI, the logo that comes to mind is the cube.
The 'g' from 1999 resembles a person sitting on a toilet.
Now it's 3 plain letters. Yawn.
Such a far cry from what they once were.

On Dec.09.2009 at 09:37 AM

Santa Clara domestic violence lawyer’s comment is:

I like the more straight forward approach they took on this one.

On Dec.09.2009 at 02:07 PM