Why your Office 2004 Fonts want to keep loading in OS X - an explaination

J

Jeff Wiseman

Why your Office 2004 Fonts want to keep loading in OS X

(please note followup-to newsgroup)


After spending a LOT of time screwing around with this, and with
with the gracious coaching by Matt Neuburg (thanks a lot Matt!)
as well as some other participants on various newgroups, I've
finally come to a fairly solid understanding of this problem and
why it is occurring. I want to get this summary down so others
running into it won't have the aggravation that I've had.
Unfortunately, there's not much can be done about the problem
except avoid it until Apple stabilizes their font support
software and Microsoft stops using strange undocumented controls
in their products.


SYMPTOMS:

Every time someone starts an Office 2004 product such as Word for
the first time, they get the entire office font set dumped into
their home font folder ~/Library/Fonts, EVEN IF the fonts are
already installed there or anyplace else in OS X (usually the
/Library/Fonts folder).


VARIATIONS:

It's possible on a system with multiple accounts for some users
not to see this problem (i.e., fonts never load) and other to see
it. The chances of incurring the problem increase with the use of
the Font Book utility.


MECHANISM:

Office seems to detect a first run on its products by the absence
of Microsoft office related preferences in the
~/Library/preferences area. When an application like Word is
first started and it determines that this is a first run, it
checks the OS X font environment of the User for the presence of
one or more specific Windows True Type fonts distributed with the
Office Installation. The font(s) checked for is from the
following list:

Batang.ttf
Gulim.ttf
MS Gothic.ttf
MS Mincho.ttf
MS PGothic.ttf
MS PMincho.ttf
PMingLiU.ttf
SimSun.ttf

I do not know which of these fonts is the trigger but it does
seem to be one or more of these. Note that this set is the
COMPLETE set of Windows Truetype fonts provided with Office. Also
note that they are all Asian type fonts.

When Office is checking for the presence of whichever font it is
looking for, it does so by using the OS X font management
facilities and not just looking in locations by itself. This is
significant as I will explain later. If it does NOT find the
font(s) in question, it then copies all of the fonts in the
Applications area for Office into the User's home font folder
(~/Library/Fonts). This is a reasonable algorithm for
Installation in that a user has control over their own fonts and
an Administrator can move them to a common area if they so desired.

PROBLEMS:

The main issue is that Office tends to install all of its fonts
even when they are already installed. In searching this out I've
discovered that it is a result of 3 issues:

1) The set of 8 fonts identified above are all wacko to start
with and all exhibit the same characteristics in the Mac's font
system. None of the other 70+ fonts installed by Office have any
of these problems. None of the Windows TrueType fonts that come
with the OS X have these problems. Some strange characteristics
when installed in OS 10.3.6 are:

a) For any of these fonts, if you double-click on the font,
although the Font Book utility opens, you will not get an install
window.
b) If these fonts are duplicated in the Font system, they can
"disappear" from the font system. This doesn't mean they are
Disabled, but rather they won't even show up as Disabled fonts.
c) Disabling one of these fonts can result in it disappearing.

The problem in a nutshell is that these fonts are disappearing
from the font system, even though they actually exist in the
proper folders. Since Office uses the Mac's view of installed
fonts, It reports to Office that they do not exist and as a
result, Office reinstalls another set of unneeded fonts.

2) The fonts in each user's environment (i.e., the list of all
enabled fonts that a user can see or use) are determined through
the Mac's font management system. It appears that the files that
track this information can be very unstable. This information is
kept partly in the com.apple.ATS.plist file in the user's
preferences folder. When fonts disappear from the visibility of
applications and utilities such as Font Book, deleting the
preference file and logging out then in can cause those lost
fonts to again show up in the tool's menu (although collection
enable/disable states can be altered and would need to be reset).
I have found through several hours of experimenting that the
Microsoft fonts listed above are the only ones that seem to keep
being dropped from sight which has the same effect of disabling
them. None of the other Office fonts are affected like this. In
other words, the very fonts that Microsoft is using to determine
whether or not their font set is installed are the very ones that
are so ill-behaved that the font system keeps losing track of
them, necessitating a preference file deletion in order to get
them detectable again.

3) The Font Book utility is very buggy IMHO (I've seen Beta test
software far more stable than this thing). Without further
experimentation using other font tools, I personally have become
convinced that the Font Book itself is the main reason for the
instabilities identified in "2)" above. I believe this because
even the handling of collections seems to be just as buggy as the
direct font handling. It has the appearance to work ok at first
but if you look closer and actually try doing what it is supposed
to do, you start seeing constant inconsistencies. If you don't
use it for anything except previewing fonts, it seems ok. But, if
you start creating multiple collections with large numbers of
fonts in them (e.g., an "Office fonts" collection) strange things
start to happen. I've seen collections that when you drag a font
from the computer collection to it, it totally ignores it. Then
when you try to delete the collection, it refuses to go away. If
you then look into the Font collections folder you can see things
like "test.collection" and "test.collection.collection" both
sitting there.

When you have duplicate fonts in the system, it can get pretty
confused here too. I saw it once where it wouldn't even let you
assign one of the duplicates to a collection since it seemed to
insist on locking it into a "Family" that it had found elsewhere.
However, the Font Book's tolerance for the wacko font set given
previously is particularly bad. When these fonts are present,
especially as duplicates (which is what this problem is all
about--installing the font set when it is already in place) you
hardly have to do anything in Font Book to see them disappear
from the view. When you can't see them in Font Book, your
applications can't see them, and Office's font installation
software can't see them resulting in the problem being documented
here.


RECOMMENDATIONS:

A) Don't try deleting the Asian Windows TrueType fonts. This
triggers the problem. Even touching them or Disabling them from
the Font Book can trigger the problem. MS put the fonts there,
now you just have to live with them and the space they take up on
your disk and font pulldown lists. Don't remove these fonts from
the Applications folder for Office so they won't install. This
will also trigger the problem.

B) Avoid doing or trusting anything significant in Font Book.
Even though it is "supposed to" do things, I have lost nearly all
confidence in it. If it doesn't seem to have all the fonts
visible, delete the com.apple.ATS.plist preference and log in
again. That will start you clean again but only a few keystrokes
in the Font Book can regenerate the problem.

C) If Font Book is locked up such that you don't seem to be able
to work on certain collections, try opening an application (such
as text edit) that has the font panel. Although the font panel is
functionally very much like Font Book, It will sometimes let you
do things when Font Book has gone brain dead. For example, if you
can't drag and drop a font from the computer collection into your
own new collection, try the same thing from the Font Panel, you
may find that it actually works there.


I hope that this is useful to others. I wish I had this
information before I had to start screwing around trying to
figure it out myself. All this information is only my personal
opinions based on the experience I've had over the last couple of
days. Any additional information or corrections to
misinterpretations I've made would be greatly appreciated.

- Jeff
 
P

Paul Berkowitz

Thanks for this summary, Jeff.

[Unfortunately, your setting follow-up only to a newsgroup to which I'm not
subscribed and which cannot be reached from the news server (Microsoft) on
which I'm reading your post, all previous attempts to send this reply
errored and backfired. So please don't do that again. Thanks. It took some
effort to get this to the right place.]

--
Paul Berkowitz
MVP MacOffice
Entourage FAQ Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/faq/index.html>
AppleScripts for Entourage: <http://macscripter.net/scriptbuilders/>

Please "Reply To Newsgroup" to reply to this message. Emails will be
ignored.

PLEASE always state which version of Microsoft Office you are using -
**2004**, X or 2001. It's often impossible to answer your questions
otherwise.
 
J

Jeff Wiseman

Paul said:
Thanks for this summary, Jeff.

[Unfortunately, your setting follow-up only to a newsgroup to which I'm not
subscribed and which cannot be reached from the news server (Microsoft) on
which I'm reading your post, all previous attempts to send this reply
errored and backfired. So please don't do that again. Thanks. It took some
effort to get this to the right place.]


Thanks for the feedback Paul. Actually, it was the first time I
ever attempted such a thing so I'll need to keep this in mind :)

- Jeff
 
B

Beth Rosengard

Hi Jeff,

I'm replying to Paul's post instead of yours because I don't want to have to
repeat the process to get this to post in the right place :).

Your summary is very helpful. May I have your permission to publish it
(crediting you as contributor, of course) at word.mvps.org
(<http://word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/index.htm>)? That way others will be able
to benefit more easily from your experience.

--
***Please always reply to the newsgroup!***

Beth Rosengard
Mac MVP

Mac Word FAQ: <http://word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/index.htm>
Entourage Help Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org>



Thanks for this summary, Jeff.

[Unfortunately, your setting follow-up only to a newsgroup to which I'm not
subscribed and which cannot be reached from the news server (Microsoft) on
which I'm reading your post, all previous attempts to send this reply
errored and backfired. So please don't do that again. Thanks. It took some
effort to get this to the right place.]

--
Paul Berkowitz
MVP MacOffice
Entourage FAQ Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/faq/index.html>
AppleScripts for Entourage: <http://macscripter.net/scriptbuilders/>

Please "Reply To Newsgroup" to reply to this message. Emails will be
ignored.

PLEASE always state which version of Microsoft Office you are using -
**2004**, X or 2001. It's often impossible to answer your questions
otherwise.

From: Jeff Wiseman <[email protected]>
Organization: Earthlink
Reply-To: <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps,microsoft.public.mac.office.word
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.apps
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 07:21:45 GMT
Subject: Why your Office 2004 Fonts want to keep loading in OS X - an
explaination

Why your Office 2004 Fonts want to keep loading in OS X
 
J

Jeff Wiseman

Beth said:
Hi Jeff,

I'm replying to Paul's post instead of yours because I don't want to have to
repeat the process to get this to post in the right place :).

Your summary is very helpful. May I have your permission to publish it
(crediting you as contributor, of course) at word.mvps.org
(<http://word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/index.htm>)? That way others will be able
to benefit more easily from your experience.


By all means, please do. I think that I've included enough
information for folks to realize that I'm no expert on this, only
that I spent a lot of time looking at it and and those are my
personal experiences and speculations. For example, it really
appears that Font Book is not properly manipulating a user's Font
environment (and scrambling it in some cases). On the other hand,
it could be Apple's Font system that is not reacting properly to
the triggers sent it from the Font Book utility.

You should also mention that all experimentation was done on a G5
iMac running OS 10.3.6 and the Office 2004 Mac student edition
both with and without the online updates after installation.

And if you can get it into the hands of some actual software
developers too, THAT would be nice :) The design engineers
should NEVER have chosen an install flag that was the most likely
to be REMOVED by most users due to it/them being:

1) Huge. These were all asian fonts with many of the glyphs and
they are much bigger as a result if I remember correctly. This is
exacerbated by the fact that when the system is broken, everyone
gets a copy of the fonts in their home areas.

2) Foreign. Many folks don't need them and don't want them taking
up space in their font menus.

3) Ill-behaved on the Mac. This installation mechanism couldn't
have been tested very well. Granted there seems to be trouble in
the Mac's Font Book and/or Font management system, but the "flag"
font(s) are an order of magnitude worse than any others on the
Mac (including those provided with Office) at screwing up the
font environment for a user. You can't even get a normal Font
Book install window to open when you double click one of these
things.

4) Totally and completely undocumented. Well, maybe it was
somewhere, but *I* sure couldn't find anything on it. I still
don't know which (or even if all) of the fonts control the font
installs. Don't you think that would be something a person
installing this stuff on their system would like (or even need)
to know?

- Jeff
 
P

Paul Berkowitz

And if you can get it into the hands of some actual software
developers too, THAT would be nice :)

Already taken care of...

--
Paul Berkowitz
MVP MacOffice
Entourage FAQ Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/faq/index.html>
AppleScripts for Entourage: <http://macscripter.net/scriptbuilders/>

Please "Reply To Newsgroup" to reply to this message. Emails will be
ignored.

PLEASE always state which version of Microsoft Office you are using -
**2004**, X or 2001. It's often impossible to answer your questions
otherwise.
 
J

John McGhie [MVP - Word and Word Macintosh]

Hi Jeff:

Actually, that's probably more our error than yours. On UseNet, it is
expected that everyone will be able to see all of the newsgroups that exist
(there are more than 50,000).

On UseNet, each group has a "canonical" hosting server that the rest of
UseNet treats as its home server and from which the other servers all feed.

Most of the regulars here connect directly to the Microsoft Server Farm at
Redmond (msnews.microsoft.com). It's free, no user name or password
required, and it means we get to see most posts within about five seconds of
them being posted (depends on Internet conditions: I have been getting a
five-second turn-around all night tonight).

But the executives at Microsoft are not that keen on hosting several
gigabytes off filthy pictures, which is the bulk of the other content on
UseNet these days. So the server we're using gets ONLY the Microsoft
groups, and can post only to those groups.

If Paul and I were not so impatient to serve you, we could connect to any
one of a number of other news servers and we would not have the problem.
But it can take as long as ten days for a post to fully replicate so we can
see your post. And we don't want several gigabytes of rude pictures either.
So we don't :)

The microsoft.public.* series are all hosted on a massive server farm at
Redmond. With one notable exception, which I won't even MENTION for fear
that we start it off again. We have been trying to get it to go "away" for
ten years, but since it now has no home server, it just wanders haplessly
from server to server. Since nobody actually "owns" it these days, nobody
has the authority to "kill" it :)

Anyway, I digress. The microsoft.public series were originally a normal
part of UseNet, hosted on some of the University servers around the world.
But they are very high-traffic groups (mega-traffic, these days).
Eventually the Universities got sick of the outrageous bandwidth and storage
required to maintain them. Microsoft began to host them, first
unofficially, now officially.

Most news servers are some unwanted and out-dated PC stuck under the table
running Linux. The Microsoft server farm is a huge collection of
multi-processor Win2K3 servers. Its scale and complexity just blows me away
these days.

Just in case anyone was interested :)

Paul said:
Thanks for this summary, Jeff.

[Unfortunately, your setting follow-up only to a newsgroup to which I'm not
subscribed and which cannot be reached from the news server (Microsoft) on
which I'm reading your post, all previous attempts to send this reply
errored and backfired. So please don't do that again. Thanks. It took some
effort to get this to the right place.]


Thanks for the feedback Paul. Actually, it was the first time I
ever attempted such a thing so I'll need to keep this in mind :)

- Jeff

--

Please reply to the newsgroup to maintain the thread. Please do not email
me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie <[email protected]>
Microsoft MVP, Word and Word for Macintosh. Consultant Technical Writer
Sydney, Australia +61 4 1209 1410
 
J

Jeff Wiseman

John,

Actually, this is good information for me. I had noticed some lag
and in some cases posts I thought was missing in the m.p.m.o.word
group I've been following. I've been using Earthlink's servers by
they have been problematic and as you point out, companies only
seem to see these things as a necessary evil. Although there is a
little improvement recently, for the longest time Earthlink has
been all but ignoring problems with their newsgroup server farms.
Their customer support is clueless. When you report an access
problem to usenet they ask if you've rebooted your PC and what
kind of email tool you are using (this isn't e-mail).

Anyway, if I can access and post to the Redmond servers directly
it sounds like a better way to participate in the
Microsoft.Public groups.

BTW, the issue Paul ran into is likely a safety net. If Microsoft
has limited their support to those groups, then blocking export
to other groups is a great way to eliminate spam to other groups.
I'm presuming that was the issue (if you can't see the other
groups, you can't see what garbage in them originating from
Microsoft might be--a reasonable precaution).

I'm going to try setting up access through the redmond servers
for this group instead on my own ISP's, it may improve my
visibility there.

- Jeff
 
P

Paul Berkowitz

Anyway, if I can access and post to the Redmond servers directly
it sounds like a better way to participate in the
Microsoft.Public groups.

BTW, the issue Paul ran into is likely a safety net. If Microsoft
has limited their support to those groups, then blocking export
to other groups is a great way to eliminate spam to other groups.
I'm presuming that was the issue (if you can't see the other
groups, you can't see what garbage in them originating from
Microsoft might be--a reasonable precaution).

It's not really a "safety net" - it's just how news servers work.

I am using Entourage as my news reader, but the same would apply with any
news reader (as opposed to participating via a browser using Google access).
In Entourage, it's particularly simple since the Microsoft News Server
(msnews.microsoft.com) is already set up as a news server. You can see the
Microsoft News Server icon in the Folders list, and can make changes to the
settings (such as setting a spoof email address rather than your default
email address) in Tools/Accounts/News/Microsoft News Server/Edit.
I'm going to try setting up access through the redmond servers
for this group instead on my own ISP's, it may improve my
visibility there.

It will certainly improve the speed at which your messages both hit the
server and are seen by others using the same process, and you'll see their
(our) messages sooner too.


--
Paul Berkowitz
MVP MacOffice
Entourage FAQ Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/faq/index.html>
AppleScripts for Entourage: <http://macscripter.net/scriptbuilders/>

Please "Reply To Newsgroup" to reply to this message. Emails will be
ignored.

PLEASE always state which version of Microsoft Office you are using -
**2004**, X or 2001. It's often impossible to answer your questions
otherwise.
 
B

Beth Rosengard

Hi Jeff,

I see you use Mozilla which I've never tried (I read news from Entourage),
but I assume you can set up news accounts there. The server designation
you'll need is msnews.microsoft.com (and it does not require you to log on).
There's information at the following URL for setting up Entourage which has
further information in case you need it.
<http://word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/AccessNewsgroups.htm>
(If using Safari, hit Refresh once or twice; or use another browser for this
site.)

--
***Please always reply to the newsgroup!***

Beth Rosengard
Mac MVP

Mac Word FAQ: <http://word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/index.htm>
Entourage Help Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org>
 
J

Jeff Wiseman

Beth said:
Hi Jeff,

I see you use Mozilla which I've never tried (I read news from Entourage),
but I assume you can set up news accounts there. The server designation
you'll need is msnews.microsoft.com (and it does not require you to log on).
There's information at the following URL for setting up Entourage which has
further information in case you need it.
<http://word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/AccessNewsgroups.htm>
(If using Safari, hit Refresh once or twice; or use another browser for this
site.)

Think I figured it out. Actually, I'm using Netscape 7.2 which
looks like Mozilla since its derived from the same code.

This is my first post via the Redmond servers. Thanks for the help.
 
J

Jeffrey Weston [MSFT]

Hey Jeff, thanks for your generous contribution to the Newsgroup.

I've passed this post onto the appropriate people. This area is certainly
one we are looking into for a future release.

Thanks again,

--
Jeffrey Weston
Mac Word Test
Macintosh Business Unit
Microsoft

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
 
J

Jeff Wiseman

Jeffrey said:
Hey Jeff, thanks for your generous contribution to the Newsgroup.

I've passed this post onto the appropriate people. This area is certainly
one we are looking into for a future release.

Thanks again,


Great, then my efforts will have been worth while. That's what I
was aiming for.

- Jeff
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top