4 ms·

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 dou

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 16y ago
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.