Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

More than 1,500 new fonts – including all-time favorites – come to Adobe Fonts

blog.adobe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–58 of 58 posts

Re: More than 1,500 new fonts – including all-time favorites – come to Adobe Fonts

#51

Post by crazygringo »

tobr wrote: post #43
crazygringo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the one hand, if you're editing a graphics file for a client that already uses Arial, you need Arial. Full stop. It doesn't matter if it's great or not. On the other hand, Arial is pre-installed not just on Windows, but Macs and iOS. And Adobe doesn't make e.g. Illustrator for Android or Linux. So what Creative Cloud app runs on an OS that doesn't already have Arial? What am I missing? Do they have something that…

I don’t know enough about Adobe Fonts and don’t trust their own writing about it, but it seems like it supports web. So I suppose it might be a way to get a consistently poor typographic experience on all platforms.

Oh, that would make sense, as a webfont for Linux and Android.

Still, Arial isn't poor. It's nearly Helvetica. It's a knockoff, but all it does is simplify some letterforms. It's not like it destroys the spacing or balance or weight or anything. You're talking as if it were Comic Sans...

Re: More than 1,500 new fonts – including all-time favorites – come to Adobe Fonts

#52

Post by beowulfey »

Spooky23 wrote: post #34
beowulfey wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a misunderstanding because Adobe deliberately obfuscates that fact when you purchase such a plan

It’s the dumbest argument ever. Find a perpetual software license or 12 month subscription that allows for cancellation for convenience. I get why some folks are angry, it was easier to pirate Adobe back in the day. If people don’t want to pay, there’s all sorts of competition in different segments of the market as well as open source.

No way. I have no problem paying. I don't even mind the price. When I signed up last time I chose the monthly option because thats what I was used to for nearly every subscription. I didn't do the math to notice it matched the price of the annual subscription and not once was the cancellation fee mentioned. I was totally caught off guard by the fee and was lucky it was close to the end of the contract.

It's the same shit internet providers used to do in the US that thankfully they can no longer do. I cannot understand anyone defending Adobe on this if they actually used that plan the way they explained it. Maybe it's better now, but it absolutely was shady as hell a few years ago.

Re: More than 1,500 new fonts – including all-time favorites – come to Adobe Fonts

#53

Post by Tommix11 »

jasonjmcghee wrote: post #21

It's amazing to me when wildly successful companies have a great thing going and choose to try to squeeze customers instead of giving them reasons to be loyal, and then self-destruct. Adobe and Unity both come to mind. I don't think I've seen a brand increase margins at the cost of customer satisfaction, successfully.

I think Steve Jobs said it best. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo8zdPNMRdY

Re: More than 1,500 new fonts – including all-time favorites – come to Adobe Fonts

#54

Post by Voultapher »

BearOso wrote: post #27
jasonjmcghee wrote: post #21

It's amazing to me when wildly successful companies have a great thing going and choose to try to squeeze customers instead of giving them reasons to be loyal, and then self-destruct. Adobe and Unity both come to mind. I don't think I've seen a brand increase margins at the cost of customer satisfaction, successfully.

They're maxed out on customers so about the only things they can do are increase prices or make cuts. It's always just so they can bump up their quarterly reports. Only private companies risk doing anything decent any more because they're not tied to investors' whims.

The cancer school of thought, insist endless growth will be possible and must be pursued, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Re: More than 1,500 new fonts – including all-time favorites – come to Adobe Fonts

#55

Post by tobr »

crazygringo wrote: post #51
tobr wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know enough about Adobe Fonts and don’t trust their own writing about it, but it seems like it supports web. So I suppose it might be a way to get a consistently poor typographic experience on all platforms.

Oh, that would make sense, as a webfont for Linux and Android. Still, Arial isn't poor . It's nearly Helvetica. It's a knockoff, but all it does is simplify some letterforms. It's not like it destroys the spacing or balance or weight or anything. You're talking as if it were Comic Sans...

Any typeface must be judged in two ways - the raw quality of the letter shapes, proportions, spacing, etc - and the baggage of associations it provokes. In both respects, Arial makes a design look cheap.

Re: More than 1,500 new fonts – including all-time favorites – come to Adobe Fonts

#56

Post by crazygringo »

tobr wrote: post #55
crazygringo wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, that would make sense, as a webfont for Linux and Android. Still, Arial isn't poor . It's nearly Helvetica. It's a knockoff, but all it does is simplify some letterforms. It's not like it destroys the spacing or balance or weight or anything. You're talking as if it were Comic Sans...

Any typeface must be judged in two ways - the raw quality of the letter shapes, proportions, spacing, etc - and the baggage of associations it provokes. In both respects, Arial makes a design look cheap.

Most people couldn't tell the difference between Helvetica and Arial at all. And Helvetica is one of the most iconic, classic, respected designs out there.

The only people it might look cheap to are graphic designers. So who cares?

Re: More than 1,500 new fonts – including all-time favorites – come to Adobe Fonts

#57

Post by tobr »

crazygringo wrote: post #56
tobr wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any typeface must be judged in two ways - the raw quality of the letter shapes, proportions, spacing, etc - and the baggage of associations it provokes. In both respects, Arial makes a design look cheap.

Most people couldn't tell the difference between Helvetica and Arial at all. And Helvetica is one of the most iconic, classic, respected designs out there. The only people it might look cheap to are graphic designers. So who cares?

Yes, if you can't tell the difference and don't care, use it! That's exactly the circumstance where it's used, and the reason it is associated with cheapness.

Re: More than 1,500 new fonts – including all-time favorites – come to Adobe Fonts

#58

Post by crazygringo »

tobr wrote: post #57
crazygringo wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people couldn't tell the difference between Helvetica and Arial at all. And Helvetica is one of the most iconic, classic, respected designs out there. The only people it might look cheap to are graphic designers. So who cares?

Yes, if you can't tell the difference and don't care, use it! That's exactly the circumstance where it's used, and the reason it is associated with cheapness.

People do use it. So stop complaining about it. It isn't associated with cheapness except in the minds of a tiny percentage of people like you.

I mean, like you admitted, it's not even a question of aesthetic qualities like the balance of letterforms. You really care about the extra-aesthetic connotations of whether the leg of an uppercase R is straight or squiggly? There are more important things in life. And I say this as someone who cares quite a lot about typography.

Like, sure, Palatino and Optima have strong associations with certain decades that even people who don't follow typography feel subconciously. But Helvetica vs. Arial? C'mon, I don't think so.

Post reply on HN