Yes or No on this credeenza?  

Indifferent.
I neither love or hate. Certainly doesn't scream "grandma" to me.

Designs
which flaunt illogic are always suspect. In this case, a drawer bay which would naturally lend itself to a series of horizontal divisions has instead been overlaid with -- projected upon -- a group of vertical panels and pilasters. Why ? Just to show that it could be done ? To flaunt some supposed technical feat of woodworking wonder ? Is it thought that disguising one thing as another somehow proves something ? I suppose that the verticals have been back-carved enough to serve as pulls, lest the "game" be given away by the application of pedestrian metal handles. . .which are of course good enough for the doors.
Yes, yes, I do protest too much, echoing what we were all taught about "honesty of design" in our Bauhaus-derived design schools, half a century ago. But it's true, isn't it ?
Otherwise, the forms and proportions of this credenza are pleasant enough, I suppose. If novelty weren't such a temptation, the problem dealt with above wouldn't have been present, I suspect, and a better piece of furniture would have been the result. But we all know how easily we are bored by "the same old thing" !

SDR makes a valid point--
the three vertical panels are gratuitous. If you imagine the piece without them, it's greatly improved.

:[
Wow, way to misrepresent what I said. I didn't say it was grandma furniture. I said it was poor design, it looks like something you'd find in grandma's moldy old basement, and it looks like furniture that someone from the 60s with average tastes would buy from an average furniture store. In short, it's nothing special.
I still love you even though you own and ugly credenza!

😡
I love you too, but that *does* mean it's 'gramma furniture'. Regardless, you're right, though it took SDR to open my eyes. The vertical lines are gratuitous...and ugly. If we ever do get married, John, I promise to burn the credenza first.

It means it's furniture...
It means it's furniture found in grandma's basement, perhaps stored there by son Ted, who has average taste. The credenza ends up at GoodWill and eventually on ebay by someone masquerading it as "mid-century" something or other.

Despite
the design flaw discussed, the piece may in fact be well made, and may have been sold by a reputable department or specialty store. Are there other photos ? It would be interesting to know more, including just where and when it was originally purchased.

Better credenza
I found a much better credenza... And look, it has a M@hogany Assn label! It's destiny. Not that I'm buying it, but it's a nice example of how improved a similar credenza can be.

Nice. . .
. . .but is it a genuine "credeenza" ?

maybe...
Am I the only one who prefers the 1st cabinet to the second? That is if I HAD to choose one of them. The vertical "projections" on the 1st cabinet are trying to be non- assuming handles, and they are doing a better job than the 2nd in that category. I like the legs on the 2nd, but they make keeping the floor clean a bit more difficult. And, speaking of cleaning, how do you really get caning totally cleaned? Is the weaved caning suppose to be decoration? With all that said I can honestly say that next month I may prefer the 2nd cabinet to the first. As a jaded snob I would say they are both inferior design. From a practical standpoint I would say they are both superior to 90% of any furniture made today.

.
I prefer the first its more unified,sorta...not that I want it or the second one.The second is really fussy...I like caning on good furniture and yes its hard to clean:(