What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

**Sherm Pendley** · Jul 12 '06, 12:25 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

axlq@spamcop.ne t (axlq) writes:

Does anyone know of a resource that shows me what different fonts
look like on different platforms?
>
I did find http://www.ampsoft.net/webdesign-l/WindowsMacFonts.html
but the page shows them all rendered as Windows fonts. For example,
see Helvetica next to both Arial and Trebuchet; Helvetica looks like
either Arial or Trebuchet, but it can't be both. Even the Mac
screenshots look wrong; the all look like Windows fonts.

Speaking as a Mac user, I can tell you that page is quite accurate. I
have in fact bookmarked it for future reference.

Microsoft's "core fonts for the web" are also freely available. They're
included with most modern Linux distros, and also downloadable here:

<http://sourceforge.net/projects/font-tool>

If memory serves, that's Andale, Arial, MS Comic Sans, Georgia, Impact,
Times New Roman, Trebuchet, Verdana, and WebDings.

Finally, when you're writing your CSS, be sure to include a list of
alternatives, with the last one being a generic such as "sans-serif".

sherm--

--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net

**Andy Dingley** · Jul 12 '06, 12:45 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

axlq wrote:

I'm trying to design my style sheets such that my pages have
similar-looking fonts different platforms (Linux, Mac, Adobe,
X-Windows, MS Windows, etc).

"Similar" is a bad target on the web. Aim for "best" or "most
appropriate" instead.

'Lucida Console' is a fine typeface as an alternative to Courier, so
use it. Only the Windows users (most of them) will see it, but it isn't
harmful to the Macs. If Macs have something similar (maybe Monaco, I
don't know) then use that too. But take a real Mac user's advice here,
not some reformatted screenshot -- things just look different on Macs,
owing to the gamma variations as much as anything.

CSS has good features for selecting fonts by preference and falling
back if they're not there. Make use of them.
font-family: 'lucida console', 'monaco', 'courier', monospace;
is a good setting - it works, it works better in most contexts, and
there isn't anywhere where it really fails.

Avoid Verdana. Verdana is an evil font that lies about its size. As a
result you just can't use it in conjunction with other fonts - you'd
see noticeably bad size inconsistencies if you ever used the CSS
fallback. If you must use Verdana, then use it alone.

As Verdana is also a poor typeface (i.e. the shape, ignoring the size
issues), then there's really no need to use it at all.

**axlq** · Jul 12 '06, 02:05 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

In article <m2y7uzf1gj.fsf @Sherm-Pendleys-Computer.local> ,
Sherm Pendley <sherm@Sherm-Pendleys-Computer.localw rote:

>axlq@spamcop.n et (axlq) writes:

>I did find http://www.ampsoft.net/webdesign-l/WindowsMacFonts.html
>but the page shows them all rendered as Windows fonts. For example,
>see Helvetica next to both Arial and Trebuchet; Helvetica looks like
>either Arial or Trebuchet, but it can't be both. Even the Mac
>screenshots look wrong; the all look like Windows fonts.

>
>Speaking as a Mac user, I can tell you that page is quite accurate. I
>have in fact bookmarked it for future reference.

That's good to know, thanks. The innacuracy that glares out at me is
with Helvetica, which apppears in different places, and looks different
in each place.

>Finally, when you're writing your CSS, be sure to include a list of
>alternatives , with the last one being a generic such as "sans-serif".

Yes, I do that already. Initially I was using all generic font
names in my pages, but then I decided I liked how Trebuchet MS
made my pages look, and Lucida Console is such a nicer font than
Courier, that I want to be sure that I have a consistent look across
platforms.

-Alex

**axlq** · Jul 12 '06, 02:05 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

In article <1152708676.178 230.315320@m79g 2000cwm.googleg roups.com>,
Andy Dingley <dingbat@codesm iths.comwrote:

>CSS has good features for selecting fonts by preference and falling
>back if they're not there. Make use of them.
>font-family: 'lucida console', 'monaco', 'courier', monospace;
>is a good setting - it works, it works better in most contexts, and
>there isn't anywhere where it really fails.

I do that but I eliminate 'monaco' -- just having 'monospace' in there
is a sufficient fallback.

>Avoid Verdana. Verdana is an evil font that lies about its size.

I am aware of all the issues with Verdana. In the site I'm
developing, I don't use it at all.

>As Verdana is also a poor typeface (i.e. the shape, ignoring the size
>issues), then there's really no need to use it at all.

Verdana actually makes nice headings (h1, h2, etc.), but I no longer
use it for body text because it consumes too much space for its
size.

-A

**Sherm Pendley** · Jul 12 '06, 02:05 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

axlq@spamcop.ne t (axlq) writes:

In article <m2y7uzf1gj.fsf @Sherm-Pendleys-Computer.local> ,
Sherm Pendley <sherm@Sherm-Pendleys-Computer.localw rote:

>>axlq@spamcop. net (axlq) writes:

>>I did find http://www.ampsoft.net/webdesign-l/WindowsMacFonts.html
>>but the page shows them all rendered as Windows fonts. For example,
>>see Helvetica next to both Arial and Trebuchet; Helvetica looks like
>>either Arial or Trebuchet, but it can't be both. Even the Mac
>>screenshots look wrong; the all look like Windows fonts.

>>
>>Speaking as a Mac user, I can tell you that page is quite accurate. I
>>have in fact bookmarked it for future reference.

>
That's good to know, thanks. The innacuracy that glares out at me is
with Helvetica, which apppears in different places, and looks different
in each place.

My eyes must be getting old - I can't see much of a difference. Maybe the
second one is a tiny bit bigger.

sherm--

--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net

**Harlan Messinger** · Jul 12 '06, 02:25 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

Sherm Pendley wrote:

Microsoft's "core fonts for the web" are also freely available. They're
included with most modern Linux distros, and also downloadable here:
>
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/font-tool>
>
If memory serves, that's Andale, Arial, MS Comic Sans, Georgia, Impact,
Times New Roman, Trebuchet, Verdana, and WebDings.

That doesn't much help, of course, since it's the users, not the page
designer, who need to have these fonts, and they're not going to
download them just because your CSS calls for them--they won't even
*know* that your CSS refers to them.

**Sherm Pendley** · Jul 12 '06, 02:45 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.rem ovethis@comcast .netwrites:

Sherm Pendley wrote:

>Microsoft's "core fonts for the web" are also freely available. They're
>included with most modern Linux distros, and also downloadable here:
> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/font-tool>
>If memory serves, that's Andale, Arial, MS Comic Sans, Georgia,
>Impact,
>Times New Roman, Trebuchet, Verdana, and WebDings.

>
That doesn't much help, of course, since it's the users, not the page
designer, who need to have these fonts

That's why I pointed out that most (obviously not all) users do have them,
even a large number of Linux users.

And that's also why I pointed out, in the part of my post that you conveniently
snipped for the sake of making a condescending response, the importance of
adding a generic "family" name like "sans-serif" at the end of the list.

>, and they're not going to
download them just because your CSS calls for them--they won't even
*know* that your CSS refers to them.

Why thank you Captain Obvious.

Do you have anything *useful* to add, or is this just a pissing contest?

sherm--

--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net

**Alan J. Flavell** · Jul 12 '06, 03:05 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Sherm Pendley wrote:

Microsoft's "core fonts for the web" are also freely available.

Those old things have a poor character repertoire. Installing them,
on a platform that doesn't have the font names in question, might make
the result worse than what that platform would do if it was left to
use its best fallback font. If you see what I mean.

Installing them on a platform that *does* have a more recent version
of the said fonts will most certainly cause harm. So proceed with
caution.

If memory serves, that's Andale, Arial, MS Comic Sans, Georgia,
Impact, Times New Roman, Trebuchet, Verdana,

I hope no-one's in any doubt here about the difficulties with Verdana.
If font-size-adjust had been developed to the point of usefulness, it
might be possible to work with Verdana, but, the way things are, I'd
definitely counsel against it. sbpoley refers ;-)

and WebDings.

Ouch!!! Don't *ever* do that with HTML. If you're unlucky, it might
appear to do what you want. For many of your users, though, it will
work to the HTML specification, which means it won't do what you want.

See my page

404 Not Found

http://ppewww.ph.gla.ac.uk/~flavell/charset/fontface-harmful

thanks

**Andreas Prilop** · Jul 12 '06, 03:25 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, axlq wrote:

The problem is, a font on one platform might be the same as a font on
another platform, but with different names.
>
Another example: Arial in Windows looks like Helvetica on the
Mac.
>
I did find http://www.ampsoft.net/webdesign-l/WindowsMacFonts.html
but the page shows them all rendered as Windows fonts.

You are confused and the author of this page is confused.

First:
Most typefaces exist at least for Macintosh and MS Windows,
often also in two formats (TrueType and PostScript). So there is
Arial for MS Windows, Arial for Macintosh, Helvetica for MS Windows,
Helvetica for Macintosh.

Second:
Arial looks no more like Helvetica than Terence Hill looks like
Franco Nero.

**Sherm Pendley** · Jul 12 '06, 03:35 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

"Alan J. Flavell" <flavell@physic s.gla.ac.ukwrit es:

On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Sherm Pendley wrote:
>

>Microsoft's "core fonts for the web" are also freely available.

>
Those old things have a poor character repertoire. Installing them,
on a platform that doesn't have the font names in question, might make
the result worse than what that platform would do if it was left to
use its best fallback font. If you see what I mean.

I do see what you mean, but I wasn't suggesting that users should install
those fonts. I was pointing out that a huge number of users - virtually
all Windows users, all Mac OS X users, and even quite a few Linux users -
will already have them installed.

The wisdom of using specific font names at all is debatable, of course, but
if you choose to do so, it makes sense to choose fonts your users are most
likely to have - with the understanding, of course, that some users will
not have that font, some will override your suggestions, etc.

sherm--

--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net

VK · Jul 12 '06, 04:25 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

Andy Dingley <dingbat@codesm iths.comwrote:

'Lucida Console' is a fine typeface as an alternative to Courier, so
use it. Only the Windows users (most of them) will see it, but it isn't
harmful to the Macs.

Keeping in mind that
1) Windows does make a difference between generic "mono" and "monotype"
font-family: Foo, Bar, mono will fail to Courier while
font-family: Foo, Bar, monotype will fail to Lucida (if installed)

2) Some browsers (eehk) do parsing only for the first three (3) fonts
in the list, so the regular formula is "MainFont, MostExpectedFal lback,
generic-font".

3) Older Macs can get weird if "pushed to the corner" (so no one font
is presented), so the 3rd font should always be a generic one - as
already suggested though, I just wanted to add a technical reason
besides the theoretical ones.

Avoid Verdana. Verdana is an evil font that lies about its size. As a
result you just can't use it in conjunction with other fonts - you'd
see noticeably bad size inconsistencies if you ever used the CSS
fallback. If you must use Verdana, then use it alone.

Verdana and its serif'ed partner Georgia are excellent widely used
fonts. I may presume that their "evelness" in some eyes may be caused
by wrong understanding of screen resolution issues, especially Mac vs.
Windows

**Harlan Messinger** · Jul 12 '06, 04:25 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

Sherm Pendley wrote:

Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.rem ovethis@comcast .netwrites:
>

>Sherm Pendley wrote:

>>Microsoft's "core fonts for the web" are also freely available. They're
>>included with most modern Linux distros, and also downloadable here:
>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/font-tool>
>>If memory serves, that's Andale, Arial, MS Comic Sans, Georgia,
>>Impact,
>>Times New Roman, Trebuchet, Verdana, and WebDings.

>That doesn't much help, of course, since it's the users, not the page
>designer, who need to have these fonts

>
That's why I pointed out that most (obviously not all) users do have them,
even a large number of Linux users.
>
And that's also why I pointed out, in the part of my post that you conveniently
snipped for the sake of making a condescending response, the importance of
adding a generic "family" name like "sans-serif" at the end of the list.

I wasn't being condescending, I didn't snip anything out of convenience,
I didn't disagree with anything you said, and I found nearly all of it
relevant and useful. All I was doing was pointing out, if not to you
then to anyone reading what you wrote who might not have grasped it,
that this *one* fact that you mentioned, while useful to those who want
the fonts, is incidental to the question of how to get web pages to
display as desired in users' browsers. Is there something wrong with
trying to clarify something someone else has written if one thinks it
will be helpful?

**Sherm Pendley** · Jul 12 '06, 04:35 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.rem ovethis@comcast .netwrites:

Sherm Pendley wrote:

>Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.rem ovethis@comcast .netwrites:
>>

>>Sherm Pendley wrote:
>>>Microsoft' s "core fonts for the web" are also freely available. They're
>>>included with most modern Linux distros, and also downloadable here:
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/font-tool>
>>>If memory serves, that's Andale, Arial, MS Comic Sans, Georgia,
>>>Impact,
>>>Times New Roman, Trebuchet, Verdana, and WebDings.
>>That doesn't much help, of course, since it's the users, not the page
>>designer, who need to have these fonts

>That's why I pointed out that most (obviously not all) users do have
>them,
>even a large number of Linux users.
>And that's also why I pointed out, in the part of my post that you
>conveniently
>snipped for the sake of making a condescending response, the importance of
>adding a generic "family" name like "sans-serif" at the end of the list.

>
I wasn't being condescending, I didn't snip anything out of
convenience, I didn't disagree with anything you said, and I found
nearly all of it relevant and useful.

I'm sorry for overreacting then.

All I was doing was pointing
out, if not to you then to anyone reading what you wrote who might not
have grasped it, that this *one* fact that you mentioned, while useful
to those who want the fonts, is incidental to the question of how to
get web pages to display as desired in users' browsers.

My point wasn't so much that they're easy for users to get and install, as
it was that they're pre-installed on a huge number of systems. Obviously not
every user will have them, but the odds for those fonts being installed are
as good as such things are going to get.

sherm--

--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net

**axlq** · Jul 12 '06, 05:55 PM

Re: What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

In article <m2wtaiewu3.fsf @Sherm-Pendleys-Computer.local> ,
Sherm Pendley <sherm@Sherm-Pendleys-Computer.localw rote:

>axlq@spamcop.n et (axlq) writes:

>>>I did find http://www.ampsoft.net/webdesign-l/WindowsMacFonts.html

>The innacuracy that glares out at me is with Helvetica, which
>apppears in different places, and looks different in each place.

>
>My eyes must be getting old - I can't see much of a difference. Maybe the
>second one is a tiny bit bigger.

Look at the lowercase L in 'Helvetica' -- both in the Arial and the
Trebuchet line. One L is a vertical line whereas the other has a
little hook at the bottom. Also compare the sharpness of the point
in the 'v'. Two completely different fonts. The 'c' is more open in
one of them, and the 'a' has a smaller loop. That's why I thought
it was inaccurate. Helvetica is NOT being displayed in at least one
instance. I think the second Helvetica is actually Trebuchet MS.

-A

What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

What fonts are equivalent on different platforms?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment