I'd like to show you two commercial fonts, more precisely: a German foundry's demo versions of these fonts, and to be really exact: 

These are (or should be) two quite different Central European elementary school handwriting programs. 

#1 and #2 are basically the same: Austria's longhand «Schulschrift 1995», slanted version.  
— According to the files' stats, this particular font was published in 2005. 

Font #3 is called «SAS», that would be «Schulausgangsschrift 1968», obligatory (or preferred) elementary school handwriting program in all East German states including the Federal Capital Berlin, and also common in some West German states, including Bavaria. 
— According to the file's stats, this particular font was published in 2012. 

Re #1 and #2, Austria's longhand 1995, «Schulschrift 1995», slanted version, cf. the Austrian Federal Ministry of Education's authoritative version: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1995_Schulschrift_2._Schraegschrift.jpg
Re #3, Schulausgangsschrift 1968, «SAS», cf. Dr. Renate Tost's authentic version: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Schulausgangsschrift_1968.png

 

Hm, and now back to the commercial fonts — is it my imagination, or is something wrong there?

 

Sorry, I don’t follow. What are you asking about? Design differences? Technical problems? Copyright concerns? …?

21 minutes ago, Ralf Herrmann said:

Sorry, I don’t follow. What are you asking about? Design differences? Technical problems? Copyright concerns? …?

It's the lack of differences, that is bothering me. 

#1 and #2 (2005), look a lot like the official version of the Austrian Schulschrift 1995 (perhaps a tad too much?…), but: the so called «SAS» #3 (2012) doesn't look like the authentic German SAS 1968; one could say, it looks much more Austrian than it probably should, IHMO. 

The most conspicuous thing is the lower case x of fonts #1, #2, and #3 — that's always an Austrian x. 

AFAIK, «SAS» shouldn't have an Austrian lower case x, and so forth. 

And since even the key-ins match mostly, I'm inclined to suppose, #3 is some sort of a «genetic chimera»?

Here a broader comparison:  

— Since this comparison contains some fonts that are basically approved by the proper authority (at least one of the Austrian ones) and/or more authentic than the fonts in question, now the particular lower case-x «dilemma» of font #3 is certainly clearly visible. 

What’s the source for the SAS font in question?

http://schulschriften.de/html/downloads.html

Addendum/Corrigendum:

http://schulschriften.de/html/body_schreibschrift.html#SAS 

http://schulschriften.de/Font_SAS_Demo [.] zip