As I’m interested in typography, I have a quick question about the different Ubuntu font families.
There are currently 2 font families: ‘Ubuntu’ and ‘Ubuntu Sans’.
These 2 font families are almost identical, with only subtle differences.
When I look at the information in gnome-font-viewer, I can see that ‘Ubuntu Sans’ is a more recent version, with more styles (ExtraLight, for example).
Why this choice to make these 2 font families cohabit by default?
In my humble opinion, it’s a bit confusing.
elcste
2
(I’m just a user/observer:) Ubuntu Sans is the newer update, as you say, and default on recent Ubuntu versions. The biggest update to me is that it is thinner, which looked funny to me at first but once I got used to it I prefer it. It is a much more similar weight to other fonts and makes reading text easier IMO. The monospaced font also has better sizing: the old version was much smaller at any point size than other fonts.
Since the changes are pretty major, “Ubuntu” was kept as the name of the previous version for people who prefer to carry on using that and “Ubuntu Sans” added for the new version. I think I remember at first the new version was named just Ubuntu as well but that made it much more complicated to determine which version is which for people who want to use both or keep the old one.
I was thinking the reason would be some apps or toolkits expect an “Ubuntu” font to be present if they have not been built to use “Ubuntu Sans” (yet).
Also “Ubuntu” is not the oldest font, it seems to be the middle child. The oldest one from Jammy is now in the fonts-ubuntu-classic package which replaces fonts-ubuntu if installed.
1 Like
Thank you for taking the time to reply.
In conclusion, I’m going to keep both fonts installed and ‘Ubuntu Sans’ will be my default font choice.
I’ve got used to this font for on-screen reading. I also like to send pdf documents with the Ubuntu font embedded to people who use another operating system. Modest attempt to promote the Ubuntu system, but that will certainly be the subject of another topic.
fthx
5
Hi all,
I have a question about Mono: I see Ubuntu Mono is the default font (by creating a new user) but what’s the difference with Ubuntu Sans Mono?
I get both in fonts list and that’s confusing me.
1 Like
fthx
6
Ok so I asked chatGPT…
It tells me that the only difference is some metrics causing a bigger vertical line spacing for the Sans version. No change in characters shape and metrics. That’s for the variable Ubuntu fonts, not Mono here.
It tells me that the Sans Mono is bigger than Mono to make the size matching the Sans size. But I have to wait for some new uploading rights atm 
.
fthx
7
Ok, so creating a new user (25.04) uses Ubuntu Sans * fonts.
The default size is 11 (UI) and 13 (mono).
It causes on my display the U of Ubuntu an height:
So why are we keeping these default settings? Is it intended to have bigger mono fonts than UI?
Why are we keeping the old non-Sans versions of Ubuntu fonts? All these different Ubuntu fonts are installed by the same usual fonts-ubuntu package:
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/Ubuntu-B.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/Ubuntu-BI.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/Ubuntu-C.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/Ubuntu-Italic[wdth,wght].ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/Ubuntu-L.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/Ubuntu-LI.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/Ubuntu-M.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/Ubuntu-MI.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/Ubuntu-R.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/Ubuntu-RI.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/Ubuntu-Th.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/UbuntuMono-B.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/UbuntuMono-BI.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/UbuntuMono-Italic[wght].ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/UbuntuMono-R.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/UbuntuMono-RI.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/UbuntuMono[wght].ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/UbuntuSans-Italic[wdth,wght].ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/UbuntuSansMono-Italic[wght].ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/UbuntuSansMono[wght].ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/UbuntuSans[wdth,wght].ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/Ubuntu[wdth,wght].ttf
Why are we keeping the old non-Sans versions of Ubuntu fonts?
The “non-sans” “Ubuntu” font family needs to live on indefinitely because so many apps look for and require an “Ubuntu” font. Not “Ubuntu Sans”.
I’m only wondering why “Ubuntu Sans” needed to be introduced and not just call it “Ubuntu” for the sake of continuity. Both look like Sans to me.
This is correct. “Sans” is opposed to a “serif” font, such as Times New Roman, where the “serifs” (small divots at the end of the letters) are present.
The Ubuntu font is and has always been, by definition, a “Sans Serif” font, or “Sans” for short. I agree, there’s no reason why the Ubuntu font couldn’t just be replaced by what is known as “Ubuntu Sans” to keep problems like this from happening.
elcste
10
Change log for fonts-ubuntu package in Ubuntu
New upstream snapshot, include the new version of the font named ‘Ubuntu Sans’ to be compliant with the Google Fonts requirements
-- Sebastien Bacher <seb128@ubuntu.com> Thu, 21 Mar 2024 21:03:21 +0100
I don’t know if that means Google Fonts want all sans fonts to have “Sans” in their name or just that the Ubuntu font was already on Google Fonts and so the new version needed a new name (or something else I’m not thinking of 
)
1 Like
fthx
11
Roboto is not named Roboto Sans…
So ok for the legacy name but why keeping two different Ubuntu fonts, though almost identical?
3v1n0
12
fthx
13
Ok I’ll search how to do that and then I’ll propose a MR with good values (11 for both, I measured with Gimp and that makes really both fonts having exactly the same height).
I think these values come from the old quite bold Ubuntu fonts? Afaicr, I always had these 11/13px in Tweaks by default in Ubuntu.
1 Like
elcste
15
I agree 11 for both looks right with the current versions (and that the current values reflect the tiny size of the old version mono font).
fthx
16
