Flat single-colored simple shape as is the trend today, with a light blue color that doesn't even exist in the standard EGA color palette.
As opposed to the much more colorful and busy icons that came after.
But then of course Windows 10 and Windows 11 are flat-single-colored simple shapes again since they are _actually_ released during today's logo design trends.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Windows_logo_and_wor...
- Simple solid modern colors, no halo/vignette effect like the Vista/7 logos
- Multiple colors, not just one single boring blue color like the newer logos
- The S-curve lines are just soft enough, yet not overly complicated, but also not boring straight lines
Monochrome logos were expensive in past since colour printing (especially quality colour printing) was expensive. Apple was notorious for their colour logo, supposedly because they wanted to emphasize that they were offering colour personal computers. Ironically, they would introduce the black and white Macintosh a few years later.
At least with respect to user interfaces, many of the design elements were meant to emphasize the improved graphics capabilities. For example: the so-called "3-D" elements graphical elements of the mid-1990's, which were little more than shading to add the perception of depth, highlighted improved colour depth. I would imagine that something similar was at play when it came to product logos. So it's probably more of a case of more complex logos for more complex video.
Highlighting the improved graphics capabilities is meaningless these days, so there is little point in constraining themselves to colour logos, which gave an opportunity for simpler logos to return.
And software capabilities. Compare Windows 2000 with Windows 10. But even the sultans loved eunucs so who am i here to speak. /s
Which were design trends when Windows 1.0 was released. Back then, the resources were limited, now they are infinite.