Re: Word 2004 installed fonts options
From: John McGhie (john_at_mcghie.name)
Date: 05/27/04
- Next message: John McGhie: "Re: Word 2004 - "Can't load Visual Basic for Applications""
- Previous message: John McGhie: "Re: Windows Word can't open Mac documents"
- Maybe in reply to: Beth Rosengard: "Re: Word 2004 installed fonts options"
- Next in thread: Elliott Roper: "Re: Word 2004 installed fonts options"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 18:43:43 +1000
Mark:
I happen to agree with you that there should be only system font folders.
However, I have been persuaded that Unix admins consider fonts to be a user
resource, and as such, each user should have their own copy.
Replacing fonts is not an option on the Mac, because users "can" customise
them. On Windows, MS does replace/upgrade fonts, but that is not seen as
good citizenship on the Mac.
cheers
On 27/5/04 6:05 AM, in article 2004052616053675249%markgreen0045@hotmailcom,
"mark green" <mark_green0045@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Paul,
> So then why not just write over the old versions of the fonts with the
> new ones in the library font folder. Why keep adding more without
> clearing out the old. Why do you say its better for fonts to be placed
> in the users fonts folder rather then the libraries where the OS puts
> all the fonts ?
>
> The "clutter" I'm talking about is not referring to the amount of hard
> disk these extra fonts take, I can handle that. The problem with having
> hundreds of fonts in either the users or the libraries font folder is
> that it causes programs startup times to slow down and causes lags in
> font menus. This is why I'm trying to minimize the amount of fonts I
> absolutely need in font folders and have suitcase manage the rest of
> them. The problem with our "modern computers" are the slow hard drives
> we have to wait on all the time to load these extras up.
>
> Phillip,
> I don't have OS 9 installed on my system, im running 10.3.3 only.
>
> On 2004-05-26 13:09:57 -0400, "Phillip M. Jones, CE.T."
> <pjones@kimbanet.com> said:
>
>> In taht case you need to open Fontbook in panther and turn off the
>> version in OS9 so that Word "only uses" the new versions.
>>
>> Paul Berkowitz wrote:
>>
>>> That would be rather unfortunate, I'm afraid. What with the change to
>>> Unicode in Word, lots of the Microsoft fonts have been upgraded. They have
>>> the same names as before, and as other fonts in your computer, but they're
>>> different versions. In particular the four Unicode fonts - Times New Roman,
>>> Trebuchet MS, Verdana and an Asian font - MS Mincho, I think - are
>>> completely different and mach bigger than before : they have all the Unicode
>>> glyphs. They will substitute for any fonts where such Unicode glyphs are
>>> needed. Dump them at your peril.
>>>
>>> Naturally Word needs fonts, and the correct place is in your user Fonts
>>> folder. It's best just to leave things be. modern computers have immense
>>> hard disks and the space taken up by the "clutter" of fonts is well worth
>>> it. I'm sure there's a way to get them to work with Suitcase too.
>
>
-- Please reply to the newsgroup to maintain the thread. Please do not email me unless I ask you to. John McGhie <john@mcghie.name> Consultant Technical Writer Sydney, Australia +61 4 1209 1410
- Next message: John McGhie: "Re: Word 2004 - "Can't load Visual Basic for Applications""
- Previous message: John McGhie: "Re: Windows Word can't open Mac documents"
- Maybe in reply to: Beth Rosengard: "Re: Word 2004 installed fonts options"
- Next in thread: Elliott Roper: "Re: Word 2004 installed fonts options"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
