Do you like my Office 2013 logo design?

[MtnDewCodeRedFreak]

Hey ActionPack, great look on the icons!

One minor suggestion, if you don't mind? Try to make the Outlook icon back to the old color of yellowish-orange.

I think MS went overboard with all the blue. Word and Visio is enough.

[ACTIONpack]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151231515125984&set=o.178191330369&type=1&relevant_count=1

Above is a link to the Office 2013 page. I post it there. I want to get a lot of comments on this and see if Microsoft would say something about this!

[psreloaded]

These icons are much better than the beta ones...

The new one in the front page news looks very much like these

[guru]

They look better than official MS icons! (Y)

+1

these are far clearer than even the new ones

[remixedcat]

Was not talking about the Metro but the desktop itself. I truly believe that the desktop does not need to go into Metro looking.

I think it does need to go metro or it looks funny switching between the two... consistency is broken. I am replacing all the 'retro' icons with 'metro' icons (where I can) on my server 2012 install. It drives me nuts seeing the old icons in metro look.

They need to get rid of the old icons... kid you not there's windows 98 era icons in there.

It's wierd using office 2013 in windows 7 becuase the visual styling clashes so much.... It would be too much work to get 7 to blend in so I deal with it. I will switch to 2012 full time soon. For now I have it in a VM to play with.

They do look very nice. Your mock-up is leading me to seriously think hard about whether the lack of gradients, shadows etc. in most "Metro" products is really a good approach or not.

I agree becuase for some things it does screwy things with my eyes.... might be too much skooma though... LOL...

[CrossCheck]

I like them, but what is casting the shadow on the top left of the main icon? It looks like it's shadowed on the wrong side.

from what i remember in school that it is light (or lack thereof) that causes shadows.

[thenonhacker]

Nice!

Much better than the retarded penguin in 2010 :D

Damn you! Can't unsee!!!

[Adam Skelton]

I like them all :)

I've got a few qualms, though. I don't like how the letters follow the perspective of the icon, and I don't think they'd scale very well.

On the former:

• Reminds me of how the Windows "flag" follows the perspective on the Store bag icon. It's just off-putting. In the bag case, it implies that the window icon should actually be presented as a straight-forward looking flat icon, not in perspective.
  
• At smaller sizes, they would look odd. Perhaps the smaller icons would show the letters as flat, and the larger ones could have them slanted as they are now in your design.
  

On the latter:

• In most cases, these icons will be seen most often on the taskbar or pinned to Start. As such, they will be scaled down, probably to about 32x32. At this point, most of the cosmetic changes you've made are no longer visible.
  

Prove me wrong, please; I want to see it :)

[Panda X]

The "light source" completely contradicts the shadows.

Take for example the shadow on the top left of the O logo. The light would be coming from north-east location, whereas the shadow on the bottom right has a south-east location. But the "light source" for the south-east shadow doesn't cast a shadow on the top right of the O. And the gradient on the right part of the O is backwards. If there were a light, casting a shadow like the one seen in the bottom right, it would either be flat, or the gradient would be light-to-dark, not dark-to-light.

As for the other icons, based on their shadows, the bottom right half would be brighter rather than the top left half. The angle of the shadow would imply a light source be closer to the right as its shadow's angle is much smaller. If the light source was where the square's lighting would imply, being more to the left and higher, then the shadow would have a wider angle from the viewers perspective and be cast slightly lower. Though you modified these in a later post, so you can ignore this.

[ACTIONpack]

Thanks for all of your input. Maybe I will change them a little bit more.