
Monotype launches the first redesign of Helvetica in 35 years - oedmarap
https://www.creativeboom.com/resources/monotype-launches-the-first-redesign-in-35-years-of-the-worlds-most-ubiquitous-font-helvetica/
======
neilpanchal
Helvetica’s relatively less popular but ubiquitous cousin, Univers also got a
facelift in 2010 after 30 years before Adrian Frutiger passed away under the
name “Univers Next” [1], the most prominent aspect of the redesign being the
return of 16 degree italics blessed by Frutiger himself.

In my view, Univers evokes a deep feeling of sophistication unlike any other
font. Helvetica has the “grunge” and New York aesthetic after it took over the
graphic design scene in the 70’s and 80’s whereas Univers was silently used in
engineering manuals, control panels, branding, keyboards(Apple), movie credits
[2] and UI without much fuss. It never became cool and edgy as Helvetica,
never tried to be something it is not and doesn't have a following. I was
lucky enough to visit the archives [3] in a obscure drawer at the Museum fur
Gestaltung in Zurich, seeing the original manuscripts of Univers was an
extraordinary feeling. Created in 1950, it is truly timeless and sits along
with other giants of contemporary typefaces such as Futura and Eurostile,
perhaps in the back row towards the corner.

Univers was, is and always will be.

It’s my favorite font.

[1] [https://www.myfonts.com/fonts/linotype/univers-
next/](https://www.myfonts.com/fonts/linotype/univers-next/)

[2] [https://www.dafont.com/forum/read/5633/what-s-the-font-
for-m...](https://www.dafont.com/forum/read/5633/what-s-the-font-for-movie-
credits)

[3] [https://www.eguide.ch/en/designer/adrian-
frutiger/](https://www.eguide.ch/en/designer/adrian-frutiger/)

~~~
exmadscientist
+1 for Univers!

Honestly, it's right there in the names. Helvetica projects a very Swiss
Modern feel to it. Sometimes that's what you want, sometimes it's not. Univers
is the most neutral typeface around that's got any personality at all. (I've
always felt Haas Unica and many of the modern sans faces, especially the
"brand" ones, have so little character to them that they're just completely
bland and uninteresting.) Univers just... is. It's Frutiger's best design, and
that's saying something.

Other favorites of mine include Trade Gothic (& friends) and Futura. I'm a
huge fan of the 1930s-1970s "industrial" look, like you might find stamped on
motor nameplates for heavy machinery, or the Apollo cockpits, or the IBM 360
consoles. These designs just scream _solid_ in a way that modern stuff...
doesn't. (Maybe because it isn't.)

(Tangent to a tangent: does anyone know what typeface HP used on their
equipment in the '70s through '90s? It's a very close cousin to Univers, but
not identical. Maybe something internal only? I don't think it's just an odd
cut of any of the usual suspects either. This is another typeface that has
always connoted reliability and stuff that Just Works to me.)

Still, though, like you, I'd say Univers is my favorite more days than not. If
I had to pick only one typeface, it'd be the one (more days than not)... just
don't make me do that :)

~~~
Alex3917
Univers makes me think of something like 2001: A Space Odyssey where computers
are just running everything and they've long since figured out how to do it
efficiently.

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
That's mostly Microgramma, although its successor Eurostile has become a
default for spaceship signage.

Microgramma really hits the spot for a certain kind of 60s/70s retro-futurism.

------
ChrisRR
I know it's a "design" website and all, but can't they just show an A-Z so I
can look at it?

The official website has better representations, but is still full of a load
of flashy animations and videos before you get to the actual font
[https://www.monotype.com/fonts/helvetica-
now](https://www.monotype.com/fonts/helvetica-now)

~~~
Corrado
I was thinking the same thing and went through the whole article looking for a
representation of the old font vs. the new font. It's my understanding that
the only changes where kerning and slight shape changes but a picture of them
side-by-side would be nice.

------
jaredcwhite
I did a little comparison between the bold weight of Helvetica, Helvetica
Neue, and Helvetica Now, and the new typeface does look really, really nice.
The letterforms aren't too noticeably different, but the kerning and relative
positioning of the letters have been tweaked in such a way as to make the font
appear more pleasing and readable (at least on my computer display). I'm also
pleased this new font is available for use on websites via Fonts.com and in
mockup work via SkyFonts. I'm definitely going to keep this in mind for future
projects.

------
Alex3917
Interesting. The new design makes it seem like they're trying to get away from
the political stigma of Helvetica, while also kind of poking fun at it.
Whereas the idea of Helvetica was to evoke things like openness, transparency,
neutrality, naturalness, etc., the new typeface strikes me as being much more
opinionated, but in a purposely understated sort of way.

In a lot of ways it really looks like someone took the core ideologies of
modern third-places and distilled them into a visual type system, which maybe
says something about the privatization of formerly public spaces and
infrastructure over the past 50+ years.

~~~
yodon
I love that I have no idea whether that second paragraph is a real analysis or
one making fun of font nerds.

~~~
Alex3917
I mean if you watch the documentary Helvetica they do a pretty good job of
explaining both the political statement the typeface was trying to make, the
backlash against it as it was adopted/hijacked by corporations, and then the
post-backlash period where we are now.

If you look at the new typeface it's clearly designed primarily for the needs
of consumer products and advertising. They could have instead created a
typeface that was purposely designed to look bad on consumer products and in
advertising, but that's not the direction they went in. That's not an
accident, it was a deliberate design decision.

Whereas the goal of the original typeface was to create a better society, the
goal of the new one is basically to make it onto a Starbucks cup. It's not
even a subtle difference, even though it's supposedly just an updated typeface
the two are really night and day.

~~~
exolymph
> the political statement the typeface was trying to make

Hmm, I think that a typeface is possibly the least effective way to make a
political statement. Approximately zero people looking at it will impute a
political message.

~~~
qubex
Less true than you might be aware yourself, actually.

Think of written Russian. Did you think of beautiful cursive Cyrillic as
Pushkin would've written or some blocky reverse-R all caps propaganda text?

Wonder why literally everybody associates anything written in "German Gothic”
(blackletter, actually, but I digress) is instantly associated with a guy with
a Chaplin moustache but who isn't Chaplin?

Why Simplified Chinese was designed to look good with printed serifs which
interfered with the Traditional script's typography?

And I'm not even a graphic designer or a “font nerd”...

~~~
ChrisRR
I associate German gothic text with beers

~~~
qubex
And the Metal Umlaut?

------
rangibaby
It looks OK from the specimens, Neue Haas Grotesk is still the best Helvetica
IMO

...

Font licensing is immoral rent seeking that takes advantage of a legal
loophole and goes against the spirit of the law in major countries (typefaces
are ineligible for copyright in at least the US and Japan), and I'm always
disheartened by how many individual designers and companies have fallen for
it.

~~~
asciident
Can you say more about this?

~~~
rangibaby
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protecti...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protection_of_typefaces)

> Typefaces cannot be protected by copyright in the United States (Code of
> Federal Regulations, Ch 37, Sec. 202.1(e); Eltra Corp. vs. Ringer). The idea
> that typefaces (rather than fonts, which are computer software) cannot be
> copyrighted in the United States is black letter law. 37 C.F.R. § 202.1(e).
> Under U.S. law, typefaces and their letter forms or glyphs are considered
> utilitarian objects whose public utility outweighs any private interest in
> protecting their creative elements. However, there is a distinction between
> a font and a typeface. The machine code used to display a stylized typeface
> (called a font) is protectable as copyright. In 1992, the US Copyright
> Office determined that digital outline fonts had elements that could be
> protected as software. Since that time, the Office has accepted registration
> of copyright for digital vector fonts, such as PostScript Type 1, TrueType,
> and OpenType format files.

TL;DR

"On a computer, a typeface isn't a typeface so you have to pay us for it"

c.f. Apple and rounded corners, Mickey Mouse...

~~~
anbop
Then why isn't every high profile font from Hoefler etc. immediately cloned by
a generic competitor?

~~~
eps
A while ago there was a case when the guy behind Maven Pro produced a very
nice font that felt vaguely like Whitney. Lo and behold, not two days after he
delisted it. When pressed for reasons, he said he got a letter from Hoefler
himself on how one cannot get insipired by other people's work, chided him for
being unoriginal and implied dire legal consequences of not taking it down
immediately. Mind you, the point of contention was a _feel_ of the font.

~~~
anbop
Do you have a link? Would love to read up more.

------
pySSK
The name Helvetica Now seems like an April Fools' joke. The name will not age
well, plus there is potential for confusion with Helvetica Neue.

~~~
silvester23
Not disagreeing, but to be fair, Helvetica Neue (neue meaning new in German),
did not age well either. I would assume the creators are aware of that, maybe
even choosing that name to be in the tradition of Neue.

------
oofabz
absolutely grotesque

~~~
dang
Maybe so, but please don't post unsubstantive comments here. What would make a
comment like this interesting is specific information about what is bad in the
diff and why. (That, plus maybe a bit less name-calling.)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

Edit: no, you guys are right, I totally didn't get the joke.

~~~
derefr
I think you got swooshed, a bit. The GP was almost certainly making a pun.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sans-
serif#Grotesque](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sans-serif#Grotesque)

~~~
pySSK
I thought so too but dang's post history shows knowledge of type. Maybe dang
is saying that calling this a grotesque font is name calling and poster should
post more on why it is one.

~~~
zorpner
He specifically says "what is bad" \-- he simply didn't get the joke. No need
to prance to defense of the mods when they miss something.

~~~
quickthrower2
Ok what do I need to know to get this joke?

~~~
JorgeGT
_Grotesque_ in the context of typography is a category of sans serif
typefaces, specifically the one from which typefaces like Helvetica descend
(they are usually called neo-grotesque). So the GP joke is based on a double
meaning: on a first read it may seem an insult, but typographically he is just
stating a quite obvious thing: that Helvetica Now is a grotesque typeface.

------
reaperducer
Does this mean Apple will license this and include it in macOS the way it does
(presumably) with Helvetica and Helvetica Neue? I really have no idea how
something like this happens.

~~~
zapzupnz
Apple no longer use this front. They have created their own font, San
Francisco, and started using it 3 to 4 years ago.

Edit: oh, I misunderstood! Apple might start using it, but they are not
compelled to. A lot of other fonts such as Palatino have also been updated,
but Apple doesn’t include them (yet).

~~~
galago
Its not installed as an available font in MacOS, even though the its used for
the UI. You can get it here if you want to use it within their licensing
guidlines:
[https://developer.apple.com/fonts/](https://developer.apple.com/fonts/)

------
amelius
Side-by-side comparison?

------
niftich
The Verge also did an interview with the designers [1]; I prefer The Verge
interview to the Creative Boom announcement [2] that's the article link at the
time of writing, because the interview adds detail behind the design process
and reads much less like a marketing announcement.

Truly the most amusing thing about the new typefaces are the alternate forms
of certain iconic letters. The alternate forms are more classically resemble
the legendary Akzidenz-Grotesk, in the tradition of paring back the few
flourishes that Helvetica did have.

Ironically some of the alternate forms also make it resemble Arial, Monotype's
famous metric-identical Helvetica clone, despite Monotype's long insistence
that Arial is less grotesk and more humanist. But I also found the not-sure-
if-serious dissing of Arial to be mostly signalling and snobbery. Other
alternate forms seem a bit odd, as if someone was playing 'design your own
sans-serif typeface' and filled out the missing cells of a big row-column
table for completion, like here's a geometric 't', and a humanist 'l'.

But all that aside, the new typefaces look nice and are redrawn with purpose.
The micro variant actually makes Helvetica usable at small sizes for the first
time. It's a well-crafted family in the honor of a classic.

[1] [https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/9/18302057/helvetica-now-
new...](https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/9/18302057/helvetica-now-new-monotype-
typeface-charles-nix-design-optical-sizes-alternate-characters) [2]
[https://www.creativeboom.com/resources/monotype-launches-
the...](https://www.creativeboom.com/resources/monotype-launches-the-first-
redesign-in-35-years-of-the-worlds-most-ubiquitous-font-helvetica/)

------
thde
There‘s a relative to Helvetica, Unica, with quite an interesting story:
[https://lineto.com/Lineto.com/Frontpage+Features/LL+Unica77/](https://lineto.com/Lineto.com/Frontpage+Features/LL+Unica77/)

------
sam0x17
How do you "re-design" a font? Isn't that just making an entirely new font
with a subtley different style? Or is this more backfilling tons of
unpopulated UTF-8 characters that aren't covered by the original font?

------
aosaigh
Where can I read more about the history of these “big hitter” fonts? It’s
interesting to hear about the context within which they were created.

------
dxxvi
How is this $300 Helvetica compared to the free Noto font (which has sans-
serif, serif and monospace from condensed extra light to bold)?

------
citrusui
The article mentions a single story lowercase 'a' and straight-legged capital
'R'... does anyone have a comparison for these? I'm unable to see it on
[https://www.monotype.com/fonts/helvetica-
now](https://www.monotype.com/fonts/helvetica-now)

~~~
mkozlows
[https://www.myfonts.com/fonts/mti/helvetica-
now/](https://www.myfonts.com/fonts/mti/helvetica-now/) lets you choose
stylistic alternates. Stylistic set 04 is straight-legged R.

------
lqet
Why is the T presented as though it is always aligned relative to its middle
bar? Not only would this be an incredibly bad idea, it is (fortunately) not
done on the official site [0]

[0] [https://www.monotype.com/fonts/helvetica-
now](https://www.monotype.com/fonts/helvetica-now)

~~~
thanatropism
I'm not too knowledgeable about fonts (although I did learn how to spot Arial
from Helvetica in that famous essay). Why does the uppercase R with its curvy
"right leg" feel out of place with everything else that's straight?

------
grawprog
So...

My dad was a typesetter and prepress technician for years. His favourite font
was helvetica. I sent him this link. Here are his comments:

>They fucked with "R" the only way too tell them abart, and they gave it a
streight leg.

>They messed with the dots wich was the othe way you could tell.

------
vages
Design comment: what's the deal with the googly eyes in the static header on
mobile?

~~~
quickthrower2
It’s creative. bOOm.

~~~
plufz
I actually liked it. Often text logos can compete with the main text and
headings in an article. Especially on mobile. Keeping the top nav all icons
made the text of the article pop a bit more.

~~~
vages
This may be different from my phone to yours, but the eyes bounced back and
forth on Safari mobile. This definitely took attention away from the article.

------
soperj
Gotta say, the f and the t in the micro font are not good. At least while
looking at it in my browser (firefox nightly on linux). They look like
something out of comic sans.

~~~
hbosch
I think it’s quite legible at intended sizes, though. Around 6pt or less.

~~~
jacobolus
Here’s a screengrab from a “2x retina” display of the sales page showing 8pt
(so view this at 50%)

[https://i.imgur.com/9tpX2Vq.png](https://i.imgur.com/9tpX2Vq.png)

------
black-tea
Is it really "the most ubiquitous font"? I always notice when someone has used
Helvetica itself rather than some generic sans serif clone and it's not that
often.

------
rambojazz
Too bad this font doesn't have a free license.

~~~
nightfly
Fonts like this represent an insane amount of work though. I would love a free
version, but I can understand why they aren't free.

