Coming from a graphic design background I frequently find myself analyzing and critiquing nearly every design element I come across in my daily travels, be it online or offline.

You'd have to be living under a rock to not have a pretty vivid image come to mind if anyone was to simply mention the word "Google". My question is if that image is actually WORTH remembering despite that fact it is ingrained in our heads.

From someone who has spent countless hours for clients performing mental acrobatics to create simple yet dynamic logotypes that work well in print and web, that embody the essence of the company as whole, that remain memorable, and timeless and that can hold up on a fax, I have my opinions on what is "good" and what isn't when it comes to logo design.

Frankly Google's logo doesn't cut the mustard! I've seen the good the bad and the ugly out there, while working with clients on corporate identity, and for a mega company like Google I think it's high time they reevaluate their image. I wrote this article after visiting Misha's hub right here on HubPages "Google Home Page"

Where he breaks down the evolution of the search engine monster that has been set as the home page for most of us since it started way back in 1999. That brings me to my next point.

Take a look at this screen shot of Google's logo back in 1999:

Notice anything different? Well if you're answer is not much then ding ding ding you're absolutely right.

Other than changing the typeface to Catull (which I'm not particularly a fan of either) It's the same logo that Sergey Brin (co-founder of Google) whipped up after teaching himself how to use GIMP

I don't think that exactly qualifies him as a designer and while it's completely reasonable for most folks just starting out to bootstrap everything and create their own logo for their start-up business, let's be honest, at this point, I think Google can afford to hire a decent designer to give them a logo worthy of the millions of pages it graces out there!

From the poor choice in typeface, to ridiculous color palette, to shabby kerning to cheap photoshop drop-shadow, the logo fails miserably. The old saying is "form follows function" and yes it's more important that google functions the way it does first and foremost but isn't it time that google embraces it's aesthetics when it comes to their identity? Good design is more than just making something pretty for the sake of it. Design communicates the fundamental soul of a product or service. And, there is no place more important to follow through on this notion than with your logo. Yes design also helps guide and instruct, and Google does a great job at keeping things simple, and by the way creating simplicity is an extremely complex task, just ask Steve Jobs and the crew over at Apple. Apple is a great example as matter of fact, they understand and value the importance of good design and the role it plays in their marketing and perception of their company.

So why is this atrocious monstrosity still staring us in the face? Well it's because no one over at Google ever decided to change the ugly thing until it was too late. They were too afraid that people would not recognize them if they changed it, even in their infancy, and now...they're stuck with it! The bottom line is, it is memorable, but so are the bad moments in our childhood, so are scars from unfortunate injuries. Just because it's memorable and implanted in our minds doesn't make it great, or in this case even "good"

It's going to take some great courage, and / or great changes in the industry to get the gang over at google to finally decide to redesign their logo. Heck, it took UPS nearly 42 years to change theirs—but that's a whole other discussion all together :)