Re: Font choices

Subject: Re: Font choices
From: Bruce Byfield <bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com>
To: techwr-l digest recipients <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 10:46:36 -0700

"Dick Margulis" <margulis -at- mail -dot- fiam -dot- net> wrote:

>I absolutely agree. And I could add that Garamond doesn't kick, either. Especially the wan version >Microshaft distributes. But Times New Roman has its uses, especially if you are a newspaper publisher >printing from stereotypes.

I've seen some one or two attractive Garamonds, but I probably
wouldn't use any of the half dozen that are in my collection, any
more than I'd use Time Roman. In the business world, the choice
of fonts is partly about company image. Regardless of the virtues
of any of these fonts, they're simply used too often. Use them,
and you throw away all chance of making the company using them
distinct. Times is everywhere, while I've read that 40% of all
manuals in the USA (and presumably Canada, too) use some type of
Garamond. Fortunately, there are dozens of alternatives that can
create a reasonably unique image without appearing gauche (or,
since I'm a leftie, should I say droit?).

Bruce Byfield, Outlaw Communications
Contributing Editor, Maximum Linux
bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com | Tel: 604.421.7189

"Monday morning, 6 AM, the clock rings off the wall,
I'm standing to attention with my bare feet in the hall,
I've got one leg down my trousers, can't find no socks at all,
But I'm a coiled spring of industry responding to your call."
-Andy M. Stewart, "Monday Morning"

Previous by Author: Font choices
Next by Author: Re: HUMOR: New Job Classifications
Previous by Thread: Font choices
Next by Thread: Libelous Email

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads