The Dongola Times

(Anachronistic) Dispatches from the Kingdom of Makuria.
29th of May, 2012

Google Web Fonts versus FontSquirrel

I have for some time now used FontSquirrel to generate or use pre-generated @font-face kits for use in my website. It is such a great tool, and a blessing to the Web. I never wanted to fight the tiring war of setting up good typography on the Web, and before I could quit bothering, Font Squirrel made it as easy as a trigger.

I never liked Typekit, because, even though it gives me proprietary fonts, which is in itself a brilliant service, I never felt free enough to get up and running with it while using only the free part thereof.

So I tried Google Web Fonts while I was already using FontSquirrel, and it turns out that the CSS that is sent by Google Web Fonts is slightly smarter—and is dumb-proof, which is important when I am the user—than what is generated by FontSquirrel. So I am using that these days, in places like this blog.

FontSquirrel’s kits work offline, while Google Web Fonts is bound to a live connection. FontSquirrel’s @font-face kit generator works with any font on which you can (“legally”) lay hands, while Google Web Fonts limits usage to a paltry few it has selected. FontSquirrel has a larger collection of free fonts than Google Web Fonts. Each has its benefits and trade-offs, but for my current situation, Google Web Fonts seems to be winning.
There has been a dramatic beautification of this weblog when I put Google Web Fonts in the place where I could replace my fonts. I like that.

Posted by e-mail.