> approximately nobody with a professionally designed corporate identity used Verdana in a printed context like IKEA did
Exactly my point. Verdana gives unprofessional vibes because a pro wouldn’t use it.
In a Midwest town you’ll see a few sun faded signs, printed menus, and service vehicles emblazoned with Verdana. In every case, my assumption is that “the owner made our logo in PowerPoint in 1999 and won’t let anyone change it” or “the technician at the vehicle decal shop pick a font for us”. IKEA having used the font for a season isn’t enough to override the sense of neglect.
If you’re designing print media for business, or a logo of all things, avoid Verdana.
> Verdana gives unprofessional vibes because a pro wouldn’t use it.
Exactly my point. The name "Google" gives unprofessional vibes because a brand identity pro would never approve that name. And because of those unprofessional vibes, nobody ever took Google seriously.
In reality, font choice is a very surface level analysis. Ever since quality fonts became commoditised, it stopped being a significant signal of professionalism. A top designer could put Comic Sans next to Trajan and make it look like a million bucks; a bad designer could typeset in Gotham and still look like a high school student project.
Exactly my point. Verdana gives unprofessional vibes because a pro wouldn’t use it.
In a Midwest town you’ll see a few sun faded signs, printed menus, and service vehicles emblazoned with Verdana. In every case, my assumption is that “the owner made our logo in PowerPoint in 1999 and won’t let anyone change it” or “the technician at the vehicle decal shop pick a font for us”. IKEA having used the font for a season isn’t enough to override the sense of neglect.
If you’re designing print media for business, or a logo of all things, avoid Verdana.