Acro.net – Technology Rants & Raves by Acroplex®

I still remember the early days of the commercial Internet, having graduated from college a good five years earlier. These days, information technology was restricted to local programming and games development, systems analysis and expressive computer art.

Computer monitors were small, expensive, monochrome and heavy.

My early web sites comprised of lots of text against dark or gradient backgrounds, contained bullet lists and headers that could fit across a monochrome 640-pixel wide screen. That was the standard size in late 1993, when the NCSA Mosaic browser was launched.

I learned to optimize my graphics for the benefit of the visitor; these days a 14.4k modem was top of the range.

Since then, a lot of things have changed. Resolutions of 1920px wide are quite common – across double monitors even – and a 20Mbit cable connection is often laughed at.

Nowadays, it seems strange to read commentary that reminds me of those early Spartan days of the Internet, 20 years ago. But that’s exactly what John Naughton did in an article titled “Graphic designers are ruining the web.”

It’s obvious that John Naughton does not appreciate today’s abundance of imagery that did not exist in the early 90′s. He seems to forget that Internet infrastructure took off to the point that wireless connections often comprise a large portion of Internet traffic. The global use of cellular phones was practically non-existent in the early 90′s, and now 3G and 4G networks are on the rise.

If it were not for graphic designers, the Internet would look like Peter Norvig’s web page, whom John Naughton seems to praise because of his position as director of research at Google.

The future belongs to graphic designers, simply because humans are visual creatures. The next big advancement of the Internet experience will be full sensory immersion, the way William Gibson imagined his ‘Cyberspace’, thus leaving John Naughton behind to reminisce about the early days of the Internet that won’t be coming back.

In the days of tight budgets and uneducated entrepreneurs, companies such as LogoGarden.com promise to bring a cheap alternative to custom-made brand development.

LogoGarden claims to be an expert veteran in the field:

“For 15 years LogoGarden.com founder John Williams owned an award-winning branding firm that served national and global companies. His firm’s growing fame led many entrepreneurs to seek John’s assistance with their branding and Logo Design.”

LogoGarden.com also declares that the versatile system with which customers can create a $79 logo is their own creation:

“John built on this vast experience to now bring you LogoGarden.com. It reflects his most advanced thinking to deliver enhanced ease of use and more than 10,000 new symbols designed by John himself and his hand-picked team of world-class logo designers.”

If only it were true.

In an article detailing the amount of creative theft, designer Bill Gardner lashes out at LogoGarden and its owner, John Williams and describes how more than 200 images have been so far identified as flat out stolen.

“Most of the designers I’ve been in touch with have had their attorneys contact Mr. Williams. Several of the corporations whose logos are registered with the US Patent and Trademark Office are also taking action.“

Domainers seeking cheap thrills from unqualified people or companies offering “logo” services must understand that slapping stylized text next to clipart does not constitute a logo or brand identity design. A professional designer’s role is to create from scratch something new and fresh that matches the requirements of the project.

Follow me on twitter for updates.