Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!ucbvax!decwrl!sun!plaid!chuq
From: chuq%plaid@Sun.COM (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Screenfonts: Adobe or Apple?
Message-ID: <84832@sun.uucp>
Date: 11 Jan 89 16:52:06 GMT
References: <8711@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Sender: news@sun.uucp
Reply-To: chuq@sun.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Organization: Fictional Reality
Lines: 30

>  1.	Why are they different?  Politics?  Artistic differences?

Good question. I've heard rumors, but don't have a definitive answer,
either.

>  2.	Which is more accurate in terms of the actual spacing on a 300dpi page?

The Adobe bitmaps are significantly better. Once you start using non-plain
styles, they're pretty much essential.

>  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... 

Except in a few instances, Adobe never had 9pt fonts. I think the primary
reason is that for most faces, 9pt on a screen is getting close to
unreadable. If you really want them (I really want them, too) the best bet
is FontSizer, which will let you create any size font you want. 

>  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

This sounds like the infamous Avant Garde resource map problem. Read the
Suitcase II manual -- it talks about the problem in there. 

Chuq Von Rospach	Editor/Publisher, OtherRealms		chuq@sun.COM
       And now a message for the eyes of only those people with
       Commander Chuqui Secret Decoder Rings:
       7-3-6-27-24-4-10-6-27-3-2-23-27-23-10-7-27-3-24-24-4-20-11-7-24