Seems like image search is getting to the point where you can scan in a logo, or take a photo of it, and plug that into a search to get to the product/web site etc.
1) The recognition is less reliable
2) It depends on another service which might be unavailable, slow, not have the logo in its database or have it associated with a different URL.
3) It's limited to products that have their own logos, which are a small minority.
4) It can't support different URLs for the same service or product, losing context.
5) As ugly as they are, QRCodes are identifiable as a link, logos aren't.
How about OCR on the URL?
OCR in real world conditions, using camera phones (not everyone has a 4S or similar) at widely different angles and distances and on the outdoors doesn't work that well. There's a reason why QR Codes where invented, and it was not just to offend people's aesthetic senses.
They have those big squares to detect the distortion, extra bits using Reed-Solomon for error-correction, they're much more compact and immediately identifiable.
1) The recognition is less reliable
2) It depends on another service which might be unavailable, slow, not have the logo in its database or have it associated with a different URL.
3) It's limited to products that have their own logos, which are a small minority.
4) It can't support different URLs for the same service or product, losing context.
5) As ugly as they are, QRCodes are identifiable as a link, logos aren't.
How about OCR on the URL?
OCR in real world conditions, using camera phones (not everyone has a 4S or similar) at widely different angles and distances and on the outdoors doesn't work that well. There's a reason why QR Codes where invented, and it was not just to offend people's aesthetic senses.
They have those big squares to detect the distortion, extra bits using Reed-Solomon for error-correction, they're much more compact and immediately identifiable.