what fonts are supported in what browsers

[lehula]

I got excited when I noticed I could use fonts like chiller and beesknees with IE7. But it doesn't look like they are supported by Firefox or IE6. Does anyone have a link to a page that tells me what fonts are supported by all browsers. Also, is there anyway to make the fonts I mentioned above, work in Firefox or IE6. thanks

[WebJoel]

"arial" is pretty much all-platform/all-browser. It's usually my first listee. I typically like to include helvetica, for Mac, Mac OS & Linux users. And a serif for the last choice, to display something if nothing else is user-local.

This link might help:

http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/res_fonts.htm

[felgall]

According to the book "The principles of Beautiful Web Design" the following is a complete list of fonts supported by all browsers on both Windows and Mac OS/X. Not all of these are necessarily supported by other operating systems

Arial
Arial Black
Comic Sans MS
Courier New
Georgia
Impact
Times New Roman
Trebuchet MS
Verdana

[WebJoel]

What's the deal with "comic sans MS"? It is nearly always the font cited as being the 'most unprofessional' and looked upon poorly from a web-design purist's point-of-view. I mean, -it's not fecal like "wingdings". Now there's a crappy font! :mad: I kind of like "comic sans MS". Works great for a light-hearted site for a nursery school / daycare web page or a personal site that features comic strips or such...

[FusionComputers]

If you want to include a non-system font like those two, it's best to use images.

[WebJoel]

If you want to include a non-system font like those two, it's best to use images. Missed the point? Using a non-system font like "comic san MS" would delineate the conscientious web page builder to include additional 'all-platform' fonts, and backups, like font-family:"comic sans MS", arial, "times new roman", verdana, helvetica, serif; but even doing this, design purists flock the use of "comic sans MS" as the hallmark stamp of impurity. -I was just curious as to why they so loathe this 'fun' font.
"webdings" or "wingdings", well, -nuff said there. :D

And NO, -images are not good. Text-readers, text-to-braille, etc., can't deal with images. Since you are conveying "readable entities", actual text is the preferred media over a photograph of the word "text". -Downloads faster too and reduces bandwidth consumption.

A truly required presentational-only font that is unsupported, yes, -an image is required. alt="descriptive text explaination" included. :)

[felgall]

Comic Sans MS is a system font for both windows and OS/X and will almost certainly be the fantasy font used if a generic "fantasy" reference is reached in the list of fonts.

The best idea is to include a list of four or fice fonts from the same family ending with the generic family name - that way people with your preferred font see the content in that font and those without it see it in a font that at least belongs to the right family of fonts rather than using the system default (usually Times New Roman).

[FusionComputers]

If you want to include a non-system font like those two, it's best to use images.

I was posting in reply to the original poster's question on "Chiller" and "beesknees"

[WebJoel]

I was posting in reply to the original poster's question on "Chiller" and "beesknees" Upon re-reading the original post I noticed these fonts cites too... yikes! Insomuch as the computer world is more-or-less snubbing VISTA and seeing problems still with IE7 (better than v6?), I am wondering if IE7 even bothered to retain the more mainstream fonts currently supported? I tried IE7 and after a few hours of things 'not working out', removed it. At least they installed a decent uninstaller, for a change. :p
I like to re-read my sig link from time-to-time regarding the stupidity & arrogance of Vista and wonder if some of that got into v7...