Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 3rd Sep 2009 23:10 UTC
Permalink for comment 382350
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
Its funny most of the comments here are in bewilderment that people actually care about this.
I think the bewilderment is more a consequence of the extent of the near hysterics that the pro-Futura individuals portray over the simple change of one readable font for another one.
The shrill hinting that IKEA's management might have put Ikea in danger, has abandoned their commitment to design, even that humanity has suffered from it... Well, it might be a major disaster in the small font afficionado circle, but the rest of the universe deems this business as usual.
The catalogue is still the same functional listing. There is no loss of information. Just the font changed. It might not be the most sexy font in existance, but it does what it needs to do. It delivers information, the real gold nugget in writing. If it can do so cheaper than Ikea's custom font could, even better.
Can you gather from this response how utterly alien this outrage is for people who see typeface as a means to deliver information, instead of it being a statement itself?