http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspxA few days ago when I put up the post Is this the Über-font post? No, but it is the teaser for it! , I did sort of promise that I'd deliver on a post explaining about the issues related to fonts on Windows that plague so many application developers, whetheren-USCommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#627954Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:08:06 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:627954Adam&quot;But applications like Media Player, MS Office applications, Visual Studio, or other apps inside of Microsoft tend to follow their own look and feel.&quot; <br> <br>Why? If I want my UI to use MS Comic Sans all over, applications should respect that. What's the point in having a customisable UI if no-one's going to respect the settings? Very few applications should be picking specific fonts at all, and all that do should *only* be doing so in their client areas (e.g. Word picking document fonts, Explorer picking document fonts, etc...) <br> <br>&quot;What is worse, everything outside of Microsoft has the same issues, but even more so [...]&quot; <br> <br>So? Lead by example. Oh, wait a minute - that would require MS to follow their own UI guidelines and not reinvent their own menu bars, etc..., for each application first. <br> <br>&quot;The [problem] is that no one wanted to modify these fonts [because] there would be subtle differences in the metrics when comparing [them]. [If] you change the [underlying font then] dialogs might start clipping text or looking inorrect. [...] The folks in Microsoft Typography and on the GDI/Uniscribe text services teams [are working hard] to make sure that whatever font was chosen for controls, that text would be displayable.&quot; <br> <br>Right. And how is that not entirely due to Windows' pixel-based layout engine? <br> <br>I'll agree that all the problems you've mentioned are very visibly triggered by changing fonts/text/sizes as part of the l10n process, but I don't see how that can be considered the _cause_. If controls dynamically changed their size based on their content (including fonts) then none of these problems would exist. <br> <br>I'm looking forward to the next post in this series though...http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#627987Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:01:10 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:627987Sorting It All OutYesterday when I posted Why the Windows Shell can't provide the ultimate font solution for everyone (or...http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#628275Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:35:38 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:628275Michael S. KaplanHi Adam -- <br> <br>Applications are not always about taking on the user's 'skin' preferences. If you do not like their look, then you don't have to use that application. But it isn ot a requirement that people follow those settings. <br> <br>We will have to agree to disagree on the other issue, as what you claim is not entirely true (the Windows dialog unit scheme is not a completely pixel-based layout, and it is not always reasonable to assume applications want to be as dynamic a you imply). <br> <br>But I will be covering these issues soon. These first two posts are explaining why certain &quot;solutions&quot; are not the answer. Stay tuned. :-)http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#628492Mon, 12 Jun 2006 21:46:33 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:628492MikeI think part of the problem is that pure win32 has no layout controls and therefore it's really difficult to make a UI that dynamically adjusts itself based on window size, font, etc.http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#628962Tue, 13 Jun 2006 04:31:40 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:628962Dean HardingThe problem with automatically resizing controls is that you can't get it to be &quot;pixel perfect&quot; - it's always just going to be a sort of &quot;approximately right&quot; (except when displayed with exactly the same settings as the original designer, hopefully). <br> <br>Which may or may not be better than having text clipped or not sized properly, depending on the situation. <br> <br>But do believe that it is the way to go. Especially in these days of high-resolution displays. The chances that a dialog will be displayed at exactly the same size as the original designer's is getting smaller anyway (for example, you might design your application at 96 DPI but display it on a 144 DPI display). While it may be practical to review/re-layout your dialogs for each supported OS version (and possibly also for each OS version + language supported, but even then you're moving into the realms of you-must-be-a-large-company-with-lots-of-designers-to-be-able-to-write-good-looking-apps) but it's impossible to expect anyone to review their dialog layouts on all OS versions, all languages AND all possible DPI-settings (simply because there's an infinite number of DPI settings). <br> <br>So if you need some sort of dynamic resizing for high-DPI displays, then it seems to make sense to extend that for different fonts as well. <br> <br>Which is why I'm welcoming Avalon/WPF. I don't know if it handles resizing based on what font is being used (though I hope it does) it certainly automatically handles the high-DPI issue well.http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#629083Tue, 13 Jun 2006 07:23:11 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:629083Michael S. KaplanAs much as I appreciate everyone's efforts to continue &nbsp;to steer things off topic, I would love it if (at this point) everyone thinking about layout controls could simply bite their tongue for the moment. It will be much easier to steer through this complex topic if we can keep the issues of each topic where they belong so we can focus things a bit..... <BR><BR>This post and the one that followed it are about the attempts at "Shell" font solutions and why they do not work. <BR><BR>In future posts I will be talking about the solutions in GDI and Uniscribe. <BR><BR>And then I will talk about Avalon (WPF) and composite fonts -- both the good and the bad. At that point I will talk about some of the general features and also some of problems with other solutions involving dynamic layouts.... <BR><BR>This would be a great point to bring up the great feelings everyone has about this type of solution &nbsp;-- rather than spreading their (obviously) strong feelings haphazardly across other posts that are not about dynamic layouts. :-)http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#629245Tue, 13 Jun 2006 11:29:04 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:629245Adam:) <br> <br>Sorry for seeming like I'm trying to drag it off-topic. That wasn't my intention, so I'll wait patiently for the next post in the series.http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#634128Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:38:48 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:634128Sorting It All OutI have not been shy about criticizing stuff provided by the Windows Shell in the past, but it is not...http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#637557Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:30:20 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:637557Jerry PiskSo basically if my application is required to support all Windows version out there I must use one of the fonts avilable with Windows 95 (Microsoft Sans Serif most likely). If I want my application to fit in Vista I have two options: <br> <br>1. Create multiple versions of my resources, one for each versions of Windows, with that version's fonts (Microsoft Sans Serif, Tahoma, Segoe UI) and then load thr appropriate one. This would get harder if my application creates fonts of the fly (not that it should). <br> <br>2. Tell all my users to upgrade to Vista or replace me. <br> <br>Am I missing something here? Maybe we should all just follow what Microsoft is doing with their applications and completely disregard all UI recomendations and just develop our own UI. I mean, Office has been doing it ever since I have been using Office. Why does Windows even have UI API? Not even Microsoft is using it.http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#637587Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:52:49 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:637587Michael S. KaplanHi Jerry -- <br> <br>It really is a problem, one that (if there were a setting that was documeneted as changing with each version) you would have to test in each version to avoid clipping, each time. Since no one likes that idea, moving to a new font has to be a conscious choice that does involve reviewing the results -- or it has to be an explicit decision to pick the font you want....http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#641504Wed, 21 Jun 2006 18:14:34 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:641504Jerry PiskI do agree with the set of problems that shell font substitution comes with. What I was wondering is how do you actually write an application that follows the look of the platform it runs on. Looks to me that creating separate resources for each known platform seems to be the only option. And at that point it's probably just easier to do what Office has been doing - ignore the platform's look and feel and use your own. Which makes a mockery of Microsoft's published UI guidelines (not necessarily a bad thing).http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#641651Wed, 21 Jun 2006 18:58:15 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:641651Michael S. KaplanHi Jerry, <br> <br>Well, given the vast number of differences even within what the Shell has in fonts that are used, I'd say that particular variability is not unreasonable -- just pick the piece of the platfrom you like the look of asnd go with that font. :-) <br> <br>But this does not mean that all of the guidelines are unreasonable....http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#690215Sun, 06 Aug 2006 21:33:32 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:690215Sorting It All Out <br>Okay, I admit it. When I pronounce the word italics, I say EYE-talics, not IH-talics. But I do say...http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#1606163Mon, 05 Feb 2007 23:09:38 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:1606163Sorting It All Out<p>There are the lies we tell others, and there are the lies we tell ourselves. And then sometimes there</p> http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#6803896Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:55:59 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:6803896darkan9el<p>So can the system font or Office 2007 font be changed and if so how?</p>http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#6804036Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:09:50 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:6804036Michael S. Kaplan<p>Not sure what you mean by system font of Office 2007 font, though for the former there are settings in the Desktop applet in the control panel and for the latter there is no way to change the UI font but obviously document fonts in templates can be modified.</p> <p>So the answer is either YES or NO, depending on what you meant....</p> http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#7146146Fri, 18 Jan 2008 08:05:17 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:7146146Ian Boyd<p>&quot;Since no one likes that idea, moving to a new font has to be a conscious choice...&quot;</p> <p>Let the conscious choice be my use of a &nbsp;substitution font named &quot;MS Shell Dlg That Changes With Every Version Of Windows And I Accept Full Responsibility If My Application Becomes Clipped And Unusable&quot;.</p> <p>That is if font face names can be 136 characters long.</p> <p>(Yes, posting 2 years late. But it did say &quot;what do you think about it?&quot;...)</p>http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#7187567Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:55:35 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:7187567Ian Boyd<p>&quot;Because there would be subtle differences in the metrics when comparing Microsoft Sans Serif to Tahoma to Segoe UI to MS Sans Serif and so on. And that means that if you change the definition of the undrlying font technology used by the Shell that dialogs might start clipping text or looking inorrect.&quot;</p> <p>i just don't understand: why might dialogs start clipping text or looking incorrect? Are dialogs not laid out in dialog units? Do dialog units not scale with subtle differences in the metrics of fonts?</p> <p>And if not, do DLUs continue to have an advantage?</p>http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/06/11/626100.aspx#8871419Sat, 16 Aug 2008 10:12:57 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:8871419Sorting it all Out<p>At first it was exciting though there was fear it was science fiction (ref: The so-called Ultimate Keyboard</p>