Typecast acquired by Monotype
typecast.com
Typecast acquired by Monotype
1–10 of 15 posts
Re: Typecast acquired by Monotype
#2Holy crap. I sure hope Monotype doesn't break Typecast (with their record of 'you-can't-embed and all: http://print21.com.au/adobe-takes-agfa-monotype-to-court-ove... )
Re: Typecast acquired by Monotype
#3Holy crap. I sure hope Monotype doesn't break Typecast (with their record of 'you-can't-embed and all: http://print21.com.au/adobe-takes-agfa-monotype-to-court-ove... )
Hey. We hope so too! The plan is for us to operate independently and continue making it easier for designers to work with type on the web.
Re: Typecast acquired by Monotype
#4As a designer who studied typography and spent a few years working in print a long time ago, I love typecast. But practically speaking, Google Fonts has serviced most of my needs. It's free for one, and that's a pretty big deal. And two, I just prefer its lean implementation.
Type design is an interesting industry. It takes years to master which is not appreciated by the market. And I'm not a qualified type designer, but as a creative director (and purchasing gatekeeper) -- I feel the pricing model is really dated and beautiful type is being held hostage because of it.
Re: Typecast acquired by Monotype
#5Holy crap. I sure hope Monotype doesn't break Typecast (with their record of 'you-can't-embed and all: http://print21.com.au/adobe-takes-agfa-monotype-to-court-ove... )
Hey. We hope so too! The plan is for us to operate independently and continue making it easier for designers to work with type on the web.
Thanks Paul, nice to see the CEO reads HackerNews +1 ;-)
Re: Typecast acquired by Monotype
#6I am sure my concern is the same as many others, how will this acquisition affect how well Typecast works?
Re: Typecast acquired by Monotype
#7Correct me if I'm wrong, but Typecast doesn't actually serve the font, right?
It always seemed like an extra hassle to have one more service in the mix, I'd rather just pick my font right in Typekit or Google Fonts even if the selection is more limited.
Re: Typecast acquired by Monotype
#8I am sure my concern is the same as many others, how will this acquisition affect how well Typecast works?
Even though we've been acquired, we're still committed to making the web a better place and I don't expect any changes to how Typecast works.
We'll be continuing to operate autonomously so there won't be any negative product changes for customers. There is no intent for this to become a Monotype-only service or to do anything other than build the best tool for working with type on the web.
Re: Typecast acquired by Monotype
#9Correct me if I'm wrong, but Typecast doesn't actually serve the font, right? It always seemed like an extra hassle to have one more service in the mix, I'd rather just pick my font right in Typekit or Google Fonts even if the selection is more limited.
Yes, the fonts are still served by the providers. We make it easier to experiment with type independently of the provider but once you've finalised your type styles you don't have to serve the CSS from Typecast (although you can).
Re: Typecast acquired by Monotype
#10Correct me if I'm wrong, but Typecast doesn't actually serve the font, right? It always seemed like an extra hassle to have one more service in the mix, I'd rather just pick my font right in Typekit or Google Fonts even if the selection is more limited.
Yes, the fonts are still served by the providers. We make it easier to experiment with type independently of the provider but once you've finalised your type styles you don't have to serve the CSS from Typecast (although you can).
So I can serve the font from Typecast? Or are you only talking about the CSS, but not the fonts?