Yahoo - 30 days of stupid logos



  • Somewhere along the way I clicked on a link that took me to a news story on Yahoo. Haven't been there in years. I noticed that they changed their logo and it's pretty awful. Then I discovered this.    Oh, and apparently they have redesigned their sports page to look like a Geocities website from the mid 90s. 



  • Someone at Yahoo just discovered dafont.com



  • The really sad part is that they still get masses of traffic. I guess all the AOL users had to end up somewhere.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    I was stalking young teenage girls on Tumblr and somewhere along the way I clicked on a link that took me to Yahoo.

    FTFY.

    @El_Heffe said:

    Oh, and apparently they have redesigned their sports page to look like a Geocities website from the mid 90s. 

    TRWTF:


    • Using Chrome, there is a small glitch with the menu when you start scrolling down on that page

    • Using IE10, the menu items wiggle randomly when you scroll.
    • Using Firefox, everything works perfectly.


  • Great. Now Yahoo's or GTFO.


  • sockdevs

    @Ronald said:

    @El_Heffe said:

    I was stalking young teenage girls on Tumblr and somewhere along the way I clicked on a link that took me to Yahoo.

    FTFY.

    @El_Heffe said:

    Oh, and apparently they have redesigned their sports page to look like a Geocities website from the mid 90s. 

    TRWTF:


    • Using Chrome, there is a small glitch with the menu when you start scrolling down on that page

    • Using IE10, the menu items wiggle randomly when you scroll.
    • Using Firefox, everything works perfectly.

     

    Add to the list:

    • Using Chrome on Android, the page looks like the developer shit himself, then put it on the web. Seriously, the layout is totally fucked.

     



  • @RaceProUK said:

    @Ronald said:

    @El_Heffe said:

    I was stalking young teenage girls on Tumblr and somewhere along the way I clicked on a link that took me to Yahoo.

    FTFY.

    @El_Heffe said:

    Oh, and apparently they have redesigned their sports page to look like a Geocities website from the mid 90s. 

    TRWTF:


    • Using Chrome, there is a small glitch with the menu when you start scrolling down on that page

    • Using IE10, the menu items wiggle randomly when you scroll.
    • Using Firefox, everything works perfectly.

     

    Add to the list:

    • Using Chrome on Android, the page looks like the developer shit himself, then put it on the web. Seriously, the layout is totally fucked.

     

    Actually, it doesn't look so bad on my phone. What version are you using? (Aside - this will probably double post, because CS always does that when I post from my phone. Once it even triple posted.)



  • @mikeTheLiar said:

    Actually, it doesn't look so bad on my phone

    To clarify: it doesn't look any worse than any of the other shitty "mobile-optimized" sites out there. I've definitely seen worse.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    Oh, and apparently they have redesigned their sports page to look like a Geocities website from the mid 90s. 
     

    I don't follow sports, but I know enough that when I look at a sports page, I get the information I want.

    Looking at this thing-- I think I now understand what other people see when I show them a regex. In vi. On a CLI. In a Linux terminal.  In a VM in a tiled window. On an AS/400 system.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Lorne Kates said:

    @El_Heffe said:
    Oh, and apparently they have redesigned their sports page to look like a Geocities website from the mid 90s.
    I don't follow sports, but I know enough that when I look at a sports page, I get the information I want.

    Looking at this thing-- I think I now understand what other people see when I show them a regex. In vi. On a CLI. In a Linux terminal. In a VM in a tiled window. On an AS/400 system.

    Holy shit. That page required multiple megabytes to load and pegged the load on half my CPUs. Even Eclipse doesn't normally manage that…



  • If at least they added a little variety. Change colors, add drawings of random things, the stuff that Google does for their logos. But all they do is change the font.


    Still, their email has unlimited storage, so that's nice.



  • Re: Yahoo - Many years of stupid

    @anonymous235 said:

    Still, their email has unlimited storage, so that's nice.
    Perhaps the only nice thing about it.

    Once upon a time, there was a company that hosted many mailing lists. One sad day, they were assimilated by Yahoo! Therefore, I signed up for a Yahoo! account, which includes email. I never used that email for anything except administrative messages from Yahoo!; I was still subscribed to the lists under my previous email address. I never, ever shared the Yahoo! email address with anyone. I still got spam (and since I didn't use it for anything else, nothing but spam) at that address.

    I concluded that either Yahoo! itself was sharing its users' email addresses with spammers, or their security was so bad that spammers were able to mine their address list. (Possibly, the spammers were emailing to random addresses, but it seemed unlikely that they would randomly succeed in hitting my address within hours the account being created.) In any case, Yahoo! was an abomination of an email provider, and there was no way I was ever going to use them.



  • I never had an issue with spam on my Yahoo email until a few years ago when there was a major breach at some company I've never done business with. Turns out they'd bought my email from some company that bought my email from some company that bought my email from a company I did business with once. Now I get 5 - 10 spams a day.

    My Hotmail account on the other hand just exclusively gathers spam. And I never use it for anything so I don't know how that address got out.

    Not sure how much spam my Gmail account gets. I never use it, somehow Google keeps deciding my password is wrong and I have to do an account recovery anytime I want to log in. Since I don't actually use that account for anything I gave up on it a long time ago.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @HardwareGeek said:

    @anonymous235 said:

    Still, their email has unlimited storage, so that's nice.
    Perhaps the only nice thing about it.

    Once upon a time, there was a company that hosted many mailing lists. One sad day, they were assimilated by Yahoo! Therefore, I signed up for a Yahoo! account, which includes email. I never used that email for anything except administrative messages from Yahoo!; I was still subscribed to the lists under my previous email address. I never, ever shared the Yahoo! email address with anyone. I still got spam (and since I didn't use it for anything else, nothing but spam) at that address.

    I concluded that either Yahoo! itself was sharing its users' email addresses with spammers, or their security was so bad that spammers were able to mine their address list. (Possibly, the spammers were emailing to random addresses, but it seemed unlikely that they would randomly succeed in hitting my address within hours the account being created.) In any case, Yahoo! was an abomination of an email provider, and there was no way I was ever going to use them.


    I had an email address once that never received any spam because I never gave it out. One day I was chatting with a close personal friend on Yahoo! Messenger, whom I'd known and trusted for years. I gave her my email address over YIM and within five minutes I received my first-ever spam message to that account.



  • @joe.edwards said:

    I had an email address once that never received any spam because I never gave it out. One day I was chatting with a close personal friend on Yahoo! Messenger, whom I'd known and trusted for years. I gave her my email address over YIM and within five minutes I received my first-ever spam message to that account.

    I knew spammers will do anything to get email addresses, but that's the first time I hear about sleeper spammers. That fucking bitch!


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @Ronald said:

    @joe.edwards said:
    I had an email address once that never received any spam because I never gave it out. One day I was chatting with a close personal friend on Yahoo! Messenger, whom I'd known and trusted for years. I gave her my email address over YIM and within five minutes I received my first-ever spam message to that account.

    I knew spammers will do anything to get email addresses, but that's the first time I hear about sleeper spammers. That fucking bitch!


    I think PRISM was inspired by Yahoo!.



  • @joe.edwards said:

    I gave her my email address over YIM and within five minutes I received my first-ever spam message to that account.
    What you obviously didn't know was that she was actually Sanford Wallace in disguise.

     


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @HardwareGeek said:

    @joe.edwards said:

    I gave her my email address over YIM and within five minutes I received my first-ever spam message to that account.
    What you obviously didn't know was that she was actually Sanford Wallace in disguise.

     


    I did know that. We prefer "costume" to "disguise."



  • @HardwareGeek said:

    I concluded that either Yahoo! itself was sharing its users' email addresses with spammers . . . (Possibly, the spammers were emailing to random addresses, but it
    seemed unlikely that they would randomly succeed in hitting my address
    within hours the account being created.)
    I used to think the same thing, and some of those expanations are possibly correct. But then I realized that there is a more likely explanation -- your address was already on their spam list before you created it:

    Spammers spew out emails by the millions to random addresses. One of the addresses on their randomly generated list of names is  <font face="courier new,courier">hardwaregeek@yahoo.com</font>  which bounces because that address doesn't exist. So what. A lot of the spam they send out bounces. The spammers don't know that they bounce, and, more importantly, don't care. Sending spam to nonexistant addresses doesn't cost them any more or less than sending spam to real addresess so it is to their benfit to just spew out as much as they possibly can. Just keep thowing stuff against the wall until something sticks.

    Then, you come along and sign up with Yahoo and create that address. BAM. The address that used to bounce is now valid.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    @HardwareGeek said:

    I concluded that either Yahoo! itself was sharing its users' email addresses with spammers . . . (Possibly, the spammers were emailing to random addresses, but it
    seemed unlikely that they would randomly succeed in hitting my address
    within hours the account being created.)
    I used to think the same thing, and some of those expanations are possibly correct. But then I realized that there is a more likely explanation -- your address was already on their spam list before you created it:

    Spammers spew out emails by the millions to random addresses. One of the addresses on their randomly generated list of names is  <font face="courier new,courier">hardwaregeek@yahoo.com</font>  which bounces because that address doesn't exist. So what. A lot of the spam they send out bounces. The spammers don't know that they bounce, and, more importantly, don't care. Sending spam to nonexistant addresses doesn't cost them any more or less than sending spam to real addresess so it is to their benfit to just spew out as much as they possibly can. Just keep thowing stuff against the wall until something sticks.

    Then, you come along and sign up with Yahoo and create that address. BAM. The address that used to bounce is now valid.

    But the situation described by the Texan HTML Integrist was that he had the address for a long time but only after he shared it with someone for the first time he started receiving spam.



  • @Ronald said:

    But the situation described by the Texan HTML Integrist was that he had the address for a long time but only after he shared it with someone for the first time he started receiving spam.

    Reading comprehension failure on your part. You are referring to Joe Edwards. I was replying to a different person who wondered how they could get spam within hours of creating a new address that they had never used before: @HardwareGeek said:
    I signed up for a Yahoo! account, which
    includes email. I never used that email for anything except
    administrative messages from Yahoo!;. . .  I never, ever shared the Yahoo! email
    address with anyone
    . I still got spam (and since I didn't use it for
    anything else, nothing but spam) at that address.
    Hey look, there's the person's name who I am replying to.

     

    Ben L said it best in another thread: @Ben L. said:

    With modern technology, we can produce an image that logs Ronald out of the forum.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    @Ronald said:

    But the situation described by the Texan HTML Integrist was that he had the address for a long time but only after he shared it with someone for the first time he started receiving spam.

    Reading comprehension failure on your part. You are referring to Joe Edwards. I was replying to a different person who wondered how they could get spam within hours of creating a new address that they had never used before: @HardwareGeek said:
    I signed up for a Yahoo! account, which
    includes email. I never used that email for anything except
    administrative messages from Yahoo!;. . .  I never, ever shared the Yahoo! email
    address with anyone
    . I still got spam (and since I didn't use it for
    anything else, nothing but spam) at that address.
    Hey look, there's the person's name who I am replying to.

    I know who you were replying to, but the Texan was reporting a similar situation with a twist that makes your theory less convincing.

    @El_Heffe said:

    Ben L said it best in another thread: @Ben L. said:
    With modern technology, we can produce an image that logs Ronald out of the forum.

    I'm not sure what is the relevance of that in the context of this discussion, but if you are to the point where you have to quote Ben L. because you can't find a way to express your displeasure yourself, you deserve this second picture.






  • @A fifteen-year-old “Yahoo!” joke said:

    Straight from the horse’s mouth: houyhnhnm.com. Because you’re not just some yahoo.



  • The 30-day punchline

    http://arstechnica.com/staff/2013/09/yahoos-new-logo-and-the-30-day-punchline/

    Yahoo quickly punted the concept of logo design into the realm of the banal — "Oh look, another goofy word mark that looks like it was whipped up by an intern or someone who just learned Illustrator."
    Oh wait . . . @Head Yahoo, Marissa Mayer said:

    I love brands, logos, color, design, and, most of all, Adobe Illustrator.  I think it’s one of the most incredible software packages ever made.  I’m not a pro, but I know enough to be dangerous.  So, one weekend this summer, I rolled up my sleeves and dove into the trenches with our logo design team: Bob Stohrer, Marc DeBartolomeis, Russ Khaydarov, and our intern Max Ma.

     



  • Yahoogle!



  • @flabdablet said:

    Yahoogle!
    So now it's being report thant a beta version of Chrome for Android contains a new Google logo.
    "It's flat! All the beveling and shadows are gone, and the colors have
    been tweaked from their traditional primary color pallet to more muted
    shades. The result is a cleaner, more modern design"
    So making things dull and flat like they were 15 years ago is now considered "Modern".



  • @El_Heffe said:

    So making things dull and flat like they were 15 years ago is now considered "Modern".

    Yep.

    The folks who designed Metro all got achievement awards for neat coloring-in at kindergarten.



  • @flabdablet said:

    @El_Heffe said:
    So making things dull and flat like they were 15 years ago is now considered "Modern".

    Yep.

    The folks who designed Metro all got achievement awards for neat coloring-in at kindergarten.

     



  • @El_Heffe said:

    So making things dull and flat like they were 15 years ago is now considered "Modern".

    And in 15 years, today's "flat and modern" logos and software will probably look as stupid as the IBM RealThings look now.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    So now it's being report thant a beta version of Chrome for Android contains a new Google logo.
    "It's flat! All the beveling and shadows are gone, and the colors have
    been tweaked from their traditional primary color pallet to more muted
    shades. The result is a cleaner, more modern design"
    So making things dull and flat like they were 15 years ago is now considered "Modern".

    Fortunately it's not a replacement. It's an alternate logo for where the actual logo would render poorly.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @anonymous235 said:

    @El_Heffe said:
    So making things dull and flat like they were 15 years ago is now considered "Modern".

    And in 15 years, today's "flat and modern" logos and software will probably look as stupid as the IBM RealThings bevelled and embossed logos look now.

    They really are starting to look dated to me. I think it's just too overdone and people get sick of it, and there's nothing to be done about it but keep changing things up over time.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @anonymous235 said:

    @El_Heffe said:
    So making things dull and flat like they were 15 years ago is now considered "Modern".

    And in 15 years, today's "flat and modern" logos and software will probably look as stupid as the IBM RealThings look now.
    What goes around comes around. Visual design styles are totally subject to arbitrary fashions, only marginally constrained by any notion of technical possibility at being used (as trade tress has always needed to be non-functional). Occasionally they promote genuine utility; everyone acts amazed when it happens though.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    @flabdablet said:

    @El_Heffe said:
    So making things dull and flat like they were 15 years ago is now considered "Modern".

    Yep.

    The folks who designed Metro all got achievement awards for neat coloring-in at kindergarten.

    linky


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.