> >On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, Michael Brady wrote:
> >> It resembles Arial because Arial is a jot-for-tittle and tit-for-tat
> >> of Helvetica, just under another manufacturer's name.
> >In fact, that's not the case, Michael. The designs are quite different:
> >just compare the lc 't', or uc 'G', for instance. AFAIK, Arial was
> >designed to fit into Helvetica's metrics, so that it would give the same
> >copy length, but the shapes themselves are different.
Sorry, I was being a little puckish about Arial, I admit.
And I admit also that I had not made a very close comparison. But when I saw
what Bill's boys up in Redmond had added to the Windows suite of fonts, I
immediately thought of all the Helvetica rip-offs of the old Compugraphic days,
fonts like Megaron and Helvetian ... and, I thought, Arial.
The differences are there, but to me the overall effect of Arial is that it is a
16 Pedestal Rock Lane
Durham, NC 27712
Voice 919 471 9554 fax 919 962 2707
[log in to unmask] http://www.unc.edu/~jbrady/index.html