I didn't notice the change in the logo as quickly as the change in the font. Maybe it's just me, but they seemed to have gone from a fairly timeless font similar to Helvetica to something more like Arial.* The change in the R was the first thing that struck me (which was why I thought of those two fonts), but the difference in the S is also similar, although Arial doesn't end that way. My first thought was that it's almost more childish looking (for lack of a better phrase). Ending the S stroke vertically instead of horizontally seems to imply that you didn't take the time to finish it, as does the straight R tail.
I guess I don't really see the point in trying to oversimplify logo fonts, but if Google did it, FIRST could too...
About the logo itself though, I did notice the change in the square overlapping the triangle instead of the other way around. It seems to make the logo point backwards instead of forwards. I wouldn't see it if they weren't next to each other, but having something point forwards seems more in line with the "change the future" message.
All that said, I don't have a strong opinion either way and am honestly fine with the new one if they choose that. Although I am curious why they'd change it since there doesn't seem to be anything major to improve on.
*I believe the old font was something similar to Univers Pro 85 ExtraBlack Oblique or the Univers Con and the new one more like Extension RR ExtraBold Italic
How come CD doesn't have a "Like" button??? - dlavery [more] 
Threaded Mode