"font" vs "typeface"

Subject: "font" vs "typeface"
From: LaVonna Funkhouser <lffunkhouser -at- HALNET -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1993 12:45:32 -0600

I just received a mailed advertisement from TigerDirect for
The Fontbank Display Type Library. Although "typfaces" is used
more than "font" through most of the ad, the envelope
back contains both of these statements:

250 top-quality typefaces--private offer for just $49.95

All 250 fonts take up only 4MB of disk space

As Steve and others have pointed out, these terms are
becoming nearly synonymous in the DTP world, so this
intermixing of terms can be forgiven.

BUT...Get a load of this mistake: The mailer is obviously
aimed strictly at Windows users, with claims like, "...all
250 FontBank fonts in this magnificent collection (PostScript
or TrueType) work beautifully with ALL YOUR WINDOWS SOFTWARE!"

Then, 3 paragraphs later in the (newsletter-style insert),
another claim is, "The best you can buy for the Mac!"

I wonder if TigerDirect could use a good proofreader. :-) If you
are interested, I think they are in Coral Gables, FL.

lffunkhouser -at- halnet -dot- com

Previous by Author: TQM: Karen, tell more
Next by Author: block lettering (readability)
Previous by Thread: Americans with Disablities Act
Next by Thread: Typeface selection is subordinate to doc design

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

Sponsored Ads