

Nokia Pure: Nokia's New Official Font - voidnothings
http://brandbook.nokia.com/blog/view/item62250/

======
rbanffy
This is awesome. With this new beautiful, strong font acting as a multiplier
of the huge competitive advantage they got by opting for Windows Phone 7, both
iPhone and Android are doomed.

~~~
tptacek
Nokia is a global company that does many tens of billions of dollars a year in
revenue. Believe it or not, they did not commission a new typeface to impress
Reddit and HN. This is not part of their plan to take on iOS and Android. So,
I don't understand the point you're making with your comment. Are you
suggesting that everything at Nokia come to a complete standstill until they
can placate smartphone pundits?

It's just frustrating that, just because we don't "like" Nokia, we can't talk
about the actual story; everything has to be a referendum on WP7.

~~~
rbanffy
Would you buy Nokia shares now and hold them for five years?

~~~
chc
Is that relevant? Because it doesn't sound like it has anything to do with
Nokia's new typeface.

~~~
rbanffy
It has with his faith in Nokia's sound strategy and competent management. I am
implying Nokia has a focus problem, he says it's normal and perfectly sane. If
it is, he would be willing to bet on the company's recovery.

~~~
chc
He didn't even mention the soundness of Nokia's strategy or the competence of
their management. What he said is the same thing I'm saying: I don't see what
any of the stuff you're talking about here (Windows Phone 7, the company's
overall strategy, the company's management) has to do with the Nokia Pure
typeface. What does a font have to do with the company's focus? Are you
suggesting they should have put Bruno Maag to work on OS development and
instead they wasted his talent on type design?

~~~
rbanffy
> He didn't even mention the soundness of Nokia's strategy or the competence
> of their management

I assumed that was implied in the defense of the visual identity
reformulation.

> I don't see what (...) Windows Phone 7, the company's overall strategy, the
> company's management has to do with the Nokia Pure typeface.

Nothing and that's the point. Why waste focus on a visual identity overhaul?
Was it broken?

> Are you suggesting they should have put Bruno Maag to work on OS development

This is a false dichotomy. Why hire Bruno Maag in the first place when they,
yes, need to hire developers (hardware and software) so they can make phones
they can sell?

~~~
chc
No, _you're_ presenting a false dichotomy — I was just pointing it out. Having
Bruno Maag design a typeface does not in any way prevent Nokia from hiring
developers, and doesn't appear to be a major company-wide focus.

Nokia's problem is that it doesn't know how to compete with Google and Apple,
not that it's resource-starved. Blindly throwing money at developers without
an intelligent vision is how Nokia got into this mess to begin with.

When Apple redesigns its website or switches corporate typefaces, do you
complain about Apple's abhorrent lack of focus? No. The people designing the
website are not the ones who develop your software, so the iPhone didn't
suffer from the redesign. The same is true of Nokia. This typeface doesn't
make their hardware or software any better, but it also doesn't make it any
worse — it's unrelated.

~~~
rbanffy
> No, you're presenting a false dichotomy

Fair enough.

> Nokia's problem is that it doesn't know how to compete with Google and Apple

I would point out that visual identity has very little to do with it.

> not that it's resource-starved

That pressure will increase in the future.

> Blindly throwing money at developers without an intelligent vision is how
> Nokia got into this mess to begin with

I agree with that - just throwing money on the problem won't make it go away.
They hired an outsider (Microsoft) to give them a coherent vision. They should
act on it.

And yes, redesigning every printed material and web presence is a small
fraction of their overall budget, but is a loss of focus nevertheless and
hardly an irrelevant expenditure.

------
LoonyPandora
Erik Spiekermann isn't very happy about the new typeface. He did the original,
and says this one is bland [1]. Though it is, the old face was shockingly
dated and needed replacing [2].

Nokia Pure is a nice readable typeface, very appropriate for use on mobile
devices, elegant in it's own way - but too bland. They should've saved some
money and just said "Frutiger".

At least they aren't setting their logo in it.

[1] <https://twitter.com/espiekermann/status/51173410415452160>

[2] <http://twitpic.com/4edrh7>

~~~
jluxenberg
_the old face was shockingly dated and needed replacing_

How was the older typeface dated, other than being from 2002?

~~~
tptacek
It (the original) has a very Santa Clara circa 1998 Rotis corporate thing
going for it.

~~~
prawn
The heaviest weight reminds me of Chicago.

~~~
moe
I also found it slightly austere in the bouquet, yet volatile in texture,
almost reminiscent of a late harvest.

------
JCB_K
When I saw the font, I got the feeling it hadn't changed much. Then I compared
it to the old one, and I realized it's completely different, but it just gave
the same feeling. In other words: very good job.

------
cromulent
And the links for download:

[http://brandbook.nokia.com/other_files/Brand_Book_v2.2_2011/...](http://brandbook.nokia.com/other_files/Brand_Book_v2.2_2011/Fonts/puretext/nokiapuretext-
webfont.ttf)

[http://brandbook.nokia.com/other_files/Brand_Book_v2.2_2011/...](http://brandbook.nokia.com/other_files/Brand_Book_v2.2_2011/Fonts/pureheadline/nokiapureheadlinerg-
webfont.ttf)

As posted here:

[http://craig.dubculture.co.nz/blog/2011/03/26/putting-
nokias...](http://craig.dubculture.co.nz/blog/2011/03/26/putting-nokias-new-
nokia-pure-typeface-on-your-symbian-phone/)

~~~
naner
What are the license terms?

~~~
gnufs
"Copyright © 2011 Nokia. All rights reserved. Reproduction, transfer,
distribution or storage of part or all of the contents in this document in any
form without the prior written permission of Nokia is prohibited."

------
gregschlom
Looks good, a little bit toyish, though. The endings of the letters look like
they are rounded. I prefer the stylish seriousness of Helvetica Light on the
iPhone, but that's a matter of taste.

------
Jabbles
Oh sweet, another font where the word "I'll" looks bizarre.

------
vessenes
I like it. It's clean, reads nicely at small sizes on a screen, and shows its
Modernist heritage while going for a little more motion.

I wish I could use it on my web application (I think), but my quick scan
doesn't show any licensing information.

------
marckremers
I can't believe what I'm reading here. That font is awful. The x-height is too
short in terms of ratio, the counters are squashed, the stroke width is far
too fat. It looks totally clunky on my screen. And that page design?! Show
some love Nokia!

------
moondowner
Why? I really liked (and still like) the one they used up until now [1]. It
looked fancy, it was _really_ distinctive, and it had a great readable font
for devices (e.g. screenshot [2]). What more do you need from a typeface?

P.S. Doesn't this new typeface somehow remind you of Windows Phone 7's one?

[1] <http://spiekermann.com/en/nokia-sans-character/> [2]
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/21709201@N00/4263893860/>

~~~
tptacek
I'm no expert, but:

* Spiekermann's face is distinctive, but also dated; Spiekermann himself draws a comparison to Rotis in the PDF spec for the face.

* The face is complicated. Look towards the back of spec book for whole pages set in it. It draws a bit of attention to itself.

* In the same vein: it's complicated enough to require a serif and "wide" variation to make it work in all the settings Nokia needs type. Don't underestimate how annoying that may have been for people working at Nokia. One company I worked with ditched an identity that used Mrs. Eaves and Futura (which looked awesome, I thought) because no normal person could make a document look good in it.

The new face is all these things in reverse:

* It's trendy (yeah, to the point of being boring)

* It's simple

* It's all-purpose

And sure, at the end of the day, maybe they just wanted to refresh for the
hell of it.

Also: remember that the cost to re-do all their docs in a new visual style
will probably dwarf the cost of getting a face commissioned. If they were
going to refresh the identity anyways (that's just something companies do once
or twice every decade), and the cost of a Dalton Maag typeface is a tiny part
of that, why not?

~~~
moondowner
All arguments valid, but I still kinda like the old typeface more.

It's true that it has too many variations, but probably the new one will have
as well. I doubt that only 3-4 variations will exist, there'll be more - for
devices, for logos, etc...

A refresh of the identity is a must every once in a while, it's the only
explanation I see why the old one should be changed ;), but I doubt that their
old docs will be redone in the new corporate branding, only the currently used
will be redone and the new docs will use it.

~~~
tptacek
Just to be clear: the original face appeared to have multiple variations
required within a single system; you were expected to know when to use the
serif (!) face, and when you needed to use the wide sans (because the normal
sans face has lots of fine detail that doesn't work in adverse environments).

It wasn't just that they had "display type" and "copy"; users of the
Spiekermann face might have needed to know a fair bit of typography to make
things look good in it. It was _intrinsically complicated_ , beyond the
complexity of Nokia's needs.

------
raquo
They probably spent a lot of resources to develop this font and didn't even
bother to move the "Our new typeface" headline a pixel or two to the left so
that it looks like it's actually left-aligned with all the other text.

------
kwantam
Chrome 9.0.597.83 beta for Linux does not do a very good job with the kerning
on that page. Not sure if it's bad hinting or just poor rendering, though.

~~~
gvb
That is because you are looking at Arial or sans-serif, _not_ at "Nokia Pure
Text"... assuming you did not download and install the font on your computer.
Check the .css:

    
    
      font-family: 'Nokia Pure Text', Arial, sans-serif;
    

The only thing that is "Nokia Pure" on the web page is the .gif images of the
sample text.

This is an insurmountable problem with branded fonts; they only work if you
load the branded font on every computer that will ever brush up against it.
This means your Word documents will look like crap when you send them to an
outside company. This means your web site that proudly uses the font will look
like... umm... some generic sans-serif font when you use it on your web page.

The problem is insurmountable because, to fix the problem, you will have to
convince everybody in the world to install it on their machine, which will
require you to release the font for unrestricted use. A custom company-branded
font with unrestricted use is an oxymoron.

~~~
dreww
did you tumble out of a time machine from 1999?

------
tptacek
I like the dots on the i's and j's.

------
jkeel
I know there are others out there (Microsoft, Android, etc.) but I do not like
corporate branded fonts. I'd much rather they choose a more creative name and
open it up for much broader use.

~~~
dchest
Android fonts are open
[http://www.google.com/webfonts/family?family=Droid+Sans&...](http://www.google.com/webfonts/family?family=Droid+Sans&subset=latin)

------
mikesurowiec
At first I thought the lowercase 'g' was weird, because it's facing to the
right, but then I guess it makes sense with their 'seamless motion' tag.

------
baddox
It looks decent: modern and playful. I'm not typeface expert, but it seems
like there are more implied vertical lines than I would expect.

------
Tichy
I think one of Nokia's problems might be an ego that is too big.

~~~
tptacek
Many companies have house typefaces, and, if you're going to do that, you
might as well have the page that says you got Bruno Maag to do it.

Really, when you get to the size of a company like Nokia, you're inevitably
going to have an enormous marketing budget just for the boring stuff, like
printing costs and designing the N+100th version of your N+100th product's
N+5th slick. These are marketing dollars that are getting spent not out of
ego, but simply to keep the train on the tracks.

Compared to those expenses, no matter how much it costs to engage Dalton Maag,
it's still probably a rounding error.

Wouldn't you rather live in a world where big companies occasionally gave
excellent typographers interesting problems to work on, rather than paying
someone to round the corners on FF Meta or something?

~~~
rbanffy
> you're inevitably going to have an enormous marketing budget

If your products are actually good and/or desirable, you may discover that the
marketing budget can be reduced and the surplus money be used to develop the
next generation good and desirable products.

~~~
tptacek
You missed my point, which is frustrating, because I lawyered up my (simple)
point with a whole lot of extra words exactly to avoid this unproductive
branch of the discussion.

~~~
sachinag
Yay HN circa 2011!

~~~
scott_s
Considering that everyone on this reply chain has been posting for at least 3
years, I don't think we can blame recent trends.

~~~
sachinag
Good people can be corrupted by bad influences over time. The douchebaggery on
HN is at all-time highs and good people are being sucked in. I've got enough
karma to spare that I'm happy to be downvoted to oblivion on this, but it's
really got to stop.

Stop correcting people's grammar and spelling, stop assuming incompetence in
others, stop nitpicking single words/phrases in thoughtful comments, and stop
willfully misreading what others write (which is what happened here despite
Thomas's deliberate efforts _to avoid that very thing_ ).

~~~
rbanffy
My comment was mostly about focus. Nokia has one single problem: they need to
build phones people actually want. They have to develop the phones people will
want in 2012 right now so they are shipping and working very well (Apple's
iPhone has somewhat raised expectations) in 2012.

Elop used the burning platform metaphor. If it's burning, the sole focus of
the whole company should be on building a new one.

A new corporate font is not a competitive advantage, will not make whatever
new platform they build with WP7 more attractive to end users and is, thus, a
waste of time and resources. The cost of having a font designed is tiny when
compared to the cost of reformulating the visual identity of the company,
something that's bound to happen.

Marketing should worry about selling as many current phones as possible and
nothing else.

I can't see how a new corporate font fits in this panorama.

~~~
tptacek
It doesn't.

~~~
rbanffy
Then why do it? If that's not a focus problem, I don't know what would be.

~~~
tptacek
Because whether or not you like the fact that they chose WP7, they still have
to publish many thousands of slicks this year, and they still have to have a
website, and it may be worth it to have a coherent visual identity across all
of them.

Your take on this baffles me. It's like you think the only functions in a
multi-billion dollar company are the ones nerds care about.

The Bengals have crappy-looking helmets. They are also a crappy team. They
should fix the helmets. Also the team. But the two don't really have a lot to
do with each other; the Bengels still bring in millions of dollars, despite
losing all the time. Meanwhile, let's make sure we're talking about the
helmets when we mean to talk about the helmets, and the teams when we mean to
talk about the teams. Because people make fun of people who judge football
teams by their helmets.

~~~
rbanffy
> Because whether or not you like the fact that they chose WP7

Nice straw man. My argument is platform neutral. Nokia should focus on
building phones it can sell. I would question their sanity even if they had
chosen Android.

> It's like you think the only functions in a multi-billion dollar company are
> the ones nerds care about.

No. Their only function is to create value for shareholders.

Your analogy is flawed. Nokia has not a visual identity (or helmet) problem -
quite the contrary - their phones look good, their printed materials and
website look good. They have a product roadmap problem. S60 seems inadequate
for current smartphone standards, which is tragic, because all things point to
a smartphone-only market in a couple years. S40 is even more doomed in that
scenario and MeeGo was going nowhere. They chose to go with WP7 and it will be
hard enough to pull that off (it would be had they chosen Android, WebOS,
MiraclePhoneOS or a mutant Symbian from an alternate future).

And yet, they decide to change their visual identity.

It's like Twitter, in the fail-whale days, deciding their problem was their
logo and changing it to a green octopus instead of solving their scaling
problem. Because, after all, cool logos are what sells stuff.

~~~
tptacek
Troll.

~~~
rbanffy
Thanks, Thomas, for your candid feedback. I see we hold each other in similar
high esteem.

------
marcamillion
I thought this was a joke at first, but am pleasantly surprised.

I actually checked my calendar, but realized it is still 2 days away.

T minus 2 days for the most ridiculous headlines of the year.

------
Flemlord
Looks like Microsoft Segoe UI, which would make sense.

------
bborud
first impression: too fidgety.

------
ignifero
OK , now I am starting to get worried about Nokia

------
dotcoma
Now I finally know what they've been doing for the last 4 years...

------
Joeri
Well, that's a wrap. Nokia is done with being about technology.

------
glhaynes
When an artist seems to want to tell you more about themselves than their
work, the work is usually not all that interesting.

------
fluidcruft
Haha. Way to try and ride on Facebook's branding.

