Microsoft's fonts are used to display most Web pages on the planet. Even Linux and Mac users, who often have fled Windows to avoid dependence on Microsoft, read most of their content using Microsoft fonts.
Microsoft's font monopoly is due to the "Core fonts for the Web" program it launched in 1996. About 10 font families--including familiar names like Arial, Georgia, Verdana and Times New Roman--were made available "for free to the Web community, on all platforms" as Microsoft told the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) at the time. The fonts have served us well. They've improved both aesthetics and interoperability on the Web, and they look good in a wide range of sizes. Unfortunately, Microsoft decided to close the project in 2002. The fonts are still available for anyone to use, but not to change. It is illegal to add support for more non-Western scripts.
The time has come to break the Microsoft monopoly on fonts. This is easier than it sounds. There are thousands of font families on the Web--I call them Web fonts--that are freely available for anyone to use. One such font family, for example, is Goodfish, an elegant serifed font designed by Ray Larabie in 2000. It comes in four variants (regular, italic, bold, bold italic), which are encoded as four TrueType files. When zipped, the files take up about 100k of memory. That's about the same file size as a small photograph.
Ray Larabie has generously allowed Goodfish and other fonts to be used by anyone, for free. And there are many other Web font designers. Some of their fonts look weird, and some only cover the English alphabet. Some are only suitable for print or for use in headings. Still, these fonts represent a huge untapped typographic resource for the Web.
In order to use Web fonts, browsers must be modified to start looking for TrueType files outside of the local machine. CSS2 style sheets can already refer to Web fonts, so there's no need for a new standard.
Browsers are already pretty good at finding information on the Web, and adding fonts to the list should be simple. There are plenty of benefits waiting on the other side: Font designers will find an outlet for their creativity, users will get visually richer content, and non-Western scripts can easily be added. Also, Web page designers can often use Web fonts instead of images to get their designs across.
Some will claim that Web fonts cannot be supported due to the risk of piracy. It is feared that people will put fonts on the Web without having permission to do so. As we know, this sometimes happens with images. Unlike some images, however, TrueType fonts carry information about permissible use. The font will know whether it's OK for it to be installed on a remote system. Only fonts that allow this should be considered for use by browsers. And even if the font is installable, browsers should not install it so that other applications can use the font. The font should be used only by the browser, and perhaps to display only pages that actively request that font.
Just as the visual appearance of the Web changed dramatically when images were introduced by Mosaic in 1993, the Web can change yet again if browsers start supporting Web fonts. I believe it will benefit everyone on the Web.
Everyone except, perhaps, the monopolist.
Biography
Håkon Wium Lie is chief technology officer of
See more CNET content tagged:
monopoly,
font,
TrueType,
designer,
Web browser
Good Luck.
Rather than spending time name calling ("Everyone will be happy except the *monopolist*"), fix the bugs in the Opera browser that cause it to crash way more than IE or FF. Opera blows away FF and IE in features, but it's too unstable to use. It's pretty ugly to look at as well.
Rather than namecalling ("everyone will be happy except the *Monopolist*"), get to work fixing your product. Opera blows away FF and IE in features, but is very unstable; too unstable to use as my main browser. It's also ugly to look at and feels clunky. And Opera's problems are not the fault of the "Monopolist".
Oh, and regarding your namecalling, I think I'd rather be a "monopolist" than a "whiner", any day.
the record Typefaces are NOT protected under copyright law.
That's why every font foundry on the planet tries to sell their
fonts as "software" or include utilities with it.
Technically though, a typeface is NOT protected under copyright
law. While the law should change, it currently does NOT protect
typefaces. It's a gray area because technically installing a font on
your computer could be considered a "program" but the design
of the typeface is not protected.
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=70132
And how, exactly, does the supposed monopolist get hurt by people using somebody else's free fonts?
I think you need to get your head out of that anti-MS fog just long enough to start at least trying to make sense.
I'm all for embedded fonts technology, but blaming the current state of web fonts on Microsoft and actually faulting them for giving away hundreds of thousands (or perhaps millions) of dollars in fonts only goes to show how deep your anti-MS psychosis goes.
And how, exactly, does the supposed monopolist get hurt by people using somebody else's free fonts?
I think you need to get your head out of that anti-MS fog just long enough to start at least trying to make sense.
I'm all for embedded fonts technology, but blaming the current state of web fonts on Microsoft and actually faulting them for giving away hundreds of thousands (or perhaps millions) of dollars in fonts only goes to show how deep your anti-MS psychosis goes.
There is always a catch with MS products.
The Internet is open and so in time all the features of the Internet should be open too.
Did you ever consider the fact that market share is for PR people to worry about, not techies like Lie?
And let's ignore, for one second, the fact that Lie invented CSS, and let's instead bash his attempts to further improve the web.
Yes, that sounds like a good way to go about things...
if you want to look at prettier fonts, here are a few websites:
1001fonts.com and dafont.com
as you can see, there's plenty of other fonts out there that also come in italic, bold, and bold italic. no one applies them because they make no sense to apply them. there's nothing to gain except a different aesthetic. no new funtionality, and extraordinarily huge amounts of fonts to choose from.
which will you choose?
As font developers, we appreciate your taking the time to point out the importance of fonts.
Microsoft has not really closed their core-fonts project. Over 1 year ago, Microsoft issued a press-release informing the world (including their competitors) that their fonts were available for licensing through Ascender (www.ascendercorp.com).
Ascender would be pleased tp license Opera or any other product (operating system, application or device) to include almost any of Microsoft's currently shipping fonts, including the Web Core Fonts.
For a small fraction of what Microsoft has invested in font technologies, research and development, their competitors can ship the same fonts in their products.
Microsoft is only guilty of appreciating the importance of fonts and of being willing to invest continously for more than 17 years. We believe that this early appreciation of fonts has contributed to Microsoft's success.
We look forward to providing Arial, Georgia, Verdana and Times New Roman to all who wish to license them and Microsoft looks forward to our doing so.
With respect to your comments on piracy. It is true that some fonts carry information about permissable use. However, it is not true that a font knows; "whether it's OK to be installed on a remote system." Developers and users do need to respect the fact that fonts are valuable intellectual property (as you point out) and that their use is subject to license.
We look forward to talking with anyone wishing to license the Microsoft fonts.
Ascender Corporation
www.ascendercorp.com
Everyone except, perhaps, the monopolist."
How do fonts benefit microsoft? Once again it must be MS's fault. This rests squarely on the shoulders of the browser and font makers. I doubt Gates and Ballmer are losing sleep over the fear of competing fonts....well they do tend to be almost insane about stuff like that....but I still doubt it.
With everything MS has done, I put standardizing fonts, which you see as monopolizing, pretty low on the list.
...so let's criticize them for it. Of course, such innovations are usually overlooked entirely - at least this one gets some attention.
all this guy is doing is to try to improve the web and add a little
diversity. I would love to be able to use more than the few
standard fonts and know that everyone who looks at my website
is going to see what I am intending them to see. Fact is that it
rarely works like that because not everyone is happy to
download a font to read a website. More fonts mean more
choices for designers and a more interesting internet
experience.
Because M$ have over 90% of browser market share, terms of
design are dictated to every web designer. IE 6 doesnt support
transparent PNG, much css doesnt work in IE and they point
blank refuse to cooperate with the W3C about making their
browser work as a standard. These things are bad for web users,
designers who have to design IE work arounds and customers
who have to pay extra for the time taken to design these work
arounds. The fonts are just another legacy of Microsoft's
domination that is not necassarily a good thing.
my OSX iBook. The fonts are different.
Maybe it's my systems, but I don't follow this "supposed"
monopoly. Maybe it's M$ who took the fonts from Apple and
then forced them back unto the public via the Web.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/7505/
Programmer #A-5 of www.totallyparanoia.com
Programmer #A-5 at www.totallyparanoia.com
IE has support for embedded fonts since version 4.0. A freely available tool called WEFT (http://www.microsoft.com/typography/web/embedding/weft3/) takes a TrueType font, subsets and compresses it into a EOT file, which can then to attach to a CSS stylesheet. The technology was licensed from a company called em2-solutions, based in Stockholm, Sweden--not that far from Opera's headquarter incidently.
- The { and } don't work
-
by Alex V-M
August 15, 2007 12:04 AM PDT
- The curly brackets or braces are not displayed properly with the Goodfish font for me. The left one instead displays a Greek Lambda and the right one Larabie Fonts in writing.
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
See all 47 Comments >>