PDA

View Full Version : Microsoft's new font collection


ktinkel
03-21-2005, 01:48 PM
The Poynter online site has a preview of six new fonts that will ship with Longhorn, the next major revision of Windows. You can read a bit about them and view most of the faces at this Poynter web site (http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=47&aid=78683) link.

There is also a discussion of the fonts on Typophile.com (http://www.typophile.com/forums/messages/30/67578.html?1111219974) — some discussion of why these fonts look so similar, among other things, by John Hudson, one of the designers. (You may have to register to read there; not sure.)

Some points about them: They are designed for Microsoft’s ClearType technology, so it appears that Mac, Linux, and other non-users of Windows will not be able to use these fonts. (Unless, of course, MS makes OT versions available somehow.) But over time, all Windows users will have them, including many web site developers; sounds messy to me.

The font names all begin with C — Calibri (sans; by Luc(as) de Groot), Cambria (serif; Jelle Bosma), Candara (sans; Gary Munch), Consolas (mono-width; de Groot), Constantia (serif; John Hudson), and Corbel (sans; Jeremy Tankard) — so they will clump together in font menus (so long as you don’t have other fonts whose names get in the way — Caslon, for example).

I am having a strongly negative response to these fonts. Unfortunately, I have only seen fairly large specimens of what are intended for use in text sizes, so cannot really evaluate them.

Anyway, something new to think about.

terrie
03-21-2005, 02:18 PM
>>kt: They are designed for Microsoft’s ClearType technology, so it appears that Mac, Linux, and other non-users of Windows will not be able to use these fonts.

Will that's kind of silly-assed isn't it???

Terrie

Steve Rindsberg
03-21-2005, 04:00 PM
From the same site:

"CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article reported incorrectly that these new fonts could not be displayed on Macs. In fact, they can be -- but only if the operator of a website has licensed them for embedding or if an individual user has licensed them for personal use."

Which suggests that they can be viewed on Macs. Besides, ClearType is a technology for making text look better on screen, not a font format.

ktinkel
03-21-2005, 04:46 PM
"CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article reported incorrectly that these new fonts could not be displayed on Macs. In fact, they can be -- but only if the operator of a website has licensed them for embedding or if an individual user has licensed them for personal use."

Which suggests that they can be viewed on Macs. Besides, ClearType is a technology for making text look better on screen, not a font format.Mac users can view the fonts — I have, myself — but I don’t think they can have them or set them.

And I am not sure what Mac users will see — probably a TT or OT version of the font?

Steve Rindsberg
03-21-2005, 05:44 PM
" ... if an individual user has licensed them for personal use" would be a meaningless distinction if the user *can't* license them for personal use.

Besides, ClearType being a display technology - a way of enhancing the way text is displayed (primarily on LCD screens) and not a font format, we'll ALL be seeing TT or OT versions of the font.

ktinkel
03-21-2005, 06:10 PM
" ... if an individual user has licensed them for personal use" would be a meaningless distinction if the user *can't* license them for personal use.

Besides, ClearType being a display technology - a way of enhancing the way text is displayed (primarily on LCD screens) and not a font format, we'll ALL be seeing TT or OT versions of the font.Good point.

But it does divide people somewhat — if Windows web site developers specify the fonts in CSS and the rest of us don’t have them, we will not see them. So long as the text is straightforward, no big deal. But if it gets tricky, could be messy.

Will take a while to get to that point anyway — Longhorn isn’t expected for another year or so.

Stephen Owades
03-21-2005, 08:48 PM
Good point.

But it does divide people somewhat — if Windows web site developers specify the fonts in CSS and the rest of us don’t have them, we will not see them. So long as the text is straightforward, no big deal. But if it gets tricky, could be messy.

Will take a while to get to that point anyway — Longhorn isn’t expected for another year or so.
I'm confident that the only problem for Mac users is that the fonts won't be offered (legally) to Mac users. They will certainly be OpenType fonts, and should work fine on a Mac. Unless Microsoft offers them in a retail package, or supplies them in a bundle with Mac Office, there may not be a legitimate way for Mac users to get them, though. Whatever optimization is included to make best use of ClearType shouldn't affect how the fonts display on Macs (or how they print from a PC, which doesn't involve ClearType).

I expect that you will be able to copy the OpenType fonts from a Longhorn PC to your Mac, if you're willing to ignore the strict legalities and want to see these actual fonts specified on web sites.

ktinkel
03-22-2005, 05:14 AM
I'm confident that the only problem for Mac users is that the fonts won't be offered (legally) to Mac users. They will certainly be OpenType fonts, and should work fine on a Mac. Unless Microsoft offers them in a retail package, or supplies them in a bundle with Mac Office, there may not be a legitimate way for Mac users to get them, though. Whatever optimization is included to make best use of ClearType shouldn't affect how the fonts display on Macs (or how they print from a PC, which doesn't involve ClearType).I eventually figured out that the format would be OT — ClearType being the icing on the cake (so to speak). After all, even Windows users are not universally going to be using ClearType (for one reason or another; some seem not to like it).

I expect that you will be able to copy the OpenType fonts from a Longhorn PC to your Mac, if you're willing to ignore the strict legalities and want to see these actual fonts specified on web sites.I guess I could review the fonts but without a license, I cannot really use them. I still know some of the people in the MS type group — perhaps they will provide a set.

Steve Rindsberg
03-22-2005, 11:05 AM
>>But it does divide people somewhat — if Windows web site developers specify the fonts in CSS and the rest of us don’t have them, we will not see them. So long as the text is straightforward, no big deal. But if it gets tricky, could be messy.

And this is different from specifying any font that isn't universal ... how? ;-)

Steve Rindsberg
03-22-2005, 11:08 AM
And who's willing to bet that MS won't sooner or later include the fonts in Office (and thence MacOffice)?

Gerry Kowarsky
03-22-2005, 12:46 PM
They are designed for Microsoft’s ClearType technology...

This reminds of the early days of digital type, when Adobe was accused of regularizing fonts to take advantage of hinting.

ktinkel
03-22-2005, 01:15 PM
>>But it does divide people somewhat — if Windows web site developers specify the fonts in CSS and the rest of us don’t have them, we will not see them. So long as the text is straightforward, no big deal. But if it gets tricky, could be messy.

And this is different from specifying any font that isn't universal ... how? ;-)No different in the result. But right now using Windows-centric fonts (Georgia, Verdana, Trebuchet; even Arial and Times) to design a web site means that something like 99% of readers will have them.

If Microsoft ships a set of six custom fonts for Windows that are not available to users on other platforms mismatched fonts will become the norm, not the rare exception.

And — how can I say this as to ruffle no feathers? — because so many Windows users (present company excepted, of course!) seem to forget that everyone doesn’t have exactly what they have, and rarely test on Macs or Linux browsers, the pages may simply not work.

But who knows? MS may offer the fonts to others, or ship them with Office, or license them to Apple, or give them to the Open Source Movement, or ??? So we have a little time before the world comes to an end. <g>

Stephen Owades
03-22-2005, 01:20 PM
>>But it does divide people somewhat — if Windows web site developers specify the fonts in CSS and the rest of us don’t have them, we will not see them. So long as the text is straightforward, no big deal. But if it gets tricky, could be messy.

And this is different from specifying any font that isn't universal ... how? ;-)
My understanding is that Microsoft made their first round of fancy OpenType fonts, including Verdana, Georgia, and Tahoma, available for free download early on, but later decided to remove those fonts from their download site. Many web designers specify those fonts--which do work very well on-screen--in their pages, even though Mac users (and users of older Windows operating systems) may well not have them. I expect that the new fonts will be handled similarly.

I'm curious as to how these new fonts are optimized for ClearType. I imagine it has to do with the hinting code, since TrueType hinting is quite flexible and Microsoft may well have developed a means by which hinting and ClearType algorithms can be coordinated.

ktinkel
03-22-2005, 01:38 PM
This reminds of the early days of digital type, when Adobe was accused of regularizing fonts to take advantage of hinting.Oh, well — that was a sin against typography (existing typefaces). This is just web type, after all! <g>

I got in a lot of trouble for showing the difference between Adobe’s Type 1 version of Goudy Old Style and Monotype’s (the latter at that time being barely hinted, if at all) in an article in Step-by-Step Graphics magazine in 1990 (or thereabouts) because I not only showed the differences in a character but actually used the forbidden word.

But it is a shame not to point these things out. Early Type 1 fonts exhibited quite a few defects, some because of fitting for hinting, others because it was such a new format and Adobe was perfecting the process.

Compared to type set with loose metal (foundry) type, machine-set metal fonts were altered. (In fact, before that, once they started using a pantograph to short-cut the punchcutting process, type was altered to suit the production process — and that was before the American Civil War!)

Compared to metal type in general, photo-type was darn near mutilated in some cases. Among other things, some companies used second-generation source art; but the movement of the negs and lenses also often created problems that readers could see.

Digital type (and it didn’t start with Adobe and desktop formats) is obviously more refined looking (and lighter) than metal, both because of changes in font production and because of offset printing. Modern readers probably find old books set in metal and printed on a letterpress kind of odd looking, perhaps even hard to read.

But we don’t dare call it regularization! <g>

Michael Rowley
03-22-2005, 05:32 PM
KT:

'If Microsoft ships a set of six custom fonts for Windows that are not available to users on other platforms'

I don't know why you are supposing that. MS is clearly looking ahead to a time when most people will have adopted other than CRTs for viewing, and by then they will also be using OT fonts, which are available to users of all platforms.

Steve Rindsberg
03-22-2005, 07:00 PM
And — how can I say this as to ruffle no feathers? — because so many Windows users (present company excepted, of course!) seem to forget that everyone doesn’t have exactly what they have, and rarely test on Macs or Linux browsers, the pages may simply not work.Oh hell, there are plenty of boneheads who seem to think that Word is the be-all/end-all for everything; twits who attach a Word doc to an email instead of typing the two or three lines it contains into the body of the email. What? I'm ranting again? Sorry ... where were w.... oh fonts. Yes.

My guess is that the uptake on Longhorn will be slow enough that the problems resulting from a few mismatched fonts will be worked out well before Earth goes up in smoke.

ktinkel
03-23-2005, 07:11 AM
Oh hell, there are plenty of boneheads who seem to think that Word is the be-all/end-all for everything; twits who attach a Word doc to an email instead of typing the two or three lines it contains into the body of the email.Seems so, yes. But I was thinking mostly of people who make web sites. That goes way beyond a few e-mails.

My guess is that the uptake on Longhorn will be slow enough that the problems resulting from a few mismatched fonts will be worked out well before Earth goes up in smoke.Dunno — if there is enough benefit, people move faster. Isn’t one of the major benefits of Longhorn to be improved security? In another year, users may be more than ready for that! Looking back (though maybe not at the time) it seems to me that Windows 3.1 became established pretty quickly.

Steve Rindsberg
03-23-2005, 09:42 AM
Looking back (though maybe not at the time) it seems to me that Windows 3.1 became established pretty quickly.>>

It seems to happen at very nearly the same pace at which people acquire new computers. New box, new OS version. There are the lunatics who'll line up at the CompuMall for the Midnite Madness Windows Release Party, but I suspect they're a very small percentage of the computer using public. And they're weird. ;-)

But once the new fonts are in hand, no doubt the WordIsAll crowd will use them to create their web sites. That and marquee lights, Word Art and all the other crap that screams "AMATEUR! TASTELESS AMATEUR!! HERE. ME! ME!"

Will a few missing fonts ever be noticed? Or matter in all that? ;-)

ktinkel
03-23-2005, 11:25 AM
But once the new fonts are in hand, no doubt the WordIsAll crowd will use them to create their web sites. That and marquee lights, Word Art and all the other crap that screams "AMATEUR! TASTELESS AMATEUR!! HERE. ME! ME!"

Will a few missing fonts ever be noticed? Or matter in all that? ;-)I reckon that time will tell! <g> But probably not.

tphinney
03-23-2005, 06:13 PM
I believe that Linn Boyd Benton came up with the pantograph for typefounding - in the 1880s. So a bit after the civil war.

A few comments on the new ClearType fonts:

- these are TrueType flavored OpenType fonts. If you look closely at the specimens on the Poynter site, I believe you'll see that they all have real small caps and ff ligatures (and presumably other f-ligs). Very nice, that.

- I'm not sure we should think of these as Web fonts. Maybe better to think of them as fonts that have been designed to look good on screen, and have been hinted to work well with ClearType, but without the same level of screen-centric design as Verdana and Georgia. Although I haven't confirmed it with the designers, I suspect that this is because the higher effective horizontal resolution of ClearType (and similar technologies) does not require the extreme compromises of spacing that used to be called for.

- Optimizing the TT hinting for ClearType is mainly a matter of doing less extensive horizontal hinting and omitting horizontal deltas entirely. As resolution improves (by taking advantage of the quirks of LCD screens), hinting matters less. This is why Adobe's equivalent technology is able to work equally well with both TT and PS based outlines. Microsoft could do the same, if they wanted to.

Regards,

T

ktinkel
03-24-2005, 05:50 AM
I believe that Linn Boyd Benton came up with the pantograph for typefounding - in the 1880s. So a bit after the civil war.Right you are. A cruder pantograph dates back to 1834, and it was used for cutting some wood type, but Benton got the patent for a more capable design in 1884, and that’s when they started to use it for metal type.

A few comments on the new ClearType fonts:

- these are TrueType flavored OpenType fonts. If you look closely at the specimens on the Poynter site, I believe you'll see that they all have real small caps and ff ligatures (and presumably other f-ligs). Very nice, that.

- I'm not sure we should think of these as Web fonts. Maybe better to think of them as fonts that have been designed to look good on screen, and have been hinted to work well with ClearType, but without the same level of screen-centric design as Verdana and Georgia. Although I haven't confirmed it with the designers, I suspect that this is because the higher effective horizontal resolution of ClearType (and similar technologies) does not require the extreme compromises of spacing that used to be called for.

- Optimizing the TT hinting for ClearType is mainly a matter of doing less extensive horizontal hinting and omitting horizontal deltas entirely. As resolution improves (by taking advantage of the quirks of LCD screens), hinting matters less. This is why Adobe's equivalent technology is able to work equally well with both TT and PS based outlines. Microsoft could do the same, if they wanted to.Interesting. Thanks.

Gerry Kowarsky
03-26-2005, 02:55 PM
<< But we don’t dare call it regularization! <g> >>

Certainly not. Since the optimization is for ClearType, perhaps we can say "clarification" with impunity. <g>

Michael Rowley
03-26-2005, 03:40 PM
Gerry:

I have heard of the Rhine's being regulated in the course of the nineteenth century, but I didn't think that type could be regulated or regularized: did Adobe seek to reintroduce the writing of Ogham stones or runes? It would of course inhibit type designers dreadfully if they were forbidden to introduce any sort of bend into their designs, though probably we'd no longer have 50 000 fonts, which would be fine.

Gerry Kowarsky
03-27-2005, 01:24 PM
The suggestion was that features of certain early digital typefaces were made less distinctive, therefore, more regular, than their models to take more advantage of hinting during rasterization. In other words, technical limitations were influencing design decisions. The same thing is happening to the fonts being optimized for dispay with ClearType.

Michael Rowley
03-27-2005, 02:10 PM
Gerry:

'more regular, than their models'

Since their models were often the highly 'regularized' fonts cut for Linotype, Monotype, et al., that seems a strange complaint. There were few type designers that refused to modify their designs for the essentially modular systems required by slug-setting or letter-setting machines, though there were some honorable exceptions.

Stephen Owades
04-11-2005, 10:10 AM
The Poynter online site has a preview of six new fonts that will ship with Longhorn, the next major revision of Windows. You can read a bit about them and view most of the faces at this Poynter web site (http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=47&aid=78683) link.

There is also a discussion of the fonts on Typophile.com (http://www.typophile.com/forums/messages/30/67578.html?1111219974) — some discussion of why these fonts look so similar, among other things, by John Hudson, one of the designers. (You may have to register to read there; not sure.)

Some points about them: They are designed for Microsoft’s ClearType technology, so it appears that Mac, Linux, and other non-users of Windows will not be able to use these fonts. (Unless, of course, MS makes OT versions available somehow.) But over time, all Windows users will have them, including many web site developers; sounds messy to me.

The font names all begin with C — Calibri (sans; by Luc(as) de Groot), Cambria (serif; Jelle Bosma), Candara (sans; Gary Munch), Consolas (mono-width; de Groot), Constantia (serif; John Hudson), and Corbel (sans; Jeremy Tankard) — so they will clump together in font menus (so long as you don’t have other fonts whose names get in the way — Caslon, for example).

I am having a strongly negative response to these fonts. Unfortunately, I have only seen fairly large specimens of what are intended for use in text sizes, so cannot really evaluate them.

Anyway, something new to think about.There's a press release out today announcing a new program by which Microsoft's fonts will be sold and licensed by Ascender Corporation. See the release at http://www.ascendercorp.com/pr/pr2005_04_11.html for information, and http://www.ascendercorp.com/msfonts/msfonts_main.html for an overview and links to the available fonts. They're making these fonts available in Type 1 (Mac and Windows) as well as OpenType formats. No mention of the new Longhorn fonts, but there's every reason to believe that they will be made broadly available in the same manner.

The folks at Ascender seem to be a pretty credible bunch--many of them having worked at Monotype Typography. They'll handle licensing of the Microsoft-owned fonts to other companies, as well as sales to individuals.

ktinkel
04-11-2005, 10:45 AM
There's a press release out today announcing a new program by which Microsoft's fonts will be sold and licensed by Ascender Corporation.

The folks at Ascender seem to be a pretty credible bunch--many of them having worked at Monotype Typography. They'll handle licensing of the Microsoft-owned fonts to other companies, as well as sales to individuals.Yep. Interesting.

The fonts are not cheap — I wonder how many 4-style families of Georgia or Verdana they’ll sell at $110/set. I really like one of the new faces, Nina, also by Matthew Carter — but it will be most useful, it seems to me, if it is available on most web viewers’ systems. At that sort of money, it won’t be — and I don’t think it is bundled with MS products, though perhaps it will be.

Stephen Owades
04-11-2005, 01:12 PM
Yep. Interesting.

The fonts are not cheap — I wonder how many 4-style families of Georgia or Verdana they’ll sell at $110/set. I really like one of the new faces, Nina, also by Matthew Carter — but it will be most useful, it seems to me, if it is available on most web viewers’ systems. At that sort of money, it won’t be — and I don’t think it is bundled with MS products, though perhaps it will be.
I don't have Nina on my system, and I have probably installed all of the recent Microsoft products that include fonts. Nina looks good, and I will want to compare it against Frutiger Condensed for some of my directory work. If it isn't bundled with something in the near future, I might even buy it!

You'll notice that Ascender Corp is offering to license the Microsoft fonts to developers who may wish to include them with their applications. I suspect that they'll be more active in such licensing than in selling individual copies to end users. And perhaps Apple will consider licensing a web set of Microsoft OpenType fonts for sale or distribution to non-Windows folks.

ktinkel
04-11-2005, 05:57 PM
… perhaps Apple will consider licensing a web set of Microsoft OpenType fonts for sale or distribution to non-Windows folks.Oooh — wouldn’t that be wonderful? It would simplify web site development, that I can tell.

Michael Rowley
04-12-2005, 07:30 AM
KT:

wouldn’t that be wonderful

I find that a bit puzzling: have you ethical objections to buying the fonts (albeit indirectly) from Microsoft? If they're Open Type fonts, whether Type 1 flavoured or TrueType flavoured, surely they can be installed on Mac machines. Or do you mean that Apple Computers would distribute them for nothing?

ktinkel
04-12-2005, 08:33 AM
… have you ethical objections to buying the fonts (albeit indirectly) from Microsoft?Of course not. What gives you that idea?

If they're Open Type fonts, whether Type 1 flavoured or TrueType flavoured, surely they can be installed on Mac machines. Or do you mean that Apple Computers would distribute them for nothing?My point, obviously not clearly made, is that the main utility of these fonts is for online reading. The only way that works is for (virtually) every user’s browser to have access to the fonts. (Today, Verdana has something like 96% penetration on both Mac and Windows. That’s why we see so much Verdana used on the web — along with the fact that it is graceful and readable.)

The Ascender/Microsoft deal is a step in the right direction — assuming new MS font releases will be included (so far unclear), an individual Mac user could get the fonts and see web pages as intended by their designers. But at $110/font family, I do not see the great majority of Mac users doing so. People who use fonts in print projects will buy them, but few will pay so much just to enhance web reading (especially as they may not even know about the fonts in the first place).

Fonts that do not ship with operating systems — or with browsers, which would be even more to the point — are unlikely to become universal on the web. If Apple were to license them from MS and distribute them with the Mac OS (or with Safari), Mac users would have the same probability as Windows users of having the fonts, and web site developers could safely use them. I don’t actually think there is much likelihood that that will happen, but hope springs eternal.

Why should we care? Perhaps because having different sets of common fonts on Macs and PCs emphasizes a division that has importance primarily to vendor management and shareholders, not users. It would be nice if user convenience would affect corporate thinking, but especially in this case, I give the likelihood low odds …

ktinkel
04-12-2005, 08:38 AM
And who's willing to bet that MS won't sooner or later include the fonts in Office (and thence MacOffice)?I’m not a betting woman (the priests told me that betting on a sure thing is a sin; and why would one bet otherwise?), but I’m not so sure they will offer these to Mac users.

The fonts have been designed to showcase ClearType, and that isn’t available on Macs (or even on at least some Windows systems), not to mention Linux.

Michael Rowley
04-12-2005, 12:59 PM
KT:

But at $110/font family, I do not see the great majority of Mac users doing so

Ah, you mean you'd like to see the fonts distributed gratis. The one you might be interested in, Nina, is not supplied free with any Microsoft application or OS: all users have to buy it from Ascender—Microsoft is getting stingy, it seems. So you'll have to go on using Verdana or bite the bullet and get Microsoft's WEFT and resign yourself to designing Web pages for Internet Explorer only.

I was just as disappointed at not getting Adobe Minion Web free, as now I'm only referred to Adobe for it.

Incidentally, $30 a font seems a bit steep for fonts that are mostly available free to owners of Windows or the Mac OS, so it does seem likely that Ascender is not really interested in retail sales.

having different sets of common fonts on Macs and PCs

Are they so different these says? The fonts that are unique to a particular OS seem to be confined to a few 'traditional' fonts like Chicago etc., and all those designed for Web use sem to be part of the core fonts of the Mac OS and Windows.

ktinkel
04-12-2005, 01:20 PM
Ah, you mean you'd like to see the fonts distributed gratis. The one you might be interested in, Nina, is not supplied free with any Microsoft application or OS: all users have to buy it from Ascender—Microsoft is getting stingy, it seems.If that’s the case, I guess Nina will not be used on the web, which is a shame as that is what it has been designed for. I expect MS may very well bundle it with MSIE or Office or Windows one day.

I do not expect fonts to be free — not when they are used in a conventional way. But web fonts are a different animal; either they are universal, or nearly so, or they are no good.

So you'll have to go on using Verdana or bite the bullet and get Microsoft's WEFT and resign yourself to designing Web pages for Internet Explorer only.Bite your tongue! <g> I don’t approve of anyone designing web sites for Internet Explorer, let alone me!

I was just as disappointed at not getting Adobe Minion Web free, as now I'm only referred to Adobe for it.And because they didn’t give it away to all and sundry, it is not used in any serious way. I understand why a font company like Adobe doesn’t give fonts away, of course. But OS vendors are a different cup of tea.

having different sets of common fonts on Macs and PCs

Are they so different these says? The fonts that are unique to a particular OS seem to be confined to a few 'traditional' fonts like Chicago etc., and all those designed for Web use sem to be part of the core fonts of the Mac OS and Windows.That was my point. Now you can specify Verdana (or if you have sadistic tendencies, Arial) and be pretty sure than everyone will be seeing the type you asked for. But if MS distributes a whole new batch of “web” fonts, but only to Windows users, some of us will be left out in the cold.

Michael Rowley
04-12-2005, 02:52 PM
KT:

I guess Nina will not be used on the web

Perhaps Microsoft will include it with IE 7, which is supposed to be coming out this summer. I don't have any idea of what sort of deal MS made with Ascender, but I don't suppose it included any restrictions on the fonts' being distributed free with MS's own applications etc.

I don’t approve of anyone designing web sites for Internet Explorer

No, I didn't expect you would; but if all Web browsers supported font embedding, there would be less reason to design specifically for IE. They say that there have been 26 million downloads of Firefox, but I reckon that a good half of those are just out of curiosity—and IE is left with 90% of the 'market'—, and you've still got a potential readership of a few hundred million if you stick to IE.

because they didn’t give it [Minion Web] away to all and sundry, it is not used in any serious way

I understand that MS included it in the short-lived IE 4 supplement by the time I looked for that it was gone.

Now you can specify Verdana (or if you have sadistic tendencies, Arial)

I don't hold anything against Arial, but it was intended as a substitute for Helvetica, which wasn't of course designed with Web in mind. I feel certain that MS will do nothing to discourage Mac users, as it's developed Mac versions of its most popular applications for years now.

ktinkel
04-12-2005, 04:43 PM
… I feel certain that MS will do nothing to discourage Mac users, as it's developed Mac versions of its most popular applications for years now.As a Mac user, I feel it has done so under duress, and that it offers no hint of what may happen in the future.

Alas.

I am a natural one-world sort of person. What can I say? :-)

Michael Rowley
04-13-2005, 06:44 AM
KT:

As a Mac user, I feel it [Microsoft] has done so under duress

It is widely though (among non-Mac users) that the very existence of Apple Computers keeps people from claiming that Microsoft has a virtual monopoly, and will do everything in its power to prevent Apple from going under. Perhaps the growth of Linux will become much more important than it is now and will make any manufacturer of proprietary computers absolutely insignificant: you don't have to buy an overpriced Mac to run Linux.

The Mac OSs have proved successful graphical systems, but look what happened to Amiga, which many say had the best GUI bar none.

tphinney
04-22-2005, 06:14 PM
I'm curious as to how these new fonts are optimized for ClearType. I imagine it has to do with the hinting code, since TrueType hinting is quite flexible and Microsoft may well have developed a means by which hinting and ClearType algorithms can be coordinated.

Actually, hinting becomes less important in ClearType and similar technologies, so these fonts are hinted less heavily than most MS fonts, especially in the X direction. Excessive X-direction hinting essentially has to be "fought" by the ClearType rasterizer....

Regards,

T

Gerry Kowarsky
04-26-2005, 09:56 AM
<< hinting becomes less important in ClearType and similar technologies>>

Thomas,

Does this mean that the ClearType intelligence is in the rasterizer rather than the font?

Gerry

tphinney
04-26-2005, 10:02 AM
Yes, exactly. Or at least, everything that differentiates ClearType from previous TrueType rasterization has to do with smarts in the rasterizer rather than the font.

T

Gerry Kowarsky
04-26-2005, 10:12 AM
Interesting. I have to chuckle when I remember the debates in the early 90s about whether the rasterizer or the font was the proper place for hinting intelligence, especially when I think about the apparent tuning of the designs of the six Longhorn fonts to take advantage of ClearType technology.