TOP 10

Comments 7

May 31, 2011

Naming Famous Brands – Abstract Logos VS Literal Logos!

Categories: Logo design, logo design inspirations, Logo Design Symbols, Logo Designers

Written By: Nora Reed

Why doesn’t Apple Inc sell Apples? Why do they have a Puma logo if they don’t sell any? What in the world does Google mean? These are the questions that often boggle our minds when we think of famous brands and their names. Another question that perturbs many logo designers is…”Does a logo design need to say what a company does?” There was a time when products used to sell as commodities with their generic names. But with the passage of time, companies have erecteds strong brands with famous logos that have led the path to corporate identity devolvement. Nowadays, brands are no simply named in literal terms, but in abstract terms as well. Airline logos don’t necessarily have to show airplanes. Neither do automobile brands necessitate a symbol depicting a car. Famous brands are not named randomly. There is a rich history and strategy behind how famous brands were named. Let us compare 30 famous brands that use literal logos and abstract logos and see which ones are more effective.
Famous Brands with Abstract Logos	Famous Brands with Literal Logos
Apple	Burger King
Camel	Mtv
BlackBerry	Chick
Cat	Cartoon Network
Google	CocaCola
Jaguar	General Electric
Mars	Dunkin Donuts
Orange	Microsoft
Nike	KFC
Shell	Orangina
Seagate	TacoBell
Virgin	T Mobile
Puma	UPS
Xerox	Pizza Hut
Yahoo	Walmart
Do you think Famous Brands are successful because of their Abstract Logos and the trend of Literal Logos is old and gone?

Tags: Apple logo design, famous abstract logos, famous brand names, famous brands, famous literal logos, google logo design

7 Responses to “Naming Famous Brands – Abstract Logos VS Literal Logos!”

1. Lee Says:
   May 31st, 2011 at 3:48 pm

   Sorry but how many spelling mistakes do you want to make?

   Further…

   KFC isn’t literal as it is just “KFC” now and not “Kentucky Fried Chicken”, and ‘Walmart’ isn’t either – a shop that sells walls?

2. Ray Says:
   June 5th, 2011 at 12:24 am

   I’d rather think that “Yahoo” is a Literal Logo.. not abstract.. since the Logo itself is the name.

   and for the above person. Listen to comercials or what not.. its “KFC” now.. Even on the doors and every where, i rarely see it called by the full name.
   —
   but if we went off what the above person’s saying then:
   wallmart, UPS, Coca-cola, Micosoft would not be literal.
   Wallmart does not a Mart for Walls
   there’s no Coca in Coca-Cola (nor is there coke)

   UPS im on the fence..

3. Orgnix Creatives Says:
   June 5th, 2011 at 7:10 am

   And its not ‘Gernal Electronics’

4. Brett Says:
   June 5th, 2011 at 7:49 pm

   Thanks for the article! Although, I don’t understand the criteria used to determine which logos were abstract and literal. I mean, what’s the difference between the Google and Coca-Cola logos? They’re side by side… both depict the company name literally and neither really say anything about what the company does.

   Maybe you meant literal vs. abstract company names… not logos?

5. Luke watts Says:
   June 7th, 2011 at 10:37 am

   First of all thanks for this comparison, hope you would have spent more time to collect them.Logo design is most important to service or product based company and it will help lot more when comes on branding, Long back people never gives more important to logo’s for example Apple had different set of logo in olden days.

   But Apple now has a wonderful logo that speaks about their product, now individuals and companies are very patient and eagle eyed to choose their Logo’s…Wonderful work from you…

6. CAT Says:
   June 13th, 2011 at 2:20 pm

   CAT has a very good logo! I like it…

7. Interview with Jacob Cass of Just Creative Design Says:
   June 16th, 2011 at 3:49 pm

   [...] Logo Blog: Naming Famous Brands – Abstract Logos VS Literal Logos! [...]

Leave a Reply