To test every letter in the English Language Alphabet use The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog, and not The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.
Otherwise you miss the s.
EDIT: Some fun reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pangrams
Grumpy wizards make toxic brew for the evil Queen and Jack.
(maybe the first time that's been written)
Both nouns get an adjective; foxes are usually red, dogs tend to be brown; Put simply, I just prefer this version.
It's hilarious how violently negative people's response to this suggestion was.
What does that mean? There's no real license information anywhere.
In general, unless you live in Burma or something, you can assume that if you don't have a license, you can't do anything with any content.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Copyright_notices_in...
This change was because The Night of the Living Dead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Living_Dead#Copyri...
THAT particular coup would make any font designer get a faraway look in their eyes.
I really like the update.
This seems to be a classic case of form vs. function.
The reality is Comic Sans is awful to look at. But the big problem is its ubiquity because amateurs are drawn to it, much like Papyrus.
Honest question: Why? What does this even mean? What makes a font "awful"? Surely this is a matter of personal taste and/or collective fashions?
I guess I'm an outlier since it's become cool to be a font nerd, but I really do not give a shit about typefaces. Except for difficult-to-read cursive scripts, pretty much everything looks fine. I find it difficult to conceive of how so many people get so worked up over this stuff.
Something comes close though. Dismissing critics as amateurs without further discussion, and also saying anyone who doesn't intuitively agree has no aesthetic sensibility (as is said in a child comment below). These substance free dismissals are equivalent to your criticism of the creator's comments.
ftfy. I find that unquestioning love for Helvetica and hate for Comic Sans go hand in hand.
1) Have Apple branded computer - check.
2) Do not know how to add content to a CMS - check.
3) Incapable of making the smallest tweak to CSS - check.
4) Move files around with a DropBox type gadget and have to get a 'developer' to 'FTP' that PDF to a server - check.
5) Only 'design' for Mac screens with a minimum resolution of Full HD even though the iphone has been out for a while - check.
6) Take inspiration from the latest site-du-jour in a me-too copy-and-paste way, bringing no blue sky thinking to the table - check.
7) Think in terms of CMYK and DPI at all times - check.
8) Never use client content in mock ups, go for Lorem Ipsum when shapes on a page are needed - check.
9) Throw a tantrum if a developer or client makes the slightest change from the cast in stone design mockups for a good reason such as usability - check.
10) Mock 'Comic Sans' - wow I am a real designer now!!!
https://github.com/belluzj/fantasque-sans
You either hate it or love it, and I find it gorgeous on Sublime Text.
But mostly, I think that font looks pretty nice.
You will notice some issues if you use Windows Chrome, which doesn't render TTF well, particularly italics and obliques.
The fix for this is to include SVG font files. I excluded SVG as they're 'advertised' as only existing to support legacy iOS. Today I found out that's not entirely the case.
As for licensing, I provide the files for free for now and state on the site 'No attribution acquired'. I'm being vague because at this point I'm undecided whether to start selling it or not.
Thanks :D
Right now, I have no idea if I'm able to use the font for a website or for a mobile application. You may provide .woff and @font-face .css, but you don't explicitly say that redistribution through @font-face is allowed. I also have no idea if I can embed the font in a mobile application (phonegap/cordova) through @font-face.
That's what bugs me when designers provide 'for free' font files on a behance page, and what is also the case here: I am explicitly authorized to install the file locally, sometimes I am explicitly authorized to use it for 'commercial projects', and almost never am I explicitly allowed to redistribute it (which renders possible to use it on a website with @font-face or in a mobile or desktop app). As a developer, that sucks. That makes it seem like the 'free font' is for designers only (in the sense of: people that will only use the font to make an image, not a document, not a program).
These problems are of course already solved by the SIL open font license (http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=OFL_web): with fonts released under this license, I am able to fix problems with the font (kerning etc...), I am able to redistribute it (@font-face, embed) AND the original designer is protected from people who want to sell the font ("The OFL allows the licensed fonts to be used, studied, modified and redistributed freely as long as they are not sold by themselves.").
If you want to sell the font, go ahead and do it! However, promoting it here as free font for a limited time to a crowd of people who have a good chance of being developers, well...
That's really cool! Thanks!
[1]: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=137692
[2]: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=331115
It never ceases to amaze me how much shit web-tech can pile together without toppling completely over.
0: http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Typographic-Style-Robert-Brin...
“A man who would letterspace lower case would steal sheep, Frederic Goudy liked to say. If this wisdom needs updating, it is chiefly to add that a woman who would letterspace lower case would steal sheep as well.”
Anytime I see someone insisting on using Comic Sans, I gently inform them that Comic Sans isn't even a good comic font, and point them to Blambot, where they can get better ones.
There, now you have an excuse.
Doesn't this directly make Comic Neue inferior to Comic Sans for people with dyslexia, one of the original fonts plus points.
Just a little gripe of mine, to be honest, but it's really one of the only positive things to the font, and having it removed in the process of attempting to improve the font is a bit funny to me.
Otherwise I think it could be a usable font (if not for the prevailing opinion about comic sans).
In Word it looks ok but I'm not sure if selecting Comic Neue and italics will use the oblique version or not?
The oblique *.ttf files where last modified March 14 in the file I downloaded.
It's "Neue Helvetica", not "Helvetica Neue". It's only called "Helvetica Neue" in lists for the sake of alphabetical sorting.
German "Neue" always stands before the noun. "New Helvetica" -> "Neue Helvetica". The generic form is "Neu", so "Helvetica New" -> "Helvetica Neu".
If you can do the same with Papyrus you will be knighted.
Marvellous.
When more discerning people around me criticise it, I send them off to read: http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/im-comic-sans-asshole
Thanks for the refresh, OP. I can't wait to see where I can sneak this in.
It's even CC-licensed.
It's half as honest. It's dilute Comic Sans. It's the diet coke of casual.
Also, Rondouillar: http://www.dafont.com/rondouillard.font?l[]=1
Although if you're trying to optimize specifically for dyslexia, you'd be better off with something like OpenDyslexic [1].
