Google Favicon Update

[Premgenius]

Is it me of has the Google favicon been updated

http://www.google.co.uk/favicon.ico

[redeemed]

Yeah I saw it too. I don't know what the deal is with that colour scheme though :wacko: :D

[kev64]

What the hell is that?? :huh:

[Spartan Erik]

Better than the purple thing they had before..

If you guys don't see it, its the typical Google colors shaped to make a white "g"

[j1232]

America YEAH!

[sundayx Veteran]

Previous changes.

[Premgenius]

What the hell is that?? :huh:

From Wikipedia

A favicon (short for favorites icon), also known as a website icon, shortcut icon, url icon, or bookmark icon is an icon associated with a particular website or webpage (

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favicon

)

Better than the purple thing they had before..

If you guys don't see it, its the typical Google colors shaped to make a white "g"

I agree.

[Skight]

To me the old one is better.

[Zickar]

Its quite old isn't it ... I mean its at least three months old I'm sure of that cause I've been seeing it for a long time now

[Lee G. Veteran]

Yeah, I noticed the change. I first thought it was for Google Images only, because the old favicon showed for Google web search, although I later realized it was because my favicon cache hadn't cleared. I prefer the blue 'g' favicon though as it's much more subtle.

[capr]

i thought it was a bug really... i don't like it!! the g doesn't standout enough. and it's just too many colors

[McDave]

Even the Yahoo one is less ugly.

[Premgenius]

I like it

[Calum Veteran]

Yeah I saw it too. I don't know what the deal is with that colour scheme though :wacko: :D

I had to re-read your post a few times until I saw that grin :p

This is what I said about the new favicon before:

I like it, although I think it's maybe wayyyy to colourful for something like Google which has the worst website design I have ever seen! The last favicon went with their boring, disgusting layout much better than this one.

I wish they would update their layout to go with this new favicon and be less 'minimal' and I might actually start liking Google!

Even Microsoft Live Search got rid of their beautiful interface become more 'minimalistic' to please the lovers of Google's disgustingly minimal user interface! :/ (although Microsoft did their 'minimal' design better, it's a shame Google's relevance in search results seems better).

[Mainer82]

I noticed that this morning with searching for something, It's different I will say.

[Guest]

Didn't really notice that... I usually use google from the search bar in firefox which has the good ol' yeolde icon (Y).

[JMann Veteran]

New one is looking good, for me at least! ;)

[Mainer82]

Didn't really notice that... I usually use google from the search bar in firefox which has the good ol' yeolde icon (Y) .

Firefox 3.1 beta 2 has the g icon, however the next release will most likely have the new icon.

[Joel]

I had to re-read your post a few times until I saw that grin :p

This is what I said about the new favicon before:

I like it, although I think it's maybe wayyyy to colourful for something like Google which has the worst website design I have ever seen! The last favicon went with their boring, disgusting layout much better than this one.

I wish they would update their layout to go with this new favicon and be less 'minimal' and I might actually start liking Google!

Even Microsoft Live Search got rid of their beautiful interface become more 'minimalistic' to please the lovers of Google's disgustingly minimal user interface! :/ (although Microsoft did their 'minimal' design better, it's a shame Google's relevance in search results seems better).

I use a search engine to find stuff, not look pretty.

[Calum Veteran]

I use a search engine to find stuff, not look pretty.

That's fair enough, Joel. Each to his own :)

However, if you say that, surely the same should be applied to any website you use? Any software you use? Even, any operating system you use? After all, you are just using Google to search for websites, just like you are just using Windows, Mac OS X or Linux to run applications, right?

I don't know what operating system you use, but would you not mind then if Windows, Apple or the developers of the Linux distro you use decided to strip all the decent images and colours out of their design and just go for a plain white design with a few horrible blue links in random places? And, of course a logo in a horrible Times New Roman font with different colours...

How about if the same was applied to the iPod touch (or whatever MP3 player you use)? After all, you are only using that to listen to music.

If the interface of your mobile phone was just plain pure white with a few blue links for menu items and black text, I take it you wouldn't mind? After all, you are just using your phone to make calls, take pictures, text people, view calendars, etc, right? Why care about a nice looking interface...?

Google has the functionality, so what's the harm in implementing a nice look which wouldn't disadvantage the loading time? (i.e. just a few divs and different shades/colours? Maybe some light images here and there).

The new favicon is brilliant and the logo needs a better font style, I reckon!

[Joel]

That's fair enough, Joel. Each to his own :)

However, if you say that, surely the same should be applied to any website you use? Any software you use? Even, any operating system you use? After all, you are just using Google to search for websites, just like you are just using Windows, Mac OS X or Linux to run applications, right?

I don't know what operating system you use, but would you not mind then if Windows, Apple or the developers of the Linux distro you use decided to strip all the decent images and colours out of their design and just go for a plain white design with a few horrible blue links in random places? And, of course a logo in a horrible Times New Roman font with different colours...

How about if the same was applied to the iPod touch (or whatever MP3 player you use)? After all, you are only using that to listen to music.

If the interface of your mobile phone was just plain pure white with a few blue links for menu items and black text, I take it you wouldn't mind? After all, you are just using your phone to make calls, take pictures, text people, view calendars, etc, right? Why care about a nice looking interface...?

Google has the functionality, so what's the harm in implementing a nice look which wouldn't disadvantage the loading time? (i.e. just a few divs and different shades/colours? Maybe some light images here and there).

The new favicon is brilliant and the logo needs a better font style, I reckon!

So, you like form over function?

I use Windows XP, in Classic mode. I don't use an MP3 player. My phone's UI is just enough for me (Motorola v635).

Your first example about websites makes no sense. If the website is flashy, it's probably trying to get your attention to sell you something. That's called advertising. Most informational sites are not cesspits of colours and Flash. Can you imagine if Wikipedia looked like something Tinky Winky barfed up? No one would go near the place.

[Calum Veteran]

So, you like form over function?

I use Windows XP, in Classic mode. I don't use an MP3 player. My phone's UI is just enough for me (Motorola v635).

Your first example about websites makes no sense. If the website is flashy, it's probably trying to get your attention to sell you something. That's called advertising. Most informational sites are not cesspits of colours and Flash. Can you imagine if Wikipedia looked like something Tinky Winky barfed up? No one would go near the place.

No. I like good form and efficient functionality. I look at functionality in products first (which is why I am looking above the new Windows Live Photo Gallery's inconsistencies and the fact we cannot change the colour, like we can on the rest of the Windows Live Essentials). However, it does not take much effort to implement a nice simple, minimalistic, user interface as well as keeping the effcient functionality which is already present. Google have opted to include an ugly, minimalistic, user interface. It looked a bit better when they decided to use tabs for the different search options and even better when they moved these search options to the top left of the screen, but the blue on the links is still an awful colour (maybe a lighter shade or a darker shade of blue would look nicer, or, even a nice shade of green). The logo is stll a horrible Times font (although I will accept that this is how people recognise Google and maybe that will have to stay like that) :rolleyes:. There is also too much white.

Google could easily implement a few more shades of whitish colours, or lighter shades of colours in it's logo around the homepage and search results page. I mean after all it's new favicon is colourful, why not the website? If they didn't want to opt for a colourful website when they could have more whitish or greyish shades (like a bit of a darker white on that top bar with the links).

My suggestions here are not the best, but Google really could make it all look much better than it does. Even changing the colour of the links and messing about with different HEX codes would benefit the layout.

Like I said, I choose form and functionality. Windows now has the features, so why not make it look nice by using the beautiful Aero glass and using things like Flip3D every now and then.

The features are there whether you use classic mode or Aero (or on XP that awful Fischer Price looking Luna theme - I can see why you use classic).

Obviously, like I said, each to his own, but why use an awful looking interface and why make your website look awful when it already has the functionality and it does not take much effort (and will not increase loading times) by just tweaking the interface a bit to make it look nicer).

[Guest]

cJr., I think you've kinda looked into Joel's statement about only using Google to search a bit too much ;).

[Calum Veteran]

cJr., I think you've kinda looked into Joel's statement about only using Google to search a bit too much ;).

Haha :D

I don't see how I have really?

It is the same principle - if he doesn't care about the look of Google because he only uses it to search then he shouldn't care about the look of his operating system or any other user interface he uses surely? (as he only uses it for functionality).

:)

Joel has already replied to proove that he doesn't care about the look of Windows, etc, anyway.

I care more about the features of a product than anything, but it helps a lot if that interface looks nice :)

[shizuko]

it just a small favicon but I like it