Another ring logo. Its hilarious how many low effort logos, with a ring, graphic designers fool people into accepting.
https://www.google.com/search?q=rancilio+rocky+grinder+burrs...
Circles are _the_ graphical element/symbol of holistic energy with few others coming close.
Generally when I see a move to a circular logo in a new design brief it's a sign that the organization perceives that it must quickly heal from damage/protect itself from danger and put some aspects of the past behind. It is usually attempting to build capacity for a new direction as well. IMO this is usually not a fully conscious decision by the team.
"This is the world we live in"
No we can't agree on that. What you say is nonsense.
What about: if they want to signal modernness and inclusiveness (regardless whether they actually want to be modern and inclusive) they had to get rid of the logo?
First, tech communities are not exactly known for deep visual design-theory interest or background (for example, what's your personal experience level with logo design? This would inform both a tendency to radically re-summarize using the word "just", and a tendency to relate the description in nonsensical terms; it's a matter of education depth).
Also, I used to lecture college students on this stuff at length, so it's kind of plain ol' design thinking to me, from theory/psychology to application.
And then, a lot of people also call tech talk mumbo jumbo. For related reasons I don't really feel the need to justify or bring it down to earth any more than I'd try to do that with the Linux kernel in a random "kernel? sounds like mumbo jumbo" discussion.
But as always, in the right context the theory-practice connection provides leverage that can't be had elsewhere.
PS there are some absolutely great examples of this thinking if you are willing to empty the cup and explore the foundations. See the "In popular culture" section here as one possible point of departure:
I can sort of see why they'd want to move away from the old logo, it hard to reproduce in various sizes, honestly not that unique either, it looks like any other very old logo and you'd have to know that it's Oxford University Press to recognize the logo.
The new one share the last problem: You need to know that it's the OUP ring logo and not one of the other 100 logos that looks just like it.
What I find to be an issue with many modern logos is that I don't see how they are expected to age. It seems more likely that they'll tossed aside completely in 10 to 20 years, for yet another redesign.
Familiarize yourself with these processes (e.g. check out IDEO). Talk to professional designers. Try to design a logo.
It's frankly ridiculous to expect a revolutionary logo every time these discussions happen. This is not a "lines of code" metric. If designers work on a logo for 6 months the deliverable is not "the biggest logo you have ever seen". It can be a squiggle.