You should ask Martin Kotulla, and you might as well ask Sean Cavanaugh about the Fontsite opentype collection...

You are hilarious, tell me, what will you do this weekend? hanging around with Sean and Martin and having a good old ball with 2,222 font names that I just showed and no multiple variation font names (Rough, Funky, Dirty, etc.) and featuring approx. 15,000+ typefaces in Windows & Macintosh OpenType format that each comes in two forms - "TrueType" and "PostScript" - marking as a total of approx. 30,000+ typefaces included.

This party, which may cost very expensive, should be LOTS of fun, be sure to post some snapshots, straight to us, off course!

DDD1988Redux, a simple question: is spamming discussion boards what you wanted to be doing with your life when you were a child and imagined what future you might have?

There's a very thin line between a very smart robot and a very stupid human.

hhp

There's a very thin line between a very smart robot and a very stupid human.

Not that I've noticed…except that very stupid humans can vote. Bummer.

@hrant – Look at "Computer Stupidities". I do not think any robot with a skerrick of intelligence, let alone self-respect, would be caught out like that.

Thank you very much. This is actually a useful list to have.

+1 to what Indra said. Thanks.

Better yet, how did you derive it?

Can you prove you're human?

hhp

@Derek
When you post long lists, it would be much easier for everyone if you could either post them to a website (providing a link here) or at least convert the format to a plain old comma-separated list instead of a three or four-yard long vertically scrolling text list :)

Personally, I find your lists quite useful. It's nice to have fairly complete lists of these collections - no matter what their origins may be.

- Herb

might be interesting to find out what softmaker have to say:

http://www.softmaker.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=11972&p=42225#p42225

they seem to know Derek, as do the MyFonts people, apparently. I don't know what to think about this now. If, Derek, you do understand what I am saying, please read the words by mr Kotulla in the Softmaker forum. It seems at least some things you have said are not true, according to him. I am interested in real knowledge on these subjects, but now it is hard to tell if it is, or if it isjust fantasy. Please explain why you post this stuff...

sorry, if I hurt your feelings with previous posts, but please understand that this can easily be misunderstood as spam.

HVB:

For your convenience, I uploaded a ASCII file here:
http://www.sanskritweb.net/forgers/megafont.txt

Queneau:

The list is no "baloney", as Mr. Kotolla said at his sofmaker forum.
In fact, the list is more or less Mr. Kotulla's own font renaming list.

Please note: I only stated that the above LIST is no "baloney".

Ah Uli, glad you chime in here.

You seem to know a lot about all this stuff. I would like to know what are current and/or former connections between URW (URW++), Softmaker and FontSite. I still do not understand it. Basically the comparable fonts by URW, SM and FS have the same outlines (I checked) so they can be set in one paragraph without noticable difference. The do have different kerning and character sets though, and the FS fonts are now in OpenType with several OT features. They seem to develop the same base material on their own. So do Softmaker. But I thought that Softmaker licensed the fonts from URW, or bought the rights when they went bankrupt. But they claim to have licensed them from URW++ (URWs succesor), which brings the question if they now activily work together or not? I would not be interested in this, if the core set of fonts (outlines, metrics) was not sound, which they are, but I am curious how they can be offered for such different prices, under so many different names....

BTW It seems a core set of fonts that features on the SM collections, seem to be on almost all cheap font CDs here, like the Data Becker CD, Franzis font collections, Clickart packages, Serif font collections, etc. It's a jungle out there...

Derek,

Forgive me for pointing this out, but this entire thread smells suspiciously of Spam…

It's blatant advertising, sure, but at least it is relevant to this site.

Just found this discussion on myfonts:

http://www.myfonts.com/WhatTheFont/forum/case/160396/

I must say: impressive, even if you just made it all up. Jeez

Too bad that bumping a big post doesn't get it re-read. Not! ]:-D (That's the 'devilish laughter' smiley, btw.)

]:-D (That's the 'devilish laughter' smiley, btw.)

I have always used }:-D, the square bracket striking me as more of a crown.

Odd. The curly bracket reminds me of a tiara...

Hmmm, perhaps it is best not to dabble in such things... I do like this combo though {]:-D

Karl...that's some interesting reading.

Get his teacher to explain that here too.

hhp

If Mr Despie is indeed autistic and obsessed with type, maybe there is some way to channel that obsession into something more interesting and useful to the community than a collection of clones of old fonts that no one much cares about. Seriously, this is deeply boring stuff: the detritus of the desktop publishing rush to digitise. The diamonds among the heaps of slag are few and far between, and most of them have long since been produced in better digital versions by the true trademark owners.

It is something like a cross between Luc and Uli's content but without their unique filters and could be put to far better uses. I suppose if it continues that it may well attract the same attention as it did on MyFonts and Wikipedia.