0

Inquiring minds want to know — Calibri

This arrived recently from our buddy, J.R. Wilheim:

“A few years back, MS Word changed the default font from Times New Roman to Calibri.  At the time I was baffled by it, but as it wasn’t too hard to switch into Times New Roman (and as I eventually figured out how to switch the default font myself in Office) I didn’t pay it much mind.  I got into a discussion recently with someone about changes to Office and as a result decided to look up exactly why this change was made.  Apparently, at the time Office 2007 was released, there was a widespread (and, as it turns out, correct) belief that more and more document production would not involve paper, and that Calibri was easier to read on screens that Times New Roman.  As someone in web graphic design, do you think there’s any merit to this?  I can’t see why paper v. online would have any effect on how readable a font is, but you obviously know a lot more about it than I do.”

The Typemaniac answered:
Short answer:
Typical resolution of a home printer is ~200 dots per inch
Typical resolution of a computer screen is ~96 pixels per inch
At small sizes, a font optimized for print won’t look too good on screen and vice-versa.

0

Anyone remember WUGNET?

Many years ago — meaning probably in the early 1990s — there was WUGNET, the Windows User Group. It was dedicated to sharing tips and tricks about the then-new Windows operating system. WUGNET published a journal, reviewed software utilities, managed Compuserve forums (that takes me back!) and published several books about Windows.

Back in the day, the Typemaniac occasionally contributed to the Wugnet Journal. In particular, he wrote a memorable column about some of the type tools we were using back then — things like Publisher’s Type Foundry (Zsoft), WFNboss (Corel), and Refont (Acute Systems).

Now the Typemaniac is preparing to write up some of the tools he’s using currently: FontForge (open source, originated by George Williams), Font Creator (HighLogic), Type Tool 3 (FontLab), and FontExplorer X Pro (Monotype).

But wouldn’t it be cool to also reprint his original WUGNET article? Unfortunately, the Typemaniac’s Bloated Archive of Old Stuff seems to have gone missing, so he did the next best thing and contacted his old buds at WUGNET, Joel Diamond and Howard Sobel. Howard and Joel scoured every nook and cranny of the office, but sadly, it turns out that their archives are also MIA.

So if anyone knows where to get the WUGNET Journal where our type tool article appeared, please get in touch. We’ll gladly scan it and return it to you and even pay you a couple of bucks.