Even in the art department, Microsoft ships a shoddy knockoff...
kqr · 3h ago
Well-written. I learned a lot!
Would have been interesting to also see a note about Verdana, and know if Microsoft shifting away from Arial as the default sans serif has changed its popularity as much as one might think.
simondotau · 2h ago
For a while IKEA used Verdana as their corporate typeface, to the howls of despair from font aficionados everywhere.
Personally, I loved it. I think it really encapsulated the idea of it’s so bad that it’s good and really suited the “assembled at home“ vibe.
duskwuff · 1h ago
I don't understand the Verdana hate. It's a decent screen font, especially at low resolutions. It may not be ideal for print, but that isn't what it was designed for.
musicale · 25m ago
Verdana is underrated. It's a legible screen font, and I greatly prefer it to the dreadful spindly font (Segoe UI?) that Windows 11 uses.
elevation · 58m ago
These days, Verdana is generally an indicator of either organisational decay or incompetence, especially when used in print, which it wasn’t designed for.
It hasn’t been a default in tools for decades, so it suggests either the organization hasn’t been able to afford to refresh the design for 25 years or the designer is incompetent.
Hate is a strong word, but Verdana is almost certainly the wrong font for your business branding in 2025.
qu1j0t3 · 1h ago
1) Overexposure.
Same problem that Georgia has: Otherwise a very serviceable Matthew Carter design.
2) It's a screen font.
In print and display applications, it really does look gross.
Source: someone who picked up a bit of knowledge about typography, but never used it professionally
Spooky23 · 2h ago
It’s very refreshing to read something about typefaces that isn’t glazing the magnificence of Helvetica!
simondotau · 2h ago
Helvetica is like vanilla. Often mischaracterised as plain and “default choice”, when done well it’s a distinct taste all of its own. In the hands of a master chef, it can be spectacular. But the majority of it is low effort and low quality.
qu1j0t3 · 1h ago
Yeah basically true; it's described as "neutral" but it absolutely is not.
I have to admit, though, the New Haas revival is so amazingly good that it makes me want to like Helvetica.
Apple's Geneva seems to be another take on Helvetica, though designed to match the Mac's original bitmap font.
The Scourge of Arial (2001) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10538384 - Nov 2015 (26 comments)
Would have been interesting to also see a note about Verdana, and know if Microsoft shifting away from Arial as the default sans serif has changed its popularity as much as one might think.
Personally, I loved it. I think it really encapsulated the idea of it’s so bad that it’s good and really suited the “assembled at home“ vibe.
It hasn’t been a default in tools for decades, so it suggests either the organization hasn’t been able to afford to refresh the design for 25 years or the designer is incompetent.
Hate is a strong word, but Verdana is almost certainly the wrong font for your business branding in 2025.
Same problem that Georgia has: Otherwise a very serviceable Matthew Carter design.
2) It's a screen font.
In print and display applications, it really does look gross.
Source: A Friendly neighbourhood typographer
https://xkcd.com/1015/
https://xkcd.com/3113/
Source: someone who picked up a bit of knowledge about typography, but never used it professionally
I have to admit, though, the New Haas revival is so amazingly good that it makes me want to like Helvetica.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helvetica_(film)
(though it's marred by Arial being passed off for Helvetica in at least one showing)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVhlJNJopOQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8PdffUfoF0