Re: ATM vs TrueType

Subject: Re: ATM vs TrueType
From: "M. Dannenberg" <midannen -at- SI -dot- BOSCH -dot- DE>
Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 11:32:29 +0200

Bruce Byfield wrote:

>> Until yesterday I would have said ATM fonts are not worth the
>> hassle,
> Hassle? What hassle? Are you just referring to the fact that
> Windows comes with TrueType fonts? If anything, postscript fonts are
> less trouble for almost any professional use, and are usually better
> quality (although, in theory TrueType should allow for better font
> rendering).

Yep, that's what I was referring to. Truetype works straight out of the
box, and so far I had absolutely no reason to ever even think about
fonts other than "Should I use Humanist or Futura". Now I do need ATM,
I've installed it, but to me that is extra hassle I would rather have
avoided. If you put yourself in the shoes of the IT guys, for them that
would be another program to install on a couple of hundred machines, to
them it's certainly extra hassle.

Also, we've never had any trouble geting our documents printed, with all
Truetype fonts in them. Our DTP bureau says that they don't mind what we
use, so it's really never been an issue. That's why I'm a bit miffed
over suddenly having to install ATM (OK, no big deal), and buying an
extra set of fonts, just to be able to produce searchable PDFs.


Mike Dannenberg
midannen -at- si -dot- bosch -dot- de

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
Search the archives at or search and
browse the archives at

Previous by Author: Re: ATM vs. TrueType
Next by Author: Re: age discrimination
Previous by Thread: Re: ATM vs TrueType
Next by Thread: Re: ATM vs TrueType

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

Sponsored Ads