Microsoft's New Fonts

snkTab

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Nov 13, 2004
579
0
Cincinnati, OH
I hope this means the death of Arial and Times New Roman. The new fonts, looks a but like Adobe's offerings though. Consolas would be a nice touch.


Bill Gates wants computer users, well, Microsoft users, to have a more enjoyable on-screen reading experience -- so much so that he made improving reading on the screen one of his top five priorities.

Beginning in 2006, Microsoft says it will ship with its operating system and other software products six brand new typefaces created especially for extended on-screen reading.
http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=47&aid=78683
 

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Jul 4, 2004
21,652
123
Interesting. All characterised by large x-heights.
Agree with him about Candara, it's very fussy.

Wonder how Adobe will be viewing these if MS want to push these as standards esp. with this rumoured Metro thang.

Thanks for the link. I love reading stuff like this... :)

p.s. Hope they manage to produce and support some decent ligatures. :p
 

daveL

macrumors 68020
Jun 18, 2003
2,425
0
Montana
Blue Velvet said:
Interesting. All characterised by large x-heights.
Agree with him about Candara, it's very fussy.

Wonder how Adobe will be viewing these if MS want to push these as standards esp. with this rumoured Metro thang.

Thanks for the link. I love reading stuff like this... :)

p.s. Hope they manage to produce and support some decent ligatures. :p
Hi Blue. Since you seem to be keyed into this stuff, may I ask what OS X font(s) you select for lengthy viewing? Say for Safari? How about mono fonts? I spend a lot of time reading on my LCD and sometimes feel a bit of eye fatigue, so I thought I might try a different font, if it would help.

TIA
 

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Jul 4, 2004
21,652
123
I'm one of those lazy people that doesn't have a personal taste about web-viewing. Give me a discussion about a typeface for print and I'll bore the living daylights out of my colleagues until I'm forcibly stopped.

This is the person who was dumb enough to say 'Who cares? Firefox is just a browser.' to my web-colleagues. A tumble-weed, squeaky-sign moment followed.

I just use the standard vanilla settings on Safari but many things can affect eye-strain, though. Lighting, monitor, seating, etc... You may even need lenses.
 

snkTab

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Nov 13, 2004
579
0
Cincinnati, OH
Fukui said:
Just for comparison:
Calibri first and Myriad after.
Exactly, I love Myriad, and when I saw these I got quite irked. But what do I know, I always use Myriad bolded. Too bad I don't have Myriad Pro Bold, I just have the normal and Black version. :(
 

t300

macrumors 6502a
Apr 10, 2004
976
0
I have these on my Mac right now. They are actually NOT bad.
 

homerjward

macrumors 68030
May 11, 2004
2,745
0
fig tree
after looking at those, i must say very good for something from m$. not that i know anything about fonts of course, other than "ooh, that one looks cool." what's serif vs. san serif? my favorite of those is consolas. seems such an improvement over courier (i guess that's what it's replacing.)
 

Mav451

macrumors 68000
Jul 1, 2003
1,657
0
Maryland
serif is like the nooks on the bottom of letters.

The letter I is good example.

Considering that "sans" = without...i think you can figure out the rest.
 

homerjward

macrumors 68030
May 11, 2004
2,745
0
fig tree
Mav451 said:
serif is like the nooks on the bottom of letters.

The letter I is good example.

Considering that "sans" = without...i think you can figure out the rest.
thanks. so like, ThIs is sans serif, but ThIs is serif?
 

thequicksilver

macrumors 6502a
Sep 19, 2004
769
0
Birmingham
homerjward said:
thanks. so like, ThIs is sans serif, but ThIs is serif?
Yep, that's right.

(For further clarification, put it this way: Times and Garamond are serif fonts; Arial and Helvetica are sans [that is to say "without"] serif.)
 

MontyZ

macrumors 6502a
Jan 7, 2005
887
0
daveL said:
What OS X font(s) you select for lengthy viewing?
For on-screen viewing, I think Verdana is pretty good. It's not really a "pretty" font, but, it's very functional and easy to read at small sizes.

The new fonts MS is releasing, however, offer better choices, I think. They are more attractive to look at, but, also very readable for on-screen use. Why Adobe isn't on the forefront of this, I have no idea. I guess they are too preoccupied with buying Macromedia.

The WORSE on-screen font to use is Arial. Butt ugly and too dense.
 

Mechcozmo

macrumors 603
Jul 17, 2004
5,215
2
MontyZ said:
For on-screen viewing, I think Verdana is pretty good. It's not really a "pretty" font, but, it's very functional and easy to read at small sizes.

The WORSE on-screen font to use is Arial. Butt ugly and too dense.
Agreed on both points.

I use Monaco (IIRC), Verdana, Times New Roman, Helvetica, and when I'm in a nostalgia mood, Chicago.
 

snkTab

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Nov 13, 2004
579
0
Cincinnati, OH
rendezvouscp said:
I think that these fonts are actually pretty cool. This morning I printed a research paper and used Calibri for the headings and Corbel for the main body text, and it looks pretty good. If you're interested in seeing the fonts in use in a PDF, check out a draft of my research paper (warning, 1.2 MB file).
-Chase
Of course they look good, I think Microsoft knows who to copy when it comes to OSes and who to copy when it comes to fonts.

That said, I wouldn't use to similar fonts in the same paper. You almost never want to use two fonts that are 90% similar next to each other, because at some level it throws the presentation. I would recommended for a paper that you either stick with one font or just two fonts each a different type. For headers use Calibri if you want, but for the text use a nice serif font. Use Constantina if you want to go with another of these fonts.

Serif fonts are great in body text because they let the reader focus on the words more and it enhances readability. Serif fonts in a header however make it look too klunky and thats why a sans serif would look better, as it adds impact.
 

rendezvouscp

macrumors 68000
Aug 20, 2003
1,526
0
Long Beach, California
snkTab said:
Of course they look good, I think Microsoft knows who to copy when it comes to OSes and who to copy when it comes to fonts.

That said, I wouldn't use to similar fonts in the same paper. You almost never want to use two fonts that are 90% similar next to each other, because at some level it throws the presentation. I would recommended for a paper that you either stick with one font or just two fonts each a different type. For headers use Calibri if you want, but for the text use a nice serif font. Use Constantina if you want to go with another of these fonts.

Serif fonts are great in body text because they let the reader focus on the words more and it enhances readability. Serif fonts in a header however make it look too klunky and thats why a sans serif would look better, as it adds impact.
Interesting. Who does Microsoft copy for fonts? I'm a bit font ignorant, which brings me to my next question.

For headings, it's good to use sans-serif fonts because they're "cleaner" without the serif, right? So serif fonts are great for body text because...they draw more attention from the eye? You sound like you know what you're talking about, so I'm curious to know.
-Chase
 

Fukui

macrumors 68000
Jul 19, 2002
1,615
6
rendezvouscp said:
For headings, it's good to use sans-serif fonts because they're "cleaner" without the serif, right? So serif fonts are great for body text because...they draw more attention from the eye?
-Chase
I don't personally like serif stuff. It looks like a million little thorns poking my eyes (the serifs). Though serif is good on some roman fonts for serious feel... I don't really like it that much, too harsh to me.
rendezvouscp said:
Interesting. Who does Microsoft copy for fonts? I'm a bit font ignorant, which brings me to my next question.
Myriad seems to be apples favorite font for advertising it seems.
So, you can check my previous post....
 

snkTab

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Nov 13, 2004
579
0
Cincinnati, OH
rendezvouscp said:
For headings, it's good to use sans-serif fonts because they're "cleaner" without the serif, right? So serif fonts are great for body text because...they draw more attention from the eye? You sound like you know what you're talking about, so I'm curious to know.
-Chase
Yes exactly, for headers sans serif can make the header look to busy. Also, sans serif is an eye stopper. You see, the serifs on the letters actually make each letter more distinguisable at some level, and because people read words rather than the letters, easy to read. San serif kinda stops the eye, so would kinda be beneficial for titles. Also, sans serifs by nature look nicer bolded.

Here's an image of the two in a header and text comparison. Note the serif font Garamond doesn't look to read as well as it's counterpart myriad in this case. This is because at small sizes the weights of the serifs get lost as the font is pixelated while viewing on a screen. However on paper, this wouldn't be an issue.
 

Attachments