Comment by tptacek

Comment by tptacek a day ago

28 replies

No, those things aren't comparable. Truffles have a functional role in a dish. A typeface does not have a meaningful functional role in a document, compared to the high-quality freely-available alternatives. This is like complaining about some kind of specially-carved or dyed truffle.

gkoberger a day ago

I respect you a ton (genuinely, I think you're the most interesting writer in the tech space), but you have a profound misunderstanding of the importance of typography if you think the only reason you'd need a paid typeface is the same reason you'd need a Hermes bag. I know you're a curious person, so hopefully you take this as an opportunity to open your horizons on the importance of it.

  • tptacek a day ago

    I'm a typeface nerd. Bringhurst is one of 3 books on the end-table next to me right now. I spend a stupid amount of money for Hoefler fonts for my dumb blog.

    This to me is like the Menswear Guy on Twitter, who will explain in very great detail to you why the Hermès product is significantly better than the generic alternative. He's right, but he also understands that you buy the Hermès product to make a statement. Spend money on that statement if you want --- I do --- but don't try to pretend you have a right to it.

    (i don't mean i own any hermes products; just stupidly expensive typefaces)

    • bravura a day ago

      I usually like your takes, but where I disagree today is when you say: "Truffles have a functional role in a dish." but fonts don't.

      Either both do have functional roles or both are luxuries like Hermès.

      • tptacek a day ago

        I don't want to get too deep into this because it doesn't matter to my point (you're also not entitled to eat truffled dishes any more than you're entitled to eat ortolans). But: set a document in one text face or another; it won't much matter at all to the experience of reading it (unless you pick a bad text face). Leave the truffle out of a risotto and you've made a different dish.

        The important subtext of this thread is that, when we're talking about functional typesetting, the solutions space is pretty constrained. There aren't that many things you can do with a text face (vs. a display face). And you already have available to you extremely high-quality, well-hinted text faces at a full range of weights.

      • [removed] a day ago
        [deleted]
    • gkoberger a day ago

      Then we aren't disagreeing. I never said anything about stealing or piracy; I agree with you that not being able to afford something doesn't give you the right to take it.

      I think we're responding to different things. You're upset the original person mentioned piracy, whereas I took their rant to be more about licensing changes being yet another way companies are creeping up prices from one-time-purchase to rent-forever. You used to be able to pay for a font and use it in a magazine, but now you have to pay per impression.

      And moreso, I'm annoyed by most of the comments saying that the free fonts on your computer should be enough.

      • tptacek a day ago

        No, we disagree. I think those companies should creep up their prices. There aren't enough type designers employed in the world. The social cost to cumbersome font licensing is essentially zero; in fact, for the reason I gave just one sentence ago, it probably tilts the other direction.

        Further: the free fonts on your computer are enough. You can do the full range of type design with what ships on Win10 or macOS, and you can do it strikingly. I cringe at my dumb blog typefaces today, because I could get an equally striking effect with the standard web font stack; most of the work is in setting the text, not in picking a particularly mannered typeface.

  • [removed] a day ago
    [deleted]
aeturnum a day ago

Typefaces do have functional roles, they {exude} a point in culture and time (the fonts that HN supports certainly time-stamps it).

edit: HN won't allow Fraktur[1] characters, even though they are in the unicode standard. Yet more evidence that font matters for the tone of the message you deliver.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraktur

vunderba a day ago

> A typeface does not have a meaningful functional role in a document

100% incorrect. There are fonts that are made specifically to increase legibility for a dyslexic audience. If that's not a functional role than I don't know what is.

  • tptacek a day ago

    Oh for God's sake. You also can't set an instruction manual entirely in DIN Grindel Milk. The implied subtext was the functional equivalence of free and unfree display fonts. The most popular dyslexia font in the world is free.

    • vunderba a day ago

      Ah that's my bad, I read the first statement without seeing that you prefaced it with "as compared to free alternatives".

      • tptacek a day ago

        Sorry for coming at you that hard, it just felt like a gotcha. But we both misread each other!

  • mrob 21 hours ago

    One dyslexia font was tested and found to have the same legibility as normal fonts:

    "Dyslexie font neither benefits nor impedes the reading process of children with and without dyslexia."

    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11881-017-0154-6

    I'm skeptical that any of these fonts actually make a difference. (Although if you like Comic Sans, you might as well continue using it; it doesn't do any harm.)

[removed] a day ago
[deleted]
butlike 15 hours ago

The truffle, and the font, add _essence_

close04 a day ago

> Truffles have a functional role in a dish

Cheap "truffle oil" can fill that role as much as a free font can fill the role of a premium one. The real truffle and the premium font have a functional role for the few people who can tell either apart. For the rest maybe anything works, just put something on the plate or screen.