Google Chrome steals logo from QQ.com?


Recommended Posts

Not even close. :no:

Blue in the middle with the same three colours swirling round it... how can on Earth can you claim that's "not even close"? It's not ripping it off because it's incredibly generic but people here are in denial to say it's not similar.

Blue in the middle with the same three colours swirling round it... how can on Earth can you claim that's "not even close"? It's not ripping it off because it's incredibly generic but people here are in denial to say it's not similar.

I say it's not close because if you think Google are ripping off these colors in a logo from QQ.com then you must go back and say that QQ (and, in turn, Google) are actually ripping it off from Microsoft with the Office logo. ;)

Bottom line: It's essentially a generic logo (Chrome's). And a horribly ugly one at that.

I say it's not close because if you think Google are ripping off these colors in a logo from QQ.com then you must go back and say that QQ (and, in turn, Google) are actually ripping it off from Microsoft with the Office logo. ;)

That's completely missing the point. You said it's "not even close", which is patently wrong as it is VERY similar. It doesn't matter whether or not QQ ripped it from anywhere else as that is a completely separate issue - I already said it was generic, so that's a moot point as well. Honestly, can't people accept when they're wrong on the internet? It seems everyone has to defend their inaccurate statements in order to save face.

I say it's not close because if you think Google are ripping off these colors in a logo from QQ.com then you must go back and say that QQ (and, in turn, Google) are actually ripping it off from Microsoft with the Office logo. ;)

Bottom line: It's essentially a generic logo (Chrome's). And a horribly ugly one at that.

actually, QQ.com's logo is nothing like Office logo. One is round with one color at the center, the other is rectangular with nothing at the center. The only thing similar is that they both have four colors, but the shapes are completely different.

Chrome's logo, on the other hand, shares an astounding similarity with the QQ.com logo, both in color AND shape. They are both three colors (red, yellow, green clock-wise) in a circle with blue at the center. actually if you turn the QQ.com logo's outer colors clock-wise 180 degree, enlarge them, you get almost the exact Chrome logo ;)

I'm not saying they have really stolen it from QQ.com, but the similarity is quite huge, and personally I haven't encountered another logo with similar color arrangement and shape, so I doubt it's really that "generic" :laugh:

Oh please, get a life.

Google has always had those four colors and they've implemented them on the design.

Also, if you can take a moment to notice the difference between the two.

everyone always had those four colors, but not many implement them in this shape.

There are of course differences, for example what I have mentioned in the previous post, you need to rotate the colors clock-wise 180 degrees for them to match the positions. If there were no difference between the two, then it would be a big "Google Chrome STEAL logo from QQ.com!!!!" instead of the current title :laugh:

Also, if you really had a life yourself, you would not take a moment to tell people to get a life here :laugh:

That's completely missing the point. You said it's "not even close", which is patently wrong as it is VERY similar. It doesn't matter whether or not QQ ripped it from anywhere else as that is a completely separate issue - I already said it was generic, so that's a moot point as well. Honestly, can't people accept when they're wrong on the internet? It seems everyone has to defend their inaccurate statements in order to save face.

Actually, you misunderstood me. When I said "not even close" I wasn't commenting on the similarities of the logos, I was talking about how it's not even close to the truth of how Google stole their logo idea from QQ. Saying something like that is ridiculous. Bad choice of words on my part in retrospect, hopefully it's clearer now... ;)

I'm not saying they have really stolen it from QQ.com, but the similarity is quite huge, and personally I haven't encountered another logo with similar color arrangement and shape, so I doubt it's really that "generic" :laugh:

Exactly, that was my point. Is that I really don't think it was stolen from QQ.com... but who knows, maybe there's just an unimaginative intern at Google's graphics dept. :p

Regardless, I still say it's a horrid logo. I actually prefer QQ.com's logo :laugh:

Blue in the middle with the same three colours swirling round it... how can on Earth can you claim that's "not even close"? It's not ripping it off because it's incredibly generic but people here are in denial to say it's not similar.

It's conceptually close but not artistically close. The Chrome logo is conceptually close to a lot of things (including Simon and Pokemon balls).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Louis Rossmann suing Samsung over "990 Pro SSD warranty scam" by Sayan Sen Back in 2023, if you recall, Neowin reviewer Robbie Khan had a dispute with Samsung over his 990 Pro SSD, which was rapidly losing its health. After significant back and forth, the tech giant had finally released firmware to "stop" the issue. Interestingly, its previous flagship at the time, the 980 Pro was also facing problems leading to two consecutive sets of firmware fixes. Three years later, it looks like a similar conflict has now broken out between tech repair entrepreneur YouTuber Louis Rossmann and Samsung, as it has escalated into a threatened lawsuit after the company allegedly refused to appropriately replace a failing 990 Pro SSD that remained under warranty. According to Rossmann, a 4TB Samsung 990 Pro NVMe SSD purchased for approximately $330 less than two years ago, began experiencing major hiccups and issues, even though he claims it had been operated under ideal cooling conditions. It was installed in a RAID 1 array and cooled by a heatsink and dual high-speed fans. However the drive reportedly started dropping out of the array, exhibiting controller-level failures that eventually became not useable in any meaningful way. Rossmann said Samsung’s support process was marked by delays and confusion from the very start. After initially contacting the wrong regional support channel, he was redirected to Samsung’s memory support division where he submitted detailed diagnostics, logs, and proof of purchase. Rossmann runs a repair company and owns an ACE Lab PC-3000 machine, which is a professional-grade data recovery equipment. As such, he had been confident in his diagnostics. Samsung even seemingly acknowledged that later. Regardless, Rossmann claims that his initial support ticket was automatically closed before a full 24-hour response window had elapsed, forcing him to reopen the case and resubmit documentation. The controversy however intensified further from here after Samsung accepted the drive for warranty evaluation but later returned it with a repair report stating that the drive had passed its testing and that the SSD had been verified as functional. Rossmann strongly disputed those claims citing that his own independent testing on PC-3000 showed write speeds reducing to as low as 40–60 MB/s before the drive failed entirely. Samsung subsequently informed him that the SSD had been reset and reflashed, passing internal stress tests. However, the company also stated that replacement units were unavailable due to an industry-wide memory shortage and suggested that a refund process could be initiated if further testing confirmed the fault. Thus, to settle, the company offered a refund of $330, the amount that was initially paid by him to make the purchase. Here, Rossmann pointed out the seeming hypocrisy of the tech giant as in how no Samsung drive was apparently allocated for warranty replacements, but they were abundantly available for retail sales especially when using business accounts. As you can see, Rossmann is indeed right, there are Samsung 990 Pro 4TB SSDs on Amazon currently for $950 (shipped and sold by first-party Amazon US itself), and they are also available on Samsung's own store too, albeit for an even higher price of $1100. Thus Rossmann argues that Samsung’s inability or unwillingness to provide a replacement while the same model remains available for purchase at significantly higher market prices reflects a failure to honor its warranty obligations. He has issued a formal 60-day notice and says he intends to file suit in Texas small claims court, asserting that companies should face greater costs for denying legitimate warranty claims than for fulfilling them. You can check out the full video titled "Samsung's 990 Pro SSD warranty policy is a scam; I'm taking them to court," at the link below. Source and image: Louis Rossmann (YouTube) As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases
    • Was it too much to ask to show the icon in this article?
    • Frankly, I blame whoever is writing such articles. "A big improvement/update and/or new feature is now available to everyone! Also, use this unofficial tweak tool to enable it because it actually isn't available to you yet officially and might not in fact even be entirely ready or whatever, hence why it is perhaps not enabled for you*. But it's great and you should enable it!" I mean there's nothing wrong with sharing info about some feature you might need to enable via unofficial means, of course. It's just that these articles tend to essentially end up being two news pieces in one, and one of them tends to be a bit misleading. (*Yes, yes, the "it's a controlled rollout!" thing. Not a fan of that one either. The argument, not the actual rollout.)
    • Thank you. Will do. I read in the release notes that editor config might be at play here.
    • Actually, I think even Microsoft doesn't know how to control it
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      davidbazooked earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Jamswaz earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Jamswaz earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      Marzoid went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Community Regular
      coch went up a rank
      Community Regular
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      508
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      185
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      83
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      75
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!