Without even judging the overall design (personally I don't mind the simplicity), why on earth do they use such inconsistent fonts? 3 different font sizes (and maybe also mismatching horizontal spacings) for 5 assorted logos??? This is insane...
Because they are still logos, not one list of short acronyms that just happens to be rendered in a specific way?
I really think it's fine: the web assembly gets to play with its parallels between W and A, JS gets to mirror the J's bottom-bend in its S (TS tagging along because those two really are more than just accidental neighbors), whereas CSS can indulge in summetry with its twin S by making them internally symmetric themselves. A logo that contains an acronym isn't really a logo when the characters are just picked from some font instead of tailored as part of the logo.
> Because they are still logos, not one list of short acronyms that just happens to be rendered in a specific way?
Consistency still matters. If you’re going through the trouble of making logos similar so they are understood as part of a family, don’t give up half way.
You want them to be even less distinctive? Personally, I think they should lean into that more and embrace the context: e.g. sans-serif for CSS, monospace for JS, serif for HTML.
The current logos are both uninteresting and badly constructed. At least either make them consistent (less distinctive but you can appreciate them as thought out as part of a family) or wildly different (more distinctive but not as clear they’re part of a family). This middle ground is the worst of all possible options.
