Split an article over 8 goddamn pages each with popup adverts and slow loading times = I can't be bother to read it. Way to go wired... You might get more page views and ad impressions in the short term, but you'll certainly get less readers in the longer term.
It's sad that even recent history gets badly mangled. This article is written as though she completely created the Google logo, when in fact the logo had already existed for some time and she basically just changed the font (and produced a bunch of other concepts that were ultimately abandoned). The link provided by "wheels" correctly identifies the "before" logo: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Google1998.png" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Google1998.png</a>. I think it was created by Sergey using the Gimp, but I could be wrong about that (it was before my time).
I always thought that the founders had done it themselves (in fact I am SURE I read a book about the beginnings of Google that said so explicitly).<p>Actually it left me a bit disappointed to find that it had been "designed" :( Google always used to make me feel (as a crap graphic artist) that Home-brew logos COULD go a long way.