Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bitstream To Donate 10 Fonts To Free Software World

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the some-gnus-is-good-gnus dept.

Graphics 410

21mhz writes "Posted on FootNotes: The GNOME Foundation and Bitstream Inc. announce long-term agreement to bring high quality fonts to Free Software. Ten fonts will be released for use under a special open license agreement, giving advanced font capabilities to all free and open source software developers and users. Read the full press release for more details." Modification and re-release (under a different name) is explicitly allowed, too.

cancel ×

410 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

For publicity? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5137953)

For publicity or for common good?

Re:For publicity? (3, Insightful)

schmink182 (540768) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138083)

For publicity or for common good?

Who care's. We have them either way.

Re:For publicity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138106)

Sorry, I usually get grammar stuff right but didn't catch it this time. Please spare me the flames (although no one minds the occasional link to Angry Flower).

FP!!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5137955)


Fonts? FONTS!!!!?? We don't need no stinkin' FONTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re:FP!!! (1)

Goldberg's Pants (139800) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138086)

hehehe UHF... Great movie.

10 fonts? WOO! Let's all celebrate.

Seriously, what is the big deal with this? That's like MS saying "Here. Have 47 lines of source code from Windows."

Re:FP!!! (1)

LilGuy (150110) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138194)

No its more like here, your fonts suck my nuts, these should help. There you go, now you don't need special glasses just to read what you type.

uh... (1)

SweetAndSourJesus (555410) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138248)

That line originally started in The Treasure of Sierra Madre [imdb.com] .

It has since been featured in numerous films, including UHF, Three Amigos!, and Blazing Saddles.

Re:FP!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138358)

Initially thought this was a troll, but I guess I am just old. On the bright side, maybe these new fonts will be easier on my eyes.

-bp

thank god! (1, Informative)

smd4985 (203677) | more than 10 years ago | (#5137965)

i very much would like to use a linux distro full time, but i just can't stand the state of linux fonts right now. redhat 8.0 does have some nice fonts but generally the fonts used in the mozilla browsing experience just suck! i hear you can get fully anti-aliased fonts working on linux but it seems to be a bit of a chore....

Re:thank god! (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5137980)

If you're using RH8, you already have AA fonts. Mozilla might not have them, tho - that'll be rectified in future releases of Mozilla.

Re:thank god! (3, Informative)

damiam (409504) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138389)

Mozilla does support AA, you just have to enable it with a hidden preference [packetwarriors.net] . Debian (and probably some other distros) does that by default.

fonts types vs anti-aliasing (4, Informative)

Knacklappen (526643) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138031)

Don't confuse font type with the way the font is displayed. Linus is not very good at displaying the fonts, unfortunately. Anti-aliasing is far off the Windows standard. However, even the best font would be affected that way. So, getting professional help with designing new fonts for Linux is great news. Just read this story [slashdot.org] and attached comments again, in case you do not agree at once.

Re:fonts types vs anti-aliasing (5, Funny)

chrisseaton (573490) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138049)

Linus is not very good at displaying the fonts

I don't think you can directly blame him :)

Re:fonts types vs anti-aliasing (4, Funny)

Knacklappen (526643) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138058)

Linus is not very good at displaying the fonts, unfortunately.

On the other hand, Bill isn't too good at this, either. ;-)

(Just making fun of my own typo.)

Re:fonts types vs anti-aliasing (1)

ramzak2k (596734) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138138)

couldnt have said it better. Staring at RH8.0 made me dizzy for the first few days. I later discovered it was because the screen as a whole is kinda of blurry. Never got around to finding where i could turn it off, there was no Control Panel.

Re:fonts types vs anti-aliasing (5, Informative)

fault0 (514452) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138159)

Six months ago, I'd would have agreed with you that font rendering (especially AA) in X was not up to font rendering in Windows. However, since then, Xft2 has come out, which offers even better sub-pixel antialiasing support than Microsoft Cleartype. I'm currently running xft2+XFree86 4.2.99 on gentoo, and the fonts look better on my lcd than in WindowsXP.

Re:fonts types vs anti-aliasing (5, Interesting)

jandrese (485) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138272)

Actually, I've always thought that the big advantage of Windows antialiasing is that it turns off when the text is small enough. Every time I try to enable the antialiasing in FreeBSD/Linux, I discover that the mechanism to disable antialiasing below a certain pixel size is either broken or nonfunctional. Antialiasing small text makes it fuzzy and hard to read.

As a caveat, some people always hate antialising. Even in Windows they dive right for the "Smooth Edges of Screen Fonts" checkbox. All programs that antialias should include a simple method for disabling it, or you are going to annoy some of your users.

Re:thank god! (1)

occamboy (583175) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138218)

Agreed! Most Linux distributions (other than RedHat 8) do a worse job of rendering fonts than Windows did 9 years ago. When you consider that the vast majority of computer users are staring at fonts all day, this bodes poorly for the prospect of Linux on the desktop.

On the other hand, since RedHat 8 finally features font rendering that doesn't suck, they may have a shot at whooping Redmond upside the head on the desktop -- but ONLY if they tone down installation so that it doesn't ask you about PPP connectivity, give you eight (or however many) terminal emulator apps to select among, and similar things that drive non-uber-nerds nutty.

Re:thank god! (1)

eggsovereasy (573119) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138279)

If you aren't happy with the fonts that come with a distribution you can install your own font system :p

The default fonts for X in Gentoo are the best I have seen... pango in Gnome2 is also very good :)

Re:thank god! (2, Informative)

palmito (571305) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138333)

The fonts problems on linux really blow away many people from using linux, but with a little configuring you can get them to look just as nice as in windows. Currently there are many enhancements happening in the linux font rendering.
But as everything nowadays, the developers are having patent issues. The deal is that in order to have nice looking fonts (at least with the current fonts that are available) you have to use the BCI (Byte Code Interpreter), wich is patented, so many distros do not distribute freetype compiled with the BCI turned on (some distros don't care about it and turn the BCI on anyway, I assume this is what happens with redhat). And even when BCI is turned on, some distros really do a lousy job when configuring the fonts.
I have mozilla running with fonts exactly like they look in windows (i did compare the fonts using vmware and they really are exactly the same) but I did have to configure many things. If you are willing to do this too check the Gentoo Forums [gentoo.org] . Unlike what happens on other Linux distros comunities, the gentoo users don't give up until they've got it like they want (and don't mind sharing their work), so you'll probably won't have a hard time getting help in the gentoo community.

GNOME already looks great out of the box (1, Insightful)

KDan (90353) | more than 10 years ago | (#5137968)

"These fonts will be available to all developers and users, giving GNOME and other open source programs a great look right out of the box that has been lacking until now."

They obviously haven't tried RH8.0 :-)

Not that I'm complaining... the more fonts the better!!!

Daniel

Re:GNOME already looks great out of the box (1)

Gortbusters.org (637314) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138144)

True B, True. I can take RedHat 8, and people are much more comfortable with it than the 7.x series.

Fonts really put the polish on RH8.

It's only 10 fonts. (3, Interesting)

Gentoo Fan (643403) | more than 10 years ago | (#5137969)

Also, if it's open source, why it is "long term"? They said "special license" but they didn't post the license itself.

Re:It's only 10 fonts. (1)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138050)

Leave it to a Gentoo fan to look a gift horse in the mouth. "What about the license?", "only 10...". We Redhat users just live with what we get.

Joke. ;)

Re:It's only 10 fonts. (3, Insightful)

valisk (622262) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138091)

If the license lasts longer than the patents mentioned then we are pretty much in the clear

Can we have that cool MUNI font? (-1)

Blacklist Blacklist (629645) | more than 10 years ago | (#5137971)

the the funky-ass Muni logo? [down10.com] It's from Down10 (as it turns out) and it's just wacky, weird, and classic 1970s.

this is cool... (3, Insightful)

blinder (153117) | more than 10 years ago | (#5137973)

... for us design geeks who like to design on the linux platform... now if The Powers That Be would just develop something like Quark.... but I digress.

Graphic design, its not just for the Mac any more :)

Re:this is cool... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138099)

it hasnt been for about a decade
most print shops have been converting away from macs for a reason

free fonts (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5137974)

get free fonts at free fonts.com [freefonts.com]

Yes! (2, Funny)

Gortbusters.org (637314) | more than 10 years ago | (#5137975)

These 10 fonts shall increase my usability experience, allowing me to show them off to all!

It's always good to hear news like this.. companies don't need to open source everything.. just donate a little to the community and it'll fill our hearts with warm feelings.

hrm.. (0)

xao gypsie (641755) | more than 10 years ago | (#5137979)

will give full functionality to projects like Freetype, XFT2 and X Render extensions of the XFree86 project, Pango, KDE and Trolltechs QT, among many others...

that is certainly good news. a few of those (pango, and freetype specifically) have given me hell in the past. hopefully those days are gone....
xao

Most of us (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5137987)

I've got lots of fonts already; I've got Adobe fonts, Bitstream fonts, Microsoft fonts, etc.. I just wish that the default configuration on my Red Hate 8 box didn't make them all look like crap.

Honestly, I'm glad that Bitstream is a good enough community player to donate these. Only problem is our community is served a whole lot more by quality than it is by quantity.

Re:Most of us (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138053)

How you you change the configuration to that the fonts don't look like crap? I use slackware, and I have the same problem. I used X for about 6 months over a year ago, and I couldn't stand the fonts anymore. Now I use windows 70% of the time and linux from the command line the otherr 30%. I don't have X installed at all and that's just because the text is so horrible.

Re:Most of us (1)

moeman (11668) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138184)


For those of us not leet enough to notice the font deficiencies, can someone post a side by side screenshot of a common "crappy looking fonts" in X, and how they should look (from windows or OSX)?

Re:Most of us (3, Insightful)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138228)

>> I've got Adobe fonts, Bitstream fonts, Microsoft fonts

Possibly not legally, and definately not Free. Some fonts that ship with MS Office are explicitly for use with MS Office, etc. They do have a free (cost) pack of fonts for use in alternate web browsers, but whether or not it's OK to use them for linux I'm not sure (I know Redhat doesn't enable them by default). I'm not positive, but I think there's something about them being free for use only to liscensees of windows. All of which is MS's perogative, since they are their fonts.

Anyways, some Free (libre) fonts, if indeed they are *usable* and not garbage like 'Carebearz' or 'Stoner handwriting', make linux just a little bit more legitimate on the desktop than it did an hour ago. It still has lightyears to go, however.

You know you're a geek (5, Funny)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 10 years ago | (#5137989)

You know you're a geek when you get excited about the release of new fonts.

Absolutely! (4, Funny)

melquiades (314628) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138151)

You know you're a geek when you get excited about the release of new fonts.

No kidding.

Of course, if I were posting this from a Linux machine, I wouldn't be excited, because I wouldn't be able to fucking read the story.

Obvious question (1)

endquotedotcom (557632) | more than 10 years ago | (#5137993)

Which ones?

Re:Obvious question (1)

icantblvitsnotbutter (472010) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138282)

From the press release: "The Bitstream Vera fonts will be available for free copying and redistribution and can be modified as long as the font name is changed."

I tried to look in the Bitstream store's find fonts [bitstream.com] section, but it was slow as molasses. I'm sure it't been indirectly Slashdotted. If you're lucky enough to get in, they should have sample images of the fonts.

Where And When? (1)

Sonicated (515345) | more than 10 years ago | (#5137997)

So where and when are these fonts going to be availible?

So what do they look like? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138014)

There are already lots of free fonts available. The only problem is that they all look like shit!

Sweethearts (1)

ErnieD (19277) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138018)

Well wasn't that sweet of them. Glad to see SOMEONE concerned about the font situation in *nix. RedHat made a leap forward by allowing TrueType fonts to be used in KDE/Gnome natively just by dropping them in ~/.fonts. But with this release, and hopefully more to come, we won't need to be bound by TrueType much longer. Yay!

Re:Sweethearts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138225)

Actually, you can install postscript fonts already.

Modifying Fonts (0, Offtopic)

perfects (598301) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138023)

> Modification and re-release (under s different
> name) is explicitly allowed, too

Like changing my browser's font so that an "a" looks like an "s"?

Shouldn't it be a rule that the editors have to use the Preview button? I like Slashdot, but sometimes it should be called Slapdash.

Re:Modifying Fonts (1)

filth grinder (577043) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138108)

most likely you would change the font so that all "S"'s are $, that way it would make bashing M$ all the easier.

I mean, this is /. right?

Re:Modifying Fonts (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138199)

Slapdash... that brings back fond memories of The Glorious MEEPT!!

Best damn Slashdot troll ever.

What I don't understand. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138029)

Why only for Gnome ?
KDE is a much better and more advanced window manager, so it should have these nice fonts, too.
So why not ?
Do they fear the wrath of Microsoft ?

Re:What I don't understand. (2, Informative)

morbuz (592480) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138070)

"The donation of these fonts to the free software community is the final piece that will give full functionality to projects like Freetype, XFT2 and X Render extensions of the XFree86 project, Pango, KDE and Trolltechs QT, among many others." said Jim Gettys of HP and GNOME Foundation board member.

Re:What I don't understand. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138104)

Read the announcement, it's all in there.

Re:What I don't understand. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138110)

From the press release (that you didn't read):

"The donation of these fonts to the free software community is the final piece that will give full functionality to projects like Freetype, XFT2 and X Render extensions of the XFree86 project, Pango, KDE and Trolltechs QT, among many others." said Jim Gettys of HP and GNOME Foundation board member. "These fonts will be available to all developers and users, giving GNOME and other open source programs a great look right out of the box that has been lacking until now."

Re:What I don't understand. (1)

JanneM (7445) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138122)

From the press release:


Ten fonts will be released for use under a special
open license agreement, giving advanced font
capabilities to all free and open source software
developers and users.


and


"The donation of these fonts to the free software
community is the final piece that will give full
functionality to projects like Freetype, XFT2 and X
Render extensions of the XFree86 project, Pango, KDE
and Trolltechs QT, among many others." said Jim
Gettys of HP and GNOME Foundation board member.


Or do you imply that this should be licensed for the use in KDE only?

Re:What I don't understand. (3, Insightful)

Unkle (586324) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138128)

The press release did not say that ONLY Gnome could use this, it just said that Gnome _would_ use it. And that other open source projects could use these fonts. The Gnome foundation, however, probably won't do the development for KDE.

I know I know... this is flamebait... but... (0, Flamebait)

TheShadow (76709) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138249)

KDE is a much better and more advanced window manager, so it should have these nice fonts, too.


Actually, anything that runs on top of XFree86 sucks. Besides, Ximian GNOME is much better than all the other sorry excuses for window managers... but it still sucks. Just use Windows for your desktop and use Linux for your server... you'll be much better off.

10 fonts /IS/ a big deal. (5, Insightful)

Vengie (533896) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138040)

Please save the "ohh but its only 10 fonts" comments.
The microsoft world does very well with ARIAL, COURIER, and TIMES NEW ROMAN.
(Actually, most of the personal computing world does fairly well with these fonts)
I used CHICAGO, TIMES and BOOKMAN exclusively for years on a Mac LCII.
The crux of the issue is that these should be high quality fonts. THAT is a big deal. Kerning is a huge pain.
"ae" vs "lk" vs "ld" vs "dl" vs "kl" -- spacing changes more than you think. Amen, hallelujah...now lets just see how they look.

If my penis had a bell (0, Flamebait)

Acidic_Diarrhea (641390) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138126)

Please save the "10 fonts /IS/ a big deal" comments. The Microsoft world does very well with ARIAL, COURIER, and TIMES NEW ROMAN. (Actually, most of the personal computing world does fairly well with these fonts). Thus, only three good fonts are needed by a proper system. We can safely say that the 10 fonts being released are overkill and must be from the bottom of the barrel.

Why don't you wait until someone actually makes a comment about 10 fonts not being enough before you get upset and cry about it? I realize that it might look like an easy way to gain some karma but come on, you can't possibly need karma this badly, can you? Basically here's what you said: 10 Fonts is a big deal. The fonts released SHOULD be high quality ones. So, how do you know 10 fonts are a big deal son? I mean, let's suppose the second conditional is not satisfied. Then is it still a big deal? Let's suppose these 10 fonts aren't high quality. Big deal? No big deal? Which is it? Please, I'm curious.

Depends on how they / you define font. (1)

Codex The Sloth (93427) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138270)

Arial, courier and times are font families. So Arial Bold, Arial Italic, Arial Bold Italic are 3 different fonts. If they go by the strict definition of fonts, it's not a big deal.

Also, it might be 10 versions of Symbol...

Re:10 fonts /IS/ a big deal. (5, Informative)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138315)

The microsoft world does very well with ARIAL, COURIER, and TIMES NEW ROMAN.

Indeed, and according to Fontilus Bitstream were the people who made these fonts.

I think people don't realise how hard it is to make good fonts. Arial is a huge project in and of itself, simply getting the fonts looking good at all sizes is hard, and then you need glyphs for other languages and alphabets.

It's hard. 10 fonts is an amazing gift, if they are of high quality. I think they will be, Bitstream are good.

Re:10 fonts /IS/ a big deal. (5, Informative)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138330)

I'm a doofus. Monotype Corporation made Arial.

What's the point? (3, Interesting)

EmeraldSpirit (643151) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138045)

I guess I just don't understand the big deal here. You can get free fonts from multiple places - why is this nothing more than a bit of free publicity for the company? And since the article didn't state which fonts - how would one know that its going to be useful? They put out this article - get the publicity - and all they have to do is give away really arcane or unused fonts. Am I missing the point?

Re:What's the point? (5, Insightful)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138273)

The problem isn't free fonts, the problem is high-quality and Free (as in freedom) fonts. Sure you can download I don't know how many free beer fonts from the net, but they are either 1) not freely redistributable or 2) for fun only; not optimized for actual ready or 3) low-quality.

BitStream is donating high-quality AND Free fonts here! So soon we will get Linux distros with high-quality fonts out-of-the-box.

Re:What's the point? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138277)

The big deal is that all fonts are not created equal. While some free fonts are high quality, many of them aren't. Bitstream is one of the best-known producers of fonts, and its fonts are all known for their quality.

Another point is that, depending on what the fonts are, they may make it possible to work in Linux, and have people on other platforms see your work the way that you intended them to see it.

Neither of these reasons may be personally important to you if you're not a designer. But consider the fact that, if these fonts allow designers to work in Linux, then they represent a small step forward in the Linux desktop.

Re:What's the point? (3, Interesting)

JanneM (7445) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138293)

The font is the Vera family; there's links in other comments to pictures.

And yes, it _is_ a big deal. Slapping together a half-decent font able to show the 7-bit ascii characters in a few sizes isn't all that much work. Making a high-quality, well designed font that will work over the entire iso8859-1 (or even Unicode) with proper hinting and good visibility over a large range of sizes and resolutions, takes a _lot_ of time and effort.

Re:What's the point? (3, Insightful)

Chasuk (62477) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138323)

You're right - you really don't understand. Yes, free fonts are available from multiple places, but most of them are shite.


Lousy font rendering/choice is one of the last major hurdles in Linux desktop adoption. It stymied me until last year, when Redhat 8 made the Linux desktop viewable without me wanting to chunder.


Yes, you are missing the point.

Re:What's the point? (2, Insightful)

pcardoso (132954) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138329)

Most free fonts are badly done. I don't question the look of the fonts themselves, but most don't have the international (accented) characters, so writing anything other than english is dificult.

If these fonts feature a complete character set and are as high quality as anything you get from a fresh install of windows (except that ugly Comic Sans) and macOS, then we're in luck.

Show a screenshot for some Linux program for a windows only user and the first thing he'll notice is that the fonts are ugly, if it's not a RH8.0 linux system. The font rendering in RH8 is very good.

Now if only I didn't have to install the fonts all over the place for GTK1, GTK2, QT, TCL/TK and all the other toolkits so they can see the same fonts....

Re:What's the point? (1)

Patoski (121455) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138387)

I guess I just don't understand the big deal here. You can get free fonts from multiple places - why is this nothing more than a bit of free publicity for the company?

I'm no expert on fonts but I do know a little about the difficulties in creating them. I'm sure someone will correct me if I mispeak on a minor point.

Sure, you can download free cheeseball fonts from lots of different free font sites but there is a *huge* difference between those free fonts you just downloaded and professionally made fonts. Why do you think Linux has gone so long without a decent set of fonts? Its because high quality fonts take a *long* time to develop and are *very* expensive to make because of all the labor involved. It can take a professional typeographer a full year to develop just one font. Until now its been very difficult for the Free Software community to find either:
1) A professional typeographer willing to donate a large amount of time (typeographers and professional level font creation software doesn't grow on trees)
2) A company willing to fund the creation of the fonts. (expensive!)

With this in mind I think one can begin to appreciate the magnitude of the gift that Bitstream is giving the community.

Thank you Bitstream!

Alright! (0, Troll)

fernd1 (582087) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138046)

Now I don't have to blatantly disregard Microsoft's EULA by copying True Type fonts over to Linux anymore. Finally distros will be crisp and clear on first install!

Re:Alright! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138251)

But you should blatantly disregard Microsoft's EULA anyway. Why not?

Bitstream holds numerous key patents in the U.S (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138051)

Bitstream holds numerous key patents in the U.S. that cover the creation of portable fonts for the Internet

How nice of them to toss us poor peasants a bone.

The best thing would be: (4, Insightful)

pyite69 (463042) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138062)


Sets of fonts that are the exact same size as the
standard Microsoft fonts (e.g. Arial). This is
one of the key problems when trying to export
files from Open Office to an MS Word user - the
fonts end up not matching correctly and things
look funny.

My $.02.

Re:The best thing would be: (1)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138367)

I believe the issue is that Windows interprets point sizes slightly differently to FreeType. I have no idea which is correct, but I don't think it's to do with the actual fonts. But yes, it is irritating.

Hehe... (4, Funny)

Chicane-UK (455253) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138067)

I can imagine Microsoft doing something like this.. a totally out of the blue, unexpected gesture, getting everyone really excited.

Then they release ten variations of webdings.. the press release says "Try rendering your pages using THOSE on Mozilla!" :)

Toddler Vomit (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138068)


Toddler Vomit

Toddler Vomit

Toddler Vomit

Toddler Vomit

Toddler Vomit

Toddler Vomit

Good News for Mozilla and Web Browsing (2, Interesting)

mpconnelly (255054) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138072)

If these fonts were bundled with Mozilla and similar browsers, we could have more variety in our web pages (i.e. not just Arial, Courier, and Times Roman) without font-embedding (which never worked very well anyway).

Now if only we could see these fonts... There's no match for Vera on the Bitstream font search.

Also check out Thunderhawk! (1)

mcgroarty (633843) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138078)

Look at this [bitstream.com] on Bitstream's site. It's a full-featured PDA web browser that supports landscape mode.

Kaching! Finally something decent looking for PocketPC users who're sick of the joke that's portable IE!

Re:Also check out Thunderhawk! (1)

nochops (522181) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138179)

Kaching is right! (but for them, not you)

Availability
ThunderHawk is available at an annual subscription rate of $49.95. But with a 30-day free trial, why not take it out for a test drive?

How similar... (2, Interesting)

dyj (590807) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138079)

are the fonts with common TrueType fonts such as Times New Roman, Ariel, and Courier? It would still be annoying if one does not have good substitutes for these common fonts in the free software world.

And the fonts are... (4, Funny)

HarveyBirdman (627248) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138085)

1. Helvetica WayTooNarrow

2. Jesse Ventura Bold

3. Another Godamnned Star Trek Font

4. Cthulhu HyperItalic

5. Penis Extra Small

6. Fertilizus Dungbats

7. Douche Medium

8. Bush Wacky Wingdings

9. MS AntiTrust

10. End Times Extra Dark

You got one wrong: (2, Funny)

GQuon (643387) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138171)

8. West Wingdings

Re:And the fonts are... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138234)

Funny? Please, this is like the lamest slashdot comment ever to be moderated up, and that is saying something.

Will it become 20 fonts (4, Funny)

miracle69 (34841) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138097)

When this story becomes a repost in about 8 hours?

Bitstream Vera (0, Redundant)

JohnA (131062) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138100)

According to the press release, the fonts to be released are from the Bitstream Vera family. A quick google didn't show anything though. Perhaps someone with more time on their hands can dig a bit deeper?

Show us your Bits!(tream fonts) (5, Informative)

King Babar (19862) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138111)

Anyway, here's the only screenshot of the newly free fonts I could find. Now, in an attempt to be nice to this guy's server, I'll make you cut and paste this one:

http://tieguy.org/fonts.png

Pretty decent stuff, in my opinion.

Re:Show us your Bits!(tream fonts) (1)

idiotnot (302133) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138141)

The serif, in particular, looks very nice on the screen.

OTOH, I've had situations where a font looks awful on the screen, and great on the page (i.e Bookman on Solaris under StarOffice).

It's not _that_ great. . . (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138116)

See? [bitstream.com]

Horrible rumor (3, Funny)

DeadBugs (546475) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138129)

I hear that 9 of the 10 fonts are variations of the famed MS Wingdings.

Psst -- LCD users... (4, Informative)

mcgroarty (633843) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138137)

LCD users... wanna make those Bitstream scalables look really really nice?

If you're running XFree86 4 and Xft as your font manager, add this to your XftConfig:

match edit rgba = rgb; (some esoteric LCDs may need "bgr" instead.)

Sub-pixel font rendering! Yes, it has a little visible color artifacting, but it gives you the same wonderful effect that you get with Windows XP ClearType and Mac Jaguar sub-pixel rendering.

On my Viewsonic vp201mb, I can see fonts beautifully a couple point sizes smaller than I can see them with antialiasing alone.

Re:Psst -- LCD users... (4, Informative)

cowbutt (21077) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138191)

LCD users... wanna make those Bitstream scalables look really really nice?

Enabling sub-pixel rendering on Trinitron-esque monitors also seems to work out well as they use a regular rectangular pixel layout, similar to LCD panels. I didn't expect it to work because CRTs don't have the same 1:1 relationship that LCDs have when running at their native resolution, but...

--

Why this sudden upsurge of baptism? (0)

GQuon (643387) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138153)

I didn't know that the free software community had such a high number of baptisms? Are you guys super fertile or what? I mean, if these Bit Stream people are even teaming up with gnomes to donate fonts to baptise in, they must be trying to give you a hint! Perhaps they are tired of all those people flocking to their stream to be baptised. I mean, even if there is some saint performing them, you have to respect that these people are trying to live their lives in peace. I mean, come on!
Perhaps Bit Stream can get rich exporting holy water to use in these fonts?

Re:Why this sudden upsurge of baptism? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138204)

Easier just to blame those damn dirty Swissinese bastards.

Such a giving company! (1)

Hott of the World (537284) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138185)

First the Free T-Shirts [bitstream.com] , Now free fonts! I hope to see more companies get our interest by doing something good for the community than evil --**cough**Microsoft**cough**!

I make my own... (0)

EverStoned (620906) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138197)

Dosen't bother me. I make my own with Font Creator Program [high-logic.com] . Of course, I'm not on linux.

Double Good (3, Insightful)

4of12 (97621) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138217)


While the main story here is Bitstream's magnanmous gesture to the open source community, I could not help but notice Jim Gettys comments that showed how he viewed the action as important, too, to KDE, despite being on the GNOME board.

"...Freetype, XFT2 and X Render extensions of the XFree86 project, Pango, KDE and Trolltechs QT, among many others." said Jim Gettys of HP and GNOME Foundation board member.
I like to see the 2 desktop projects recognize their mutual needs and their mutual strengths.

And I'm hoping that someday there will be a bridge between Bonobo and KParts, too.

And yet (1)

Stonent1 (594886) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138236)

They still used the old standard courier font for the press release.

Other free (as in freedom and as in beer) fonts (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138300)

Hello,

I have released a set of fonts under the GPL (10 or so) my latest "Dustismo" is a good all purpose sans serif, with more then 350 glyphs. get them all at http://www.cheapskatefonts.com/

Thanks,
Dustin

Missing Fonts for linux. (2, Interesting)

BrookHarty (9119) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138322)

I didnt see the fonts listed. Does the fonts released include "zapfdingbats" and "lucida sans"? I can add lucida via MS fonts, but zapfdingbats is copyrighted, and not avail for download. (Except for Adobe Typeset on windows.)

Many production X Window software seem to use these 2 fonts, and xfree doesnt include them. No loss, but I see the error all the time, on many applications. (Do a google search, it is a common problem)

aka..
Font specified in font.properties not found [-b&h-lucida sans-medium-r-normal-sans-*-%d-*-*-p-*-iso8859-1]
Font specified in font.properties not found [-urw-itc zapfdingbats-medium-r-normal--*-%d-*-*-p-*-sun-fon tspecific]

How many glyphs? (2, Interesting)

Lord of the Fries (132154) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138346)

The press release says the Vera font. What I really want is a well populated decent looking scalable unicode font. Will this be just iso-1? or well populated across all of unicode?

Could Apple donate TTF's in return for KHTML? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5138361)

I don't know the exact history of TTF's, but didn't Apple develop them?

Apple seems to have benefitted from the free software community by utilizing KHTML for it's new browser. Could it return the favor by donating some of it's TTF's for use in Linux/Xfree?

STIX Fonts (5, Informative)

white-mj (313374) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138368)

Have you heard about STIX?

The STIX [stixfonts.org] fonts are going to cover all of Unicode.

Maybe I'll never again see "?" for every non-ASCII character. Now, *that* will be useful.

From their site:

The STIX mission will be fully realized when:

* Fully hinted PostScript Type 1 and OpenType font sets have been created.
* All characters/glyphs have been incorporated into Unicode representation or comparable representation and browsers include program logic to fully utilize the STIX font set in the electronic representation of scholarly scientific documents.

Please please please... (1)

Eric Jaakkola (629263) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138383)

Let one of the fonts be WingDings!

wow (-1, Redundant)

SquireCD (465008) | more than 10 years ago | (#5138402)

10 whole fonts?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?