Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-ncis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!scam.berkeley.edu!hastings
From: hastings@scam.berkeley.edu (Mark Hastings)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Screenfonts: Adobe or Apple?
Message-ID: <8711@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 11 Jan 89 04:01:02 GMT
Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: hastings@scam.berkeley.edu (Mark Hastings)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 20


	After looking at the recently posted Adobe screenfonts (from the sumex
archive), I found that I preferred them to the standard Apple screenfonts.
But before I start using them full-time, I wanted to ask a few questions:

  1.	Why are they different?  Politics?  Artistic differences?
  2.	Which is more accurate in terms of the actual spacing on a 300dpi page?
  3.	Why did Adobe drop the 9 point fonts?  Ok, a few of the fonts have
	  a single 9 point resource, but only in the basic style... 
  4.	When I used the Font Harmonizer utility from Suitcase II,
	  which supposedly fixed up some resources in the Adobe fonts, the
	  suitcase file still contained resources for the semi-bogus 7, 8 & 9
	  point fonts, yet they weren't advertised as available in programs 
	  like Word 3.  Does that mean I have to fool around with the Font/DA
	  Mover to get them added to the FOND resource?  (I don't have my
	  suitcase II manual handy, or else I'd check there).

Thanks,
	Mark Hastings
	hastings@scam.berkeley.edu