Microsoft Office’s new default font: Aptos
theverge.com
theverge.com
> Perhaps most infuriating, Word will embed any number of styles per family, but it will only display one. Meaning, if you’re using regular, italic, bold, and bold italic in your document, all four styles will be embedded. But when your recipient opens the file, only the regular will display correctly; the italic, bold, and bold italic will be Word-synthesized approximations, not the embedded fonts.
> This last limitation means that Microsoft Word has reached the exalted state where it is not compatible with itself: it is writing data into its file format that it cannot read. Worst of all, this is not a bug—it’s the intended behavior [2].
[1] — https://practicaltypography.com/how-to-embed-fonts-in-a-word...
[2] — https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/office_standards...
Pages is awful for things like bibliographies and referencing. It's LaTeX is janky, underpowered, and for some ungodly reason avoids computer modern like the plague. In 99% of things you will be just one option short of what you actually want to display.
With that said it is easy to use. The documents almost always look like a document and not a bunch of text that has incidentally ended up on the same page. It doesn't take up too much vertical by using side panels well. It makes everything it does let you do easy.
I have used heaps of WYSIWYG editors over the last 30 years. I have used some LaTeX ones too.
Pages is the only one where I would keep the UI and just add more functionality (somehow without changing the UI).
A good one? No.
The synthetic substitutions still exist, but only if you fail to provide the font variants.
If I'm not mistaken, browsers still allow using embedded font variants if they are available in e.g. one OTF file
[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/60746818/how-can-i-use-b...
[2] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/58073983/how-to-show-dif...
Wikipedia says
> Oblique type is a form of type that slants slightly to the right, used for the same purposes as italic type. Unlike italic type, however, it does not use different glyph shapes; it uses the same glyphs as roman type, except slanted
So the use case for both italic and oblique font styles in the same document is very... opaque to me :)
Sounds like a case of the perfect vs the good
Also offers pro-tips for typography for lawyers and for general office typography.
https://typographyforlawyers.com/what-is-good-typography.htm...
see https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/12/15961354/pakistan-calibri... and https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/01/microsofts-fonts-cat...
though Aptos isn't officially available as Aptos until 2023 July.
Tenorite seems to look like some form of a Gotham ish one, Grandview is some form of DIN it seems.
Here's an example of the five fonts, Bierstadt, Skeena, Seaford, Grandview, and Tenorite. https://imgur.io/gallery/Dx91rtr
While true, there is a setting for good kerning which is disabled by default for backwards compatibility reasons[1]. It's just so well hidden that I'm fairly certain that I'm one of maybe dozens of humans on the face of the planet using it.[2]
1. Go to the Styles ribbon control area and right-click the Normal style.
2. Select the Modify menu item.
3. Click the Format button in the bottom left.
4. Select the Font menu item.
5. Select the Advanced tab.
6. Tick the checkbox labelled "Kerning for fonts". Set the size to something small like "6 Points or above".
7. While you're here, turn on Ligatures. "Standard Only" is fine.
If the above doesn't make you breathe into a paper bag in a panic[3], also consider turning justification on so that we can use 5 GHz multi-core CPUs to finally catch up to the fancy paragraph layout algorithms introduced by this young chap called Gutenberg.[4] Any day now, Microsoft Word will catch up to the first moveable type printer ever made. Any day now...
[1] Backwards compatibility is not a good reason for new documents to use the 1990s defaults, but Microsoft doesn't care about your silly common sense and "logic", okay?
[2] There's dozens of us achieving good typography in Word, I tell you! Dozens!
[3] Some coworkers literally had a panic attack and made me revert the settings because they're "unauthorised" and not the defaults. I wish I was kidding.
[4] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/Gutenber...
The next biggest thing for most technical documents is maintaining the fidelity of drawings, diagrams, and charts. Many people paste low-resolution JPEGs into their documents, which looks like trash, especially on 4K screens or if printed.
Word now supports SVG format vector artwork natively. There are icon packs from vendors in SVG format now. E.g.: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/architecture/icons/#...
Even older versions could paste in vector-format diagrams from other apps by using "Paste special -> Enhanced metafile".
Metafiles are the "native" vector format for the Windows GDI drawing and printing APIs, and provide the maximum quality and retain all of the original formatting details one-to-one. They're also small and efficient to display.
If none of those are possible, I insert images like company logos by scaling them up at the source to fill a 4K screen, take a screenshot, save as a PNG, and then insert that at a small size. This provides crisp edges at all but the most ludicrous resolutions.
I appreciate how it's Debian-packaged into the "fonts-linuxlibertine" package, but is it installed by default in Linux Mint? Alas, no.
I quite like Times New Roman, it saddens me a little to see it looked down on as if it’s outdated, and to that end I’m glad they commissioned a new font so a well known typeface won’t get shunned like Times New Roman.
As a formally harmed person, does that word have any weight or meaning anymore?
"Sprawl" from a name of font? Not anything like policies, media, immigration etc. No, the name of a font. That's harmful.
Do we need a reality check?