Ban Comic Sans

Warning: annoying pop-unders! (Which is about enough to initiate a "ban Isaac Stanfield" campaign...)

A valid complaint. So do something about it. Offer him some space on your server.

While I agree about the "goofyness" of Comic Sans (being a lifetime comic reader and historian, as well as a type designer) I totally agree also with Vincent Connare.
Mr Stanfield has been extremely ineducate and unpolite in appropriating Mr. Connare image for such a stupid and offensive use. Also, his ban comic sans webpage is no better (and as ethical as) than the worst porn sites, with unwanted ads and windows popping up like mushroom.

I always wonder why people have never better things to do than offend and criticize work without constructive results, but I guess I will continue to wonder until the human race inhabits the earth.

If Vincent Connare is reading I will try to make some humble constructive criticism instead. Comic Sans is too loosely written, with a lack of concern for balance. It seems regular writing and has not the necessary qualities of regularity-yet-spontaneity that makes a typeface aimed for lettering pleasant. It has a strange flavor of naive yet non-spontaneous. No doubt about the good hinting of the font (as all Microsoft fonts are designed with great care for onscreen usage) but if you intended to do a typeface for pleasant and professional comics' lettering you should have done a lot of lettering trials by hand before.

This does not mean that you aren't skilled. Maybe you worked under precise requests and I unfortunately don't know your work (my fault, I know).

Btw, Sand and Comic Sans, alongside with Gadget bring out the worst regular people can do while desiging so I'm happy to see ugly ads set in Microsoft Core fonts. They just indicate the degree of skill a designer have, and help to point out that everyday people aren't designers (like all those photoshop embossing does). Sand is a Godsend.

I always wonder why people have never better things to do than offend and criticize work without constructive results

Come on, it's for fun, and even criticizing something without elaboration is better than staying quiet: it's information, and can be used - as long as it's not actually done to hurt the person in question - and I don't think that's the case with Isaac. Some people have a passion for type - that's a good thing - even if it sometimes transcends tactfulness. Grow some thicker skin, everybody will be happier for it.

if you intended to do a typeface for pleasant and professional comics' lettering you should have done a lot of lettering trials by hand before.

Is this not more offensive than just "I hate it"? Just because you're recommending a better course of action doesn't mean he has no grounds to get pissed. That's more of an attack on Connare himself, rather than merely an attack on a font of his.

But as for the use of the photo, I think that's a gray area. On the other hand, complaining about it might be just as misguided. A certain detachment is often the best strategy.

--

But you know what bugs me even more than the font itself? When people hide behind the "it depends how you use it" cover. It's true to some extent, but it's no absolute. A font doesn't just have relativistic value, there are very much good and bad things. For example, a text font with descenders longer than ascenders is bad.

hhp

Sand and Comic Sans, alongside with Gadget bring out the worst regular people can do while desiging so I'm happy to see ugly ads set in Microsoft Core fonts.

...which is precisely why such fonts should not be banned--they're the easiest way to identify the work of rank amateurs at a glance.

On a related note, I think there should be a 10-year certification process to be permitted to use Impact.

Impact at Fonts.com

It annoys me like you can NOT believe when I read things like this.

To the person deleting Comic Sans: you should be ashamed, and you should stop doing it. Further, you should re-install a copy of the font on every machine that you deleted it from. I take it you did this on lab computers for public use. Would you go to your library and rip the “bad” pages out of the books, to spare others from having to deal with them?

Or, how would you like it if some stranger walked in to your room, plopped down at your computer, and began to calmly delete fonts on your hard drive that HE didn’t approve of?

To the guy with the stickers: if you don’t like Comic Sans, DON’T USE IT. In my opinion, you are mocking and belittling the designer of the font you don’t like with your oh-so-funny sticker. I believe you are being rude and immature.

Put yourself in that designer’s shoes. You’ve worked long and hard to create a font; uppercase, lowercase, punctuation, figures, and about a bazillion of those damn accented characters. You’ve worked late, pulling all-nighters, until your eyes start to sting from not blinking often enough. You’ve kerned and hinted every letter until your hand is cramping from squeezing the mouse for nine hours straight. After weeks or months of effort, you finally finish your font and get it distributed. Then, from out of nowhere, some -yahoo- spams message boards and design blogs with posts proclaiming “This font SUCKS!” all over the place. This same self-appointed arbiter of good taste puts up a web site containing a less-than-flattering picture of yourself, along with a message telling everyone to print out your picture and stick it to every available flat surface, in the hope of doing so will cause YOUR font, the one you poured a portion of your life into creating, to be permanently BANNED.

Now, how would that make you feel?

Sigh. Sorry for the rant.

It's not about the font; it's about the behavior. There is already -way- too much arrogance and condescention in the design world.

would that effort were the sole arbiter of quality...

But it's not Isaac Stanfield's site. Why is the link "Isaac Stanfield's war" pointing to the site that he claims not to have made?

My mistake. His first post at the Typophile Forums made it seem so. I’ll modify.

My girlfriend received accommodations to use a laptop to take the California Bar Exam, employing special word-processing software. Knowing full well the disdain I hold for Vincent Connare's baby, the love of my life chirped, "Hey, I could write my entire exam in Comic Sans!"

"I hope you do," I said.

Giving politely an advice on a working method isn't offensive.

What most people say here is offensive.

And doing unconstructive criticism is no fun at all.

A lot of people I know have abandoned these forums just because many people like only to argue and offend pointlessly.

And sadly, most of them are professionals or very interesting designers anyway that could contribute an intriguing and stimulating conversation.

I'm writing here (and Joshua knows he told me about the log from the very beginning but I never posted until last summer) just because now I really care about the involvement of more designers which give often precious and stimulating information.

Hey Caudio. Thanks for writing. I’d certainly like to avoid being so insensitive that we push interesting contributors out. Please clarify what specifically you find offensive.

Man. I'm usually the oversensitive one, and even I'm thinking, Jeez, lighten up.

My personal belief is generally that there are no bad fonts, only bad usages, which kind of speaks to Mr Connare's weak defense and pretty much informs my view of such works as Brush Script and Dom Casual: somewhere, out there, is a reason and place where those faces are true and beautiful.

Comic Sans is simply the Tekton of the new millennium. And so, too, shall Comic Sans pass. As Mother always said, just ignore it, and maybe it will go away.

> A lot of people I know have abandoned these forums

They have abandoned forums because they are *psychologically weak*. Period.

But it's no great loss, since most of them contribute almost nothing of real value anyway - a shame considering they have so much to offer. Probably many don't have the self-confidence to share what they know, and very often that lack of confidence is completely justified...

The bottom line is that just because somebody makes good fonts doesn't mean he's fit to maintain a fruitful online presence. This is not a cocktail party, it's a multicultural zoo. The funny smells come with the territory. If you can't ignore the smells enough to take advantage of forums (in whichever way you choose), then that's your loss. And if you have a problem with *other* people hearing opinions you don't agree with, then you should join the gestapo.

I've had it up to *here* with certain people pretending to be civilized wanting to control the internet, and throwing hissy-fits because they don't have to will/ability to overcome their *own* shortcomings, instead attacking the shortcomings of other that they can do *nothing* about. Enough is enough.

hhp

Cheshire Dave said:

Comic Sans is simply the Tekton of the new millennium. And so, too, shall Comic Sans pass.

A key difference between Comic Sans and Tekton: Comic Sans is a MS “Core Font” that comes pre-installed on operating systems. It takes very little effort to find and use it. So, until it is dropped from the list of Core Fonts I think its use and misuse will remain very common.

And I have had it up to *here* with asterisks. For crap's sake, this is a forum about typography. Use italics.

And if I had the patience, I'd use the correct codes for “real” quote marks, too.

Hallelujah!

Hey, I dislike italics in print (it skews the voice arbitrarily), and onscreen there's the additional problem with aliasing. I'd use bold, but 2-pixel stems are too dark compared to the body text in the 1-pixel-stem default. I'd use bold for the text and regular for emphasis* (like I do on my site), but that would: stand out too much from the posts of others; look too dark at the default (small) PPEM settings in Typographica. So I guess I will just use italics...

*
BTW, what about using an
asterisk like this, is that OK? :-)

hhp

Uh, I don't even know where to begin. But you're a typographic professional, so I'm just going to quietly back away...

Nothing to see here, please move on...

I'm no professional.
One way you can tell is that so many of my opinions are against professional practice, such as not liking italics, preferring 2-pixel-stem screen fonts (at least above ~14 PPEM), thinking calligraphic [text] type is for failed artistes, etc.

hhp

> calligraphic [text] type is for failed artistes

Actually, that was a bit unfair.
There's actually one good reason to make calligraphic text type, and it could be pretty widespread: honestly thinking that it's a good idea. Not that it is, mind you - quite the contrary.

hhp

Amanda Erickson said:

First of all, there’s nothing “fun” about Comic Sans. Comic Sans is the font of choice for killer clowns. Remember that.

I've always hated Comic Sans. Today I found I'm not alone.

Hey, thanks for the quote!

But what about that "there are no bad fonts, only bad usages?" You've got to be kidding me. There are plenty of bad fonts out there and Comic Sans is one of them. It's got no rhythm. It's got no passion. It's wearing a funny hat. Show me a good usage of Comic Sans and I'll show you good usage of a plastic Flamingo.

Show me a good usage of Comic Sans and I'll show you good usage of a plastic Flamingo.

Both exist. They just aren’t very common. I think the use of Comic Sans for the titles in Journeys with George was very appropriate. The documentary exhibits the amateur, jocular side of Dubya, two words that also describe the feel of Comic Sans.

The sentiment about "there are no bad fonts" is fine for a typographer - an open mind is important. But any self-respecting typographer would never say "there is no bad typography" (even though a reader might say it - there again it's what you do with it: read it during "quality time", or during a desperate wait at the dentist). In the same way, any lucid type designer would never say that about fonts.

hhp

I’d much rather eradicate Gill Sans than Comic Sans — at least Comic Sans isn’t trying to look serious. But then, I’m a typophile rather than a typographer, so what would I know?

Don't make me come down there and kick your ass!

Or do something else to it...

hhp

Sure there are bad uses of Gill Sans, just as there are also many good uses of it.

Take a look at
these PDFs.

Then tell me if Gill Sans isn't anything but a good and useful tool (in able hands).

I thought this might be helpful to aid in the flow of discussion. It will soon be posted on the ban comic sans website. (Sorry for the pop-unders.) This revolution is in the hands of the common man. We must use whatever means necessary, including free web hosting with pop-under adverts to spread the gospel. If anyone would like to host the ban comic sans site, please contact me.

The ban comic sans Manifesto

We believe in the sanctity of typograhy and that the traditions and established standards of this craft should be upheld throughout all time. From Guttenberg's letterpress to the digital age, type in all forms is sacred and indispensable. Type is a voice; its very qualities and characteristics communicate to readers a meaning beyond mere syntax.

Early type designers and printers spent hours not only designing these typefaces, but the very painstaking process of setting and printing these faces was so laborious that it is a blasphemy to the history of the craft that any fool can sit down at their personal computer and design their own typeface. Consider how many books may be found in the average home today compared to that of a home in fifteenth century Europe. Technological advances have transformed typography into a tawdry triviality. The patriarchs of this profession were highly educated men. However, today the widespread heretical uses of this medium prove that even the ineducate have opportunities to desicrate this art form; therefore, destroying the historical integrity of typography.

Like the tone of a spoken voice, the characteristics of a typeface convey meaning. The design of the typeface is, in itself, its voice. Often this voice speaks louder than the message behind the words. Thus when one is designing a "Do Not Enter" sign the use of a heavy-stroked, attention-commanding font such as Impact or Arial Black is appropriate. However, typesetting such a message in Comic Sans would be ludicrous. Though this is done frequently, it does not justify the usage. Clearly, Comic Sans as a voice conveys silliness, childish naivety, irreverence, and is far too casual for such a purpose. It is as if someone were showing up to a black tie event in a clown costume.

We are summoning forth the proletariat around the globe to aid us in this revolution. We call on the common man to rise up in revolt against this evil of typographical ignorance. We believe in the gospel message "ban comic sans." It shall be salvation to all who are literate. By banding together to eradicate this font from the face of the earth we strive to ensure that future generations will be liberated from this epidemic and never have to suffer this scourge that is the plague of our time.

Then tell me if Gill Sans isn't anything but a good and useful tool (in able hands).

Ok, Gill Sans is anything but a good and useful tool (in able hands). Much better choices (in my opinion), depending on the situation, would include Optima (e.g. for those PDFs), Futura, Univers, or even Comic Sans.

I suppose it might be possible to set a pleasing logo or heading in Gill, but only if you avoided using any of the characters “a”, “f”, “r”, “M”, “R”, “1”, or “2”, all of which I find cringeworthy.

Cringeworthy? It's a ridiculous accusation.

If Gill Sans is such an obviously horrible typeface, because of certain letters, as you claim, would typographers like Tschichold, Schmoller, Froshaug and Birdsall (among many others) have used it? Wouldn't they have sussed how bad it is and used something else?

Of course, they realized that it is a just fine typeface, able to do the job they needed quite well.

I suggest you learn more about my (Gill's) work and the work, specifically, that went into Gill Sans. You might change your opinion of the type. If your objection to Gill Sans is that you're bored of it, or something like that, then we can stop the discussion right here.

Cringeworthy. What a great word.
But come on, GillSans is a solid font. And note that there seems to be a huge difference as to how it's seen between Brits and 'Mericans.

hhp

Get back on the topic. this is a ban comic sans comment page.. not a GillSans page. hey how bout "The ban comic sans Manifesto" WOW.
any comments.

We are summoning forth the proletariat around the globe to aid us in this revolution.

Perhaps this thread should be renamed "Comic Sans versus Comic Book Guy."

I came across this site while doing research for a design class.

Never before now have I known people can get so worked up about fonts. People are starving in other countries and here in the U.S. people are fighting about fonts. My personal opinion...Why would you want to ban anything? I think any creation by another person should stay. If you don't like it, don't use it. Constructive criticism is good if it helps the designer in the future. Thats all I have to say.

No need to respond cause I doubt I will be back on this site to see it.

> People are starving in other countries and here in the U.S. people are fighting about fonts.

Good point.
But at least we're not arguing about which brand of sweat-shop sneakers is best, or what country kills more people by 8AM than most countries do in a year.

The problem is way deeper that what we talk about.

hhp

Boy, who?, I really see your point. Just the other day I had to break up a gang fight between two groups of street punks who couldn't agree to disagree about which cut of Garamond is the best. It's really out of control in this country.

Or:

People are starving in other countries and you're taking a design class? What kind of heathen are you?

Perhaps if Mr. Who, like a good little liberal, talks incessantly about starving people, those people will magically get fed.

Hey John. Stop gabbin' and get to that event. I want to see pics of you and Doyald in a warm embrace. Got that?

John, don't be such a boor.

hhp

Stephen, the event was scheduled for 6pm.

But thanks to Yahoo maps and MapQuest, I couldn't find the place, nor could I find a phone number for AIGA Atlanta. But that's OK, because he's got another gig tomorrow morning at Portfolio center, and I expect to show up at that one. And I know for certain how to get there this time.

Theres no need for sarcasm,Cheshire, I never attacked you personally so dont be a hypocrite.

Yes, I'm taking a design class. Just because people are starving in other countries does not mean that I should not do anythign with my life and not go to school.
The point is, I'm not sitting here arguing about a font. I do what i have to do and thats all.
As for Butler, did I say I was going to start a Feed the Children Organization? I merely used that as an example of the bigger problems in the world. For example, I was in Europe this summer and I was watching the European CNN. The president of Prague was commenting on the destructive floods, other countries about their own SERIOUS problems. Afterwards, they showed our own President, George W. Bush, saying that he hopes the baseball strike does not last. At that moment I felt ashamed to be American. Here other leaders of nations are speaking about SERIOUS life threatening problems and the president of the United States is distraught about a Baseball strike. How sad.

And true, the problem is deeper than what we talk about. The point im trying to make is that a lot of people, american or not, forget to focus on whats important.

Its really sad that the people that run this country and many countries are close minded individuals who do not see the bigger picture.

Actually, the world would be a much better place if the US government concentrated on baseball.

hhp

Mr. Who, I agree with your opinion on Comic Sans. I think the idea of "banning" it is inane and wankular.

I actually enjoy discussing politics, so much that I too often end up ruining an otherwise lovely dinner or coffee. If you or Hrant or anyone else with political issues to discuss can offer a more appropriate forum to do it in, I'm there. But I get the feeling that Joshua, Matt, Stephen and/or Patric might not want to see it on typographi.ca, or at least not in a thread about Comic Sans. Fair enough?

Gill IS good
Comic sans IS pure evil...
I already have completely removed all forms of comic sans out of my little life...
and yes : I spend to much time lookin and makin fonts : so what : the fact hat the world is a pretty screwed place is not 'our' fault , but of those more powerfull, and into Power...

So I will repeat : abolish COMIC sans NOW... before it is to late. (and still : gill IS good, and so is impact **use caps ya morrons!**)

that is all for now:

----------------------------------------
**tetsuo_INC**
----------------------------------------

I am not alone. With respect to it's creator, I find Comic Sans presents an amateurish, childish and simply ugly image.

I'm aware that it's one of the fonts (along with Arial and Tahoma) that people with reading difficulties and dyslexia find easier to read. It's a shame that as a result our politicos think that all offical organisations should be using it to help people read more Hmm, so why not use Arial ?

Comic Sans RIP. Please.

People starving in other countries and the banality of Comic Sans are the same problem.

They are both "side effects" of a global economic system that doesn't care about people as individuals or members of diverse cultures, because that's not the bottom line.

We can engage the problem of hunger in the political arena; we can similarly politicize our day to day work as typographers (in a way that no-one would find objectionable), by choosing to use a variety of typefaces designed by contemporary, local, independent designers.

There is, as Spiekermann has said, no such thing as a bad typeface, only those that are hard to use well, to which one might add, also those that are easy to use poorly.

Comic Sans is not inherently banal, merely simple. It has acquired its banality through massive over-exposure in situations for which it is ill equipped.

> I'm aware that it's one of the fonts (along with Arial and Tahoma) that people with reading difficulties and dyslexia find easier to read.

This is news to me - do you have a reference for this claim?

Cheers, Si
Microsoft Typography

Nick, I hear you on your first three paragraphs, but:

> no such thing as a bad typeface

Poppycock.

hhp

The first thing that strikes you with Comic Sans on the screen is its legibility. And that is probably why it is used - along with its informality and friendliness. Mr. Connare is on to something with his legibility from which others could learn.

Comic Sans also has a forced awkward 'cuteness' which becomes disgusting with overexposure, and it is long past overexposed.

I can believe that Comic Sans tests as very legible. But Ariel? You must be joking.

>Comic Sans is not inherently banal, merely simple. It has acquired its banality through massive over-exposure in situations for which it is ill equipped.

Nick, for the first time, I totally disagree. Comic Sans is graceless. It is a set of letters designed with the supposed naivetè of an untrained eye, a grocery shop owner, or a shoe repairs one, but without the flavor which comes only and only from spontaneity. Connare, which is a type designer and knows too much, does not have the naivetè of producing a good naive typeface. Besides, Comic Sans is rendered as a "stroked" typeface, with flawless contours, and this makes the mockery even more evident when set big. People became familiar with it because it's the only typeface recalling quite closely handlettering offered for free as a system font. But the whole thing is an artifact, not genuine.
Connare has proved to be a quite good designer. I like Trebuchet, whatever your opinion might be, but Comic Sans is a bad typeface: each letter seem designed in isolation from the others (so how could they work good together?)

I hope I've been able to explain why (in rare cases) there are bad typefaces. This happen often in terms of spacing. Even the greatest typeface is crap if poorly spaced. But the latter option leaves room for the designer to adjust the flaws.
Comic Sans is drawn unpleasantly.
To make some actual examples: Ooga Booga (from Thirst, now discontinued) was a digitized lettering from a naively executed sign, and maybe it was ugly, but it felt genuine. This goes for Brode Vosloo's face Shoe Repairs (from T-26).
On the other side, many handlettering faces (Comicraft's WildWords, FontFont's Justlefthand or Erikrighthand, Child's Play and Sale, many Blambot or Dogstar lettering fonts are well executed handwritten faces with various degrees of slickness/unslickness).

Comic Sans fails just because it present (unpleasing) naive forms as imagined by a skillful designer which is no longer visually naive in the first place, and so he cannot replicate whan an untrained letterer would accomplish with genuinity.

What do you think? Have I been able to pinpoint the core of the problem? I think my lifetime passion for comics has given me some insight on how handlettering could be, even if transposed in typographic forms.

On this purpose, I dare anyone with enough spare time to do so, to present, as Nick suggest, a good designer's use of Comic Sans. I will never be able to use it, or I would end up redrawing it from scratch, taking one direction or the other among the ones I've suggested.
In fact I liked the idea of designing a sort of provocation against Comic Sans, using just its skeletons, called Tragic Serif. But I was unable to proceed, because Comic Sans IS its skeletal forms. And I did not have so much time to throw away, as well.

Claudio, right on.

> in rare cases

It's not even that rare... :-/

hhp

>Claudio, right on.

Do you mean you find my observations appropriate?
Yes, you're right, it's not actually that rare. The idea that there are no bad typefaces works until *at least* the spacing is done with care and love, and until the forms, even if unusual or naive, are drawn with attention to detail and taking the necessary time.
Comic Sans unfortunately is rendered with a careless stylization (the "stroked" style) and it gives the impression of a "quick" rendering. Maybe the hinting et al, as usual has been done with great care at Microsoft, but the forms...
But I really like Trebuchet (at least a good part of it).

Sand, on the other hand, lacks both the requirements I listed.

I wonder what could possibly be a decent use of Sand.
My boss once wrote a baseline for a food product with it, colored it brown, and it looked like... well, pieces of (shit). Honestly, it gave this impression. Luckily he never used it again and the logo which was chosen used another face in its baseline.

> Do you mean you find my observations appropriate?

Yes.

hhp

FontFont's Justlefthand or Erikrighthand

Claudio, surely Just and Erik are skillful and visually educated designers too... So what's the key to designing typefaces that are genuinely naive?

The main reasons for Comic Sans's widespread use and misuse are that it's on almost every current PC and Mac and that its hinting is very good. General users usually judge the merits of a typeface (usually pre-installed on his/her system) by looking at it on screen. If the hinting is done right, and that they think it's interesting enough, they will invariably think the typeface is good to use.

I think Comic Sans's popularity is quite understandable. General computer users' taste is often quite different from that of typographers'. The typefaces that they find most interesting are usually those that are somewhat soft and hand-written looking, if not cute. We hardly ever write by hand any more. At least Comic Sans imitates handwriting and has some character to it, and its free and readily available. Traditional 'typographic' fonts are too cold and impersonal for casual communication. Maybe there's a market for some casual, warm and cuddly font for everyday use? Who knows?

The main problem with Comic Sans is that it is often used for the most inappropriate situations.

It should also be noted from a recent conversation with Si Daniels that Comic Sans originally was only bundled with Internet Explorer as a core web font for on-screen display in that browser.

Just think of how many times IE has been downloaded. I don't feel it's any different than the overuse/misuse of Verdana for Gadget for example. Look was happened to Apple's Chicago! I think it's a direct result of availability.

Stuart :D

Incidentally, as I was walking through the corridor of my school the other day, I saw a Ban Comic Sans sticker plastered to someone's project in a display case (inappropriately using CS of course). I'm certainly not a fan of vandalism or libel, but I must admit I had to let out a chuckle. I can't stand seeing the bloody face anymore myself.

I've explained why I consider Comic Sans an equivocal product.
Erik and Just are professionals, but I referred to their scripts as examples of digitized handwiting, a territory close but not the same of comic book lettering (or Comic Sans, for what matters).

If people mistake Comic Sans for something "genuine" it's just because they don't see how slick is rendered, and the contrast with the quick, poor skeletons, all but "vernacular".
We designers are the only one feeling bad about it because we have developed a higher visual sensibility, and to us it's ugly, maybe even more ugly than how actually is.

But I accept the idea of its use on screen, at small sizes. The good hinting makes it the only face "handwritten" (with all its limitations, see above) available as a widespread system font.

Just try to ignore it. Or submit Microsoft a better lettering system font. I doubt they'll invest time in doing another, anyway.

I mentioned this in another forum once, but I think it's worth repeating.

A few months ago I had a chat to a friend's friend in a pub, and got onto the subject of what we each did for a living. She was a teacher, fresh out of training, and was keen to ask me for opinions on some fonts she'd recently been instructed to use.

Turns out that her training college is advising teachers to use Comic Sans for all teacher-prepared handouts. After my initial horror and puzzlement, we talked about the reasons for such an edict. We agreed that to help engage pupils in lessons, there was a need to set a different tone in material prepared by their own teacher from material she might have photocopied. Just like in my schooldays teachers handed out unpretentious, handwritten worksheets (photocopied), the modern equivalent is to type up your notes, edit them a bit each year, and press print. It goes without saying that Comic Sans is the only universally available font that satisfies such needs.

I also wondered if text set in Comic Sans is more forgiving of a lack of typographic sophistication. Text set in Times by a typographic illiterate would certainly appear inferior to material from books; setting in CS is almost a statement that "this is not meant to be typographic" and invalidates that comparison.

>We hardly ever write by hand any more. At least Comic Sans imitates handwriting and has some character to it, and its free and readily available.

Good point Keith.
I've often wondered why handwriting fonts are so popular (Handsome is ShinnType's best seller: memo to self - do more scripts!), and this may be an explanation, that it has something to do with the lapsed practice of writing. Nostalgia, perhaps...

This is a different (though related) phenomenon than the professional popularity of retro commercial scripts, for I suspect that most sales of handwriting fonts are to amateurs.

It would be interesting to hear the opinion on this, from someone at a foundry that carries a lot of scripts/writing fonts, eg Typadelic, House, Font Diner, Jukebox, Fontek, ITC.

Maybe I'm an alien, but after my psichic malaise (1996-2001) I restarted to handwrite intensively. I love it, and I begun to understand how the transition between capital letters to uncial and then the Carolingian minuscule has occurred.
I see my odd writing shifts from all-caps, to "chancery", to connected scripting, without apparent reason.
Even an idea I had for a personal sans-serif was inspired by how I write some letters, like the uppercase G.

Anyway: meant to be typographic or not Comic Sans sucks big time. Period. It makes me nauseous. If it wasn't meant to be a typeface it shouldn't have been one. Why Microsoft did not hire Comicraft's Rickard Starkings, or any good comic book letterer to do a good handwritten/lettering font to hint for screen use?

It's enough to say ANY Dogstar font which were free and online for a longtime, for both Mac and PC and in TrueType until recently, is a MASTERWORK in any sense compared to Comic Sans. Or just try any of the links on this page. Maybe not hinted, but at last there is a choice:
http://hans.presto.tripod.com/links004.html

P.S. I tried to do a critical analysis on why Comic Sans is bad, but you seem to justify it all around, thus my "angry" reaction.
It's not aimed at Connare: I'd need to know what he wished to accomplish with CS to say more, because his work is in general very good. It's not about being "professional". Comic Sans had motivations behind it, which are not completely clear to me.

Shouldn't we all bandy together and destroy MS Word's WordArt fuction while we're at it?

It is the singe most repugnant 'feature' ever to grace an application. Suddenly all grocery stores are using it, bending and twisting the price of ham to illegibility (hope I got that last word spelled right...)

Problem is the layman will never realize that choosing the proper font will produce unmeasurably better results than that WordArt crap. Bending and 3D effects are suave, man. Deck. The bees knees.

The same reason that laymen prefer garish fonts like Comic Sans, ITC Matisse, and ITC Beesknees is the same reason they like WordArt. We, as designers, will probably never understand how anyone can consider that stuff anything but execrable.

Hey, I strongly hope you wouldn't even remotely consider the excellent Dave Farey's Beesknees as something similar to Comic Sans. It's one of the most absurd comparisions I've heard so far.
It could work for your grocery store manager, not here.
Please...

Claudio: Sorry I didn't make myself clear. It is excellent, and that's why I included it in my list. My point was not that it's bad, just that it's cutesy, and that's what most non-designers go for. And it is garish, which (once again) doesn't mean it's bad. Garish does not mean bad. Bad does not mean garish. I mentioned it because it's a font I see a used a lot on amateur flyers and posters.

I don't know what the grocery store manager comment was supposed to me, but if it was an insult, that's unnecessary.

Crack open a copy of Beesknees and examine the glyph forms. There is no question that this face was well conceived by Mr. Farey.

I had the opportunity to compliment him on it in person at Typecon. Try and make an original fat comic bold display font and you'll find many roads lead back to this face.

Stuart :D

No, Colin, it was just referred to your grocery store manager. Luckily here in Italy no one uses Beesknees for amateur work...

I'd like to recall this:
"There are plenty of bad fonts out there and Comic Sans is one of them. It’s got no rhythm. It’s got no passion. It’s wearing a funny hat. Show me a good usage of Comic Sans and I’ll show you good usage of a plastic Flamingo."
Right on, Amanda Erickson!

I still don't get the grocery store manager comment ;-) Maybe that's because someone does some cool sign lettering at my grocery store.

This post has put my Comic Sans radar on high alert. I cringe when it see it.

>I still don’t get the grocery store manager comment ;-) Maybe that’s because someone does some cool sign lettering at my grocery store.

No, probably it's just because my (use of) English is crappy.
And here they use Comic Sans even for logotypes. Consider yourself lucky.

What a fabulous discussion; I come here about a year late but hotfoot from denouncing Comic Sans in other parts of the net, [typotheque] viz; >>My problem is that everday I see Comic Sans, and its near cousins, [those awful truetype 'handwritten' fonts all over the web], being used to sell me stuff. Being used in an irresponsible and uncaring way, by people who should know better. Seriously - the supermarket, the bus company, the local Starbucks and a university[!] where I live - they all think it's cool to pitch me their commercial messages in very large sizes of badly-spaced Comic Sans. Usually on public billboards where there is no escaping its legendary ugliness and utter lack of craft. Perhaps this would be OK if I was an unlettered six-year old, but I'm not; I've had enough.

You want some really good news?
http://www.typophile.com/forums/messages/30/20611.html
:-/

hhp

I was watching a video for a Business Studies class, here in England - and there was a company featured called 'Beechdean Ices' or something. Basically they're a crap-shit company that sell nothing, and have two products - their regular horrible looking ice cream, and their kiddies' version. This kiddies' version is terrible, it has a mascot called Beechdean Bob. It's degrading. The use of Comic Sans MS is overwhelming. And they think they're going to get taken seriously? Come off it. Check out http://www.beechdean.co.uk/Products/Bob.htm for laughs.

So I too might have walked in a few months late. But if anyone else reads (or scrolls) this far down the list of comments on what seems to be a very tired topic: I have a question.

Since starting my Visual Communication degree this year, with introductory typography subjects being taught in both semesters, I [would like to think] I've become alot more typographically aware. While my fellow students and I cringe at Comic Sans on billboards, WordArt, stretched type, and the like, what's it to everyone else? Would you average grocery-shopper really care that This Week's Special is advertised in skewed, stretched, drop-shadowed Comic Sans?

cheers
pat

An interview with Vincent Connare on Comic Sans and the bancomicsans movement

Thanks Hrant - I have just been to http://www.typophile.com/forums/messages/30/20611.html. And wow. Now I feel very sorry for Vincent Connare - and I reckon him to be genuinely 'more sinned against than sinning' - SHAME ON YOU APPLE! It's not right and it's not fair; the guy has caught more than enough crap for other people's actions, but to be ripped off in this way is outrageous. BTW, I still think Comic Sans very ugly and badly-spaced; to my eye, Chalkboard is an attempt to 'fix it' and indeed, it appears to space better - even in Vincent's demonstration of the difference between the two! However much I dislike it, Comic Sans IS a roaring success and no-one can detract from that; perhaps Mr Connare could be content with the idea that 'imitation is the sincerest form of flattery'. The suggestion that he makes a new 'Comic Sans Regular' to retain ongoing authorship and regularise the font is a good one.

I remember getting an email years ago which had 10-20 photos collected from around the world where Comic Sans was used inappropriately. I am trying to find it again and was wondering if anyone here knows where they are? An example that I will never forget was that a nuclear missile silo had a special launch room (or something similar) which had a notice on it saying words to the effect "restricted area, etc etc" all in comic sans!!! It was the epitome of poor application of the comic sans typeface. If anyone knows where a heap of good pics are showing real world examples of comic sans being used inappropriately, please share. I have been to bancomicsans.com and the pics there are very small and the selection is not as good as this email I am remembering...