Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!rpi!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!ginosko!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!Lou From: Lou@cup.portal.com (William Joseph Marriott) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Adobe Type Manager Message-ID: <23012@cup.portal.com> Date: 12 Oct 89 09:49:36 GMT References: <3028@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> Organization: The Portal System (TM) Lines: 77 Mark Vita Writes: | I think it would be great if Adobe would modify | their advertising copy so that instead of reading "13 of the most | popular fonts", it says "4 of the most popular font families". I think it would be great, too, because that would mean I could get more than 102 styles of Helvetica for the price of four. To be absolutely certain you don't mislead customrs, you'd actually have to word your improved advertisement something like, "four each of the most common variations of the three type families you're used to seeing from LaserWriters, plus one variation of another font." The example of sandwiches is colorful, but inappropriate, because to do an italic font right, you have to go back to the drawing board and build the font from the ground up. It's *NOT* like adding a pickle to a sandwich. Otherwise, you would have to settle for mathematical transformations of the font, instead of the more aesthetic hand-crafted italics offered by Adobe. Compare printed italics with the way italics look on your screen when no true italic screen bitmap is available. Compare Helvetica Narrow with Helvetica Condensed. You thought "Outline" was a style? Compare that with the many "Open Face" versions of some fonts. Call it crazy, but somehow Adobe makes money off people who care about those differences. You'd like to call it the Helvetica "font" and leave it at that. Okay, but what do you call Helvetica Black? A new font? A new family? A new Typeface? You'll have to define those words for me all over again. I knew what they meant, but apparently I'm out of step with the times. What about Bodoni Poster? Is that a family, a font, or a typeface? If you bought a copy of Bodoni Poster, would you expect to Get Bodoni Poster Bold, Bodoni Poster Italic, and Bodoni Poster Bold Italic, too? (They don't exist yet.) Or would you want to get Bodoni Plain, Bodoni Italic, Bodoni Bold, and Bodoni Bold Italic? Apparently, if we do not want to mislead the customer, we need a new word for fonts that don't have the Four Variations. Perhaps simply a "semi-font"? "Font-ette?" Until the NFNT format came along, these stylistic variations of typefaces were listed as *separate items* under the "font" menu, so there _is_ precedence in the Mac environment for considering these fellows discreet fonts. Adobe, please don't change your packaging. The dictionary still says, "a complete assortment of type _in_one_size_and_style_" -- scalable font technology provides an infinite number of sizes and thus makes the distinction of "size" meaningless, but technology has *not* been able to take over the the creative process required to make *true* style variations. (The real purists among us might point out that one should adjust line widths and such when fonts grow larger.) Mark, I don't think you have any doubt in your mind, at this point about what you are buying when Adobe says it bundles "13 fonts" with ATM. And hopefully, if we can keep terminology straight, no one else will be confused, either. I could see your point about "deception" if Adobe used the word "font" inconsistently, but they don't. In fact, their larger ads for ATM have a little picture of all the fonts that come with the package, so there's no confusion. While you might not agree with the way Adobe uses the word, they are (1) consistent, and (2) right. I suggest that if you want to use the Apple definition of "Font" that you also use the Apple definition of "Style" -- which (in the case of italics) is really skewed up. -Bill Marriott