🚀 go-pugleaf

From postnews Tue Apr 10 11:45:56 1990
In article <18000049@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, morris@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu writes:
> 
> >The two articles quoted don't contradict each other on the facts, but
> >they take different views of the implications. One points out, perhaps
> >correctly, that Royal is a technical triumph.  From this, the author
> >supposes that it will win because it *deserves* to win. 
> 
> >The other article points out that Adobe has a large, hairy arm around
> >the market's neck.  From this, the author supposes that Postscript
> >will win because it's *already* won. 
> 
> In the April 1990 Macworld they have a very well written analysis of Royal and
> its implications. The basic reason behind Royal is dollars and cents. As the
> article says, "`Royal fonts will be considerably less expensive than current
> PostScript fonts because you won't have any royalties attached to them'". This
> fact is quite significant. For if there is one thing that changes everything, it
> is money. Yes, Apple has a better technology (quadratic curve definition vs.
> cubic which render faster), and the new system will simplify the rats nest of
> problems caused by font ID conflicts. But the real reason Royal will succeed
> while other great technology has failed is quite simple. Royal makes cents!
> By breaking the monopolistic power of Adobe, and providing the font technology
> without licencing fees, Apple has certainly executed a coup. Royal fonts will
> be cheaper and easier to use. And better. They will work for the same reason

  Well, I didn't realize that Apple was going to develop, design and
give away all their Royal faces for free. ;-)  Don't forget that some
of the licensing fees come not for the font rendering technology, but
for the right to copy the font (owned by the type foundries) using
your particular rendering technology. Someone still has to design those
fonts, etc. and its a major task *and* very few designers get rich
designing just fonts. Of course, we can continue the bad and 
confusing practice (my feeling) of having, for example, Helvetica
followed by another company's copycat design called Swiss, and
anothers called Geneva, etc. etc. ad nauseum.
  As to whether Royal is better technology, I keep reading that, but
no one has gone into any details as to why. How is it going to make
type face design easier? How is it going to make the designers job
easier on the end product? What difference am I going to see when
I design a newsletter, poster, or ad for a client?  Aside from
excerting some price pressure, (not a small consideration, granted,
but, I don't think the price of fonts is as "elastic" as some
people think it is) no one has fleshed out what these promised
advantages are going to do for me as and end-user/designer.  
   As to the price of fonts...I doubt this is going to mean one can
buy 50 fonts for $50.00.  This is just wishful thinking of the
cadre of Mac owners who refuse to let go of their old machines, 
and want to run Pagemaker, Photoshop, AUX and multifinder on their
128K Macs and are angry at the world because they can't.
  Most of the big money in this arena is in the mid to high end 
design shops and the cost of an  font is a *very* small part of a
an overall design job.  Plus, I have already bought my dozen or so
Adobe fonts. The cost has already been incurred. There is no 
apparent (not yet) reason for me to incur the cost again.
   Now, as to quadratic vs. cubic curves/math. My understanding is
that quadratic involves simpler math, but far more points to 
calculate along the curve, while cubic math is more complex but
has fewer points on the curve. I have also read the font designers
actually prefer *fewer* points, not more. Has something to do with
non-computer, "artsy" criteria like elegance of the curve, etc.
But who knows at this point? What difference will that make to me
as an end user? 
   Anyway, sorry this is so long and rambling. So far, however, 
John Warnock's quote from back in September still holds true for
me - there is a still a large quantity of mumbo jumbo in all this.
Now for my prejudices - I own nearly every product Adobe has
published and don't regret it, likewise with Pagemaker, and I have
owned 3 Apple machines - Apple II+ to SE/30 and haven't regretted
those either. Finally, I would rather return to quill and ink than
to rely on getting consistant and competant products from Microsoft.
Apple joined forces with the dark side when it entered into that
pact with MS.]
-Paul Hudy <egapmh@ecsvax>
UNC-General Administration