...about the new Adobe Branding?
Not specially impressed.
It looks like a lot of people have time on their hands which would be better employed in other things than messing with the visual brand image.
And what we have seen recently from their attempts to re-vamp this website indicates that the current team should be given their notice and some decent designers hired in their stead.
In general, I don't really care what the icons (app, document, etc.) look like. They sit as tiny 16x16px or 32x32px images in windows or the dock. As long as I can tell them apart I don't care. I will say that the color wheel and letters are much better for instant recognition than flowers, eyes, and butterflies ever were.
But I do wonder.......
1) Why aren't all the boxes in the splash screens the same size? And in the same position on screen? Launch 3 or 4 apps at the same time and you've basically go no correlation between the apps. They should either stack and merely show the transparent items, cascade gracefully (as if planned) or they should combine so they make some sort of uniquely "puzzled-tegether" image. I'm surprized with all the fluid jutting out of transparent areas no one thought to make those areas appear to stitch together if say Photoshop and Illustrator are both launched at the same time. Carry the "wheel" concept beyond color... assign each app 20° of a circle.. let the transparent areas only use that 20°.
2) I do appreciate that icon changing with each version release. This allows you to instally tell the difference between the CS3, CS4, CS5, and CS6 applications. Unfortuantely, on the Mac at least, all documents, plug ins etc always take on the latest itteration of icons so the application recognition is about as far as the usefulness goes. Probably more of an OS limitation than anything else though.
Acrobat really is the unwanted or forgotten step-child. Why that app never falls in line in terms of appearance and UI with the other Adobe apps is beyond me.
In general, I thought that blog post was self-serving twaddle. Whatever changes to the designs they happened to come up with are described as "wisely" done, etc.
The two things that disgust me the most about their design process are:
Seems like an attempt to justify, after the fact, the camel that resulted from the horse being designed by a committee.
I also agree completely with Steve's comment that much more effort should have been put in to avoiding and correcting the errors in UI design and program coding. If that meant less personnel and expense devoted to the icons, that would have been an excellent trade-off.