Apple resident Neue Helvetica Font / alternative Neue Helvetica source – confusion

[Tony Pritchard]

TYPOGRAPHIC HELP! Any thoughts? Neue Helvetica is a resident font on Apple. As such it cannot be disabled, deactivated, hidden, deleted, removed. The system and Font Book do not have the complete family. This means you have to have another version /source. Herein is the confusion. Both will display in font lists within software. This means you could inadvertently end up with a mix of sources. Apple displays as light, bold, etc The other source displays as the numerical system 45, 65, etc. Adobe InDesign seems to display using the numerical system and therefore which one are you actually using? Affinity Publisher mixes everything up with two lists of Neue Helvetica in the list. If you have both open then Font Book will alert you to the issue that you have 'multiple' copies open. Multiple suggests lots and not two sources. Confused? I'm not sure there is any way around this. Am I wrong?

[v_kyr]

See also older posts about that theme aka the "Helvetica Neue" font ...

• Related forum threads

[lacerto]

2 hours ago, Tony Pritchard said:

I'm not sure there is any way around this. Am I wrong?

What is the source of the non-Apple version? Adobe has the family name as Helvetica Neue LT Std (at least the OpenType PS flavor) so it differs from the Apple version (which is TrueType).

I have these two installed on the same system and they do not conflict (not within Affinity apps, either, and Font Book does not complain about duplicates):

One potential method to fix this would be using a font editor and rename the family of the non-Apple Helvetica Neue to something else. It is of course a large family so maybe quite a nuisance, and would or course require a specific tool.

 

[Tony Pritchard]

Thanks Lacerto

It looks from your screenshot that your Apple and Adobe versions are in the same list but fortunately sorted out. Mine are a little bit mixed up between the two sets. I don't know what the original source is. I used to work at a University where the Adobe license and typefaces were taken care of. I've left now and the laptop was taken back and the account closed. Hence the move to Affinity. The source of the other typeface might be someone who I worked with who artwork a publication and then packaged the job so I could check it. That person unfortunately died. So am figuring things out. I can't deactivate the Apple resident fonts so they have to appear. Both my sources appear in Publisher so maybe I just need to take more care selecting and then check fonts when packaging for output. Whilst the Publisher displays the fonts. Font Book alerts that there are multiple copies. Maybe this doesn't mean much. Screen shots attached. Of course I could delete my other source and buy a new set from Font Shop (£165). I think the same thing will happen in that the Apple Version will display alongside the bought version.

[lacerto]

Yes, the both Helvetica Neue versions on your computer seem to have same or close to same family names (perhaps a space character is not enough to separate the names, unless the app can make a difference when enumerating the fonts). 

Font editors typically use the FamilyName as a base, and then other parameters to build several other names to create a unique set of font names to avoid name conflicts. Since e.g. PostScript name seems to be built based on Family name (spaces removed and style name appended by other parameters), it may be that at least certain fonts that have close to identical family names, end up having fully identical secondary names (like PostScript name).

If an app enumerates fonts based e.g. on PostScript body (the first part of the name), name conflicts would happen and all kinds of issues related to this problem. I do not think that it is possible to resolve the issue unless the family name of one of the conflicting font is changed and sub names thereafter rebuilt. As mentioned, the problem is often app-specific, depending on whether an app uses multiple name fields to deduce how individual fonts should be grouped and identified.

If name editing is not an option, you could try if just removing the exactly conflicting fonts from the non-Apple family would make it possible to use all sub styles of these fonts, even if from mixed families. The Font Book is probably good enough tool to do this task, as it allows just deactivating conflicting fonts without needing to uninstall them.

 

[kenmcd]

5 hours ago, Tony Pritchard said:

It looks from your screenshot that your Apple and Adobe versions are in the same list but fortunately sorted out. Mine are a little bit mixed up between the two sets. I don't know what the original source is.

The versions you have were probably found thru a web search - and most of those are broken with name conflicts like this. There are no "HelveticaNeue" (no space) official fonts.

The macOS Helvetica Neue is also broken. It may work in Apple applications and most of Adopey apps, but it will never work properly in Word, LibreOffice, and apps like Affinity. Apple did this on purpose to prevent others from using their fonts.

Helvetica Neue LT Std (which is easy to find as it is in the old Adobe Font Folio 11) has a different family name so there will be no name conflicts like you have now. Same with Helvetica Neue LT Pro.

BUT, both of those font families are configured with multiple R/I/B/BI style groups (2), and Affinity apps do not handle multiple R/I/B/BI style groups well. The fonts may or may not work properly. They may appear to work and then you may have the wrong font(s) get embedded in a PDF.

One thing is for sure is you need to get rid of the broken non-macOS Helvetica fonts. They will continue to cause problems.

The Std or Pro or WG1 versions have different family names which will not conflict with the macOS versions. So they may work for you.

If you have something like TransType, you can rename the fonts to work properly (if you know what you are doing).

You may want to consider Helvetica Now. Being a much more modern font family it does not have the old numbered font naming issues, or the R/I/B/BI style groups naming issues. 

Or consider changing to one of the many free or less expensive options available now.

[Tony Pritchard]

Thanks kenmcd and lacerto for your responses. Appreciated. I'm not sure what R/I/B/BI is but I assume it is the way fonts are named. There is the Apple resident Neue Helvetica and the other one I have. The other one is from a legitimate source. It was from a designer I knew who was in a commercial studio and we would have used it on a print job when we were both working at a university. We are both Apple Mac users. A former colleague has also confirmed that system fonts clashing with external fonts is a common problem. Helvetica Now is a reasonable suggestion but is quite expensive now that i am retired. This version of NH https://www.myfonts.com/products/neue-helvetica-pro-basic-family-package-379965 is priced at £164 and is quite reasonable. My alternatives are buy this fresh. Push on with what I have on my system. Dig out my old computer and see what version I had back then which again I think will be legitimate. 

[lacerto]

1 hour ago, Tony Pritchard said:

Helvetica Now is a reasonable suggestion but is quite expensive now that i am retired.

You can PM me to tell some details of this other font. Depending on a bit on details, it might be an easy task to prepare you a version that works fine on you current system, without causing conflicts with the internal macOS version. R/I/B/BI refers to Windows kind of four-style menu names which need to be consistently created to make super families like Helvetica Neue work. I think that Affinity apps and apps generally on macOS basically ignore this system and have other means that help grouping fonts. But name conflicts occur all the same, but for other reasons than confusion of four-style menu names. As I have the macOS versions installed, I could have a peek on your font and see what it takes to make a fix.

[lacerto]

This illustrates a situation that you might have:

a) Internal macOS version (part of TrueType collection):

b) Legacy Type 1 font, this one is from Adobe FontFolio 8 (which still can be installed on most recent macOS):

If I try to install this font using Font Book, it warns about a duplicate being in process of installation. As you can see both fonts use identical family name and style group with identical sub style. Many apps only read this information and accordingly would get confused font menus when enumerating available fonts. Adobe apps might have been able to handle these conflicts without problems because they read those additional names to identify and group the fonts correctly. But as this is a Type 1 font, modern Adobe apps no longer support it, and Affinity apps are helpless in differentiating these fonts.

The easiest method would be simply disabling the conflicting styles of the non-Apple version using FontBook. It would be possible to convert the Type1 versions and use non-conflicting names, but this would be a pretty big job (and besides, I assume that against the original license). 

As Type 1 fonts are deprecated and more and more apps (and e.g mobile OSs) stop supporting them, it might be a good idea to get a new version of Helvetica Neue. Unless you want to have exactly the same design, I would recommend getting Helvetica Now from Monotype, as it is a superb font with lots of fine features. The MyFonts version is from Linotype and is basically an up-to-date OpenType version of the old Type1 font, but the package you referred only contains 16 styles while the original FontFolio 8 or 9 version contains 51 styles so there is a good chance that you will not get full support for opening all your old documents with the replaced versions, despite of identical design. In any case you would need to map the "missing" fonts of the old documents with old versions of Helvetica Neue to the new fonts with slightly different names. 

EDIT: The Apple built-in OpenType TrueType flavor contains 14 styles. It you do not need all styles of your current non-Apple version of Helvetica Neue, just using the Apple versions (instead of purchasing a new Linotype package only containing 2 styles more) would probably be the most practical solution.

[Tony Pritchard]

Thanks for adding a lot of information to this thread. Affinity say they will continue to support Type 1 fonts for the foreseeable future. But yes time moves on. I'm a bit of a typographic minimalist so Light 45, Roman 55, Heavy 85 along with their italics will see me through. I tested Adobe and Google fonts along side Neue Helvetica and NH still stood up really well. Helvetica Now looks good but its family packages are more than I need and there is an attendant cost. Another thing I thought to try is to set up a small sample and package it for output and printing and then send it to the chosen printer to ascertain if there are actual issues. I'll keep the idea of a purchase in the books. I'll take a look at the font I have and PM you anything I can find out. Thanks!

[lacerto]

Font naming conflicts are a big nuisance and unfortunately not anything that was properly resolved with OpenType. It would be useful to have a kind of an (optional) XML mapping etc. that would let the user to resolve family name conflicts so that a specific set of file names could be remapped in one go to a distinct family name, without needing to touch the actual font files. Decades ago something like this could be done on Windows using AFM (plain text file) and PFB and letting Adobe Type Manager (possibly even OS installator, do not remember anymore) create PFM files (Windows menu font and metrics files) that would be used to install fonts.

Font manufacturers and distributors do occasionally rename font families so e.g. Linotype Helvetica Neue (old name), which in Adobe FontFolio 11 existed as Helvetica Neue LT, is now renamed in modern Linotype package as Neue Helvetica, thus differentiating e.g. from the Apple package (which conflicts at least with the legacy Type 1 family name). Similarly e.g. Hero New exists in Adobe Fonts as New Hero.

I am not sure if Windows (11 at least) can somehow avoid font conflicts related to duplicate installations of common fonts (at least MS related) since I have e.g. Calibri physically installed (inherited from some original installation years back along either along with Windows OS or Office installation), and then have activated Calibri in Adobe Fonts to make the font available also on macOS (the font is automatically activated on all computers that have CC installed). But Calibri does not show as duplicate installation on Windows and is not causing any issues. Perhaps there is some co-operation with Windows and Adobe CC(???) .

But there certainly is not with macOS (Ventura 13.1 tested) and Adobe CC. E.g. Seravek and Athelas both exist with these exact family names in Adobe Fonts and on macOS (as legacy support fonts), and the full Adobe versions cannot be installed on modern macs (and absurdly the inbuilt but in later OS versions hidden support fonts cannot be made available, either, unless an app knows to enumerate hidden font resources). Apple should rename all their inbuilt trademark font samples (that's what they basically are since they are typically somehow crippled versions of the full versions that can be purchased from their manufacturers) so that there would be no chance for conflict with purchased versions.

[Tony Pritchard]

Thanks Lacerto for an informed and intelligent response. This naming '12 pt Helvetica* 55 Roman 05472' which is under Neue Helvetica is very confusing. It doesn't fill me with confidence as it seems to mix up different naming versions of Helvetica and Neue Helvetica. I am stalling on buying a new version with Monotype. I spoke to them this week and they advised four places to buy from. Their original price of £164 didn't include VAT so it's near £200. I don't want to make a mistake and repeat the known problems. Some of the retailers give technical details including the file name Font.com has things like HelveticaNeueLTPro-Roman.otf which I don't like as scrolling through a list of alternatives like this doesn't seem good. I prefer the numbering system of 45, 55, 65, etc. Linotype.com has this Neue Helvetica® Std 55 Roman although this might not be how it displays in the font list. With FontShop I can't see how the name will display. MyFonts doesn't list how the name will display in a software font list. I'm going to see if I can chat with MyFonts. I'll buy if it sorts the naming. 

[lacerto]

On 2/9/2023 at 2:09 PM, Tony Pritchard said:

MyFonts doesn't list how the name will display in a software font list. I'm going to see if I can chat with MyFonts. I'll buy if it sorts the naming. 

I hope they can verify the naming. I am not sure but it may be that font distributors can rename font families. One thing that seems odd in Neue Helvetica is the region-specific names like Neue Helvetica Paneuropean -- I would not like that, but just Neue Helvetica as family name and then the numeric sub styles with descriptive names.

As for Helvetica Neue LT that comes with FontFolio 11, it works perfectly fine on macOS, along with resident Helvetica Neue, and all 51 styles get listed under common family name also in Affinity apps:

It would be very odd if you could not get the same with current Linotype version no matter where you purchase it.

One thing that shows that fonts have been properly named is loading them -- the whole family -- in TransType (available for both Windows and macOS):

If there are naming conflicts or irregularities, they are shown in red. No red with the version that comes in FontFolio 11. On macOS grouping of fonts in sub groups consisting of four logical styles (regular, italic, bold, bold italic) has not traditionally been important since this practice is based on old Windows restriction, but it can still be used effectively to quickly change to a logical bold or italic version of any font in a super family using the keyboard shortcuts Ctrl/Cmd+I and Ctrl/Cmd+B, or equivalent toolbar buttons, or turn logical bold and/or italic version back to regular and straight. This does not work in Affinity apps (except when used with simple families only having one bold-switch within the whole family), even on Windows, but does work in e.g. InDesign (not sure if on macOS). In Affinity apps emboldening using Ctrl/Cmd+B, or the Bold button might switch to wrong font, so by emboldening and turning off emboldening the user might end up having a different font than what they had before emboldening, as demonstrated here:

a) The four-style mapping built into font:

b) Affinity style:

c) Adobe style:

These kinds of finesses have been attended to in good-quality fonts (though paying more or purchasing directly from foundry does not necessarily guarantee bug-free names and fonts; e.g. Helvetica Now initial version (full family) purchased directly from Monotype [EDIT: no, it was actually from MyFonts.com, but the font manufacturer is of course Monotype] had several bugs in naming and had also glyph omissions.

 

[Tony Pritchard]

Thanks Lacerto. Had a reasonable exchange with Monotype. MyFonts, Fonts.com, Fontshop and Linotype are all related to Monotype so buying from any of them will hopefully be the same. The person did a test in Adobe InDesign but not Affinity. Attached is a screenshot of what displayed. In Affinity Publisher 2 you have Font Family in one drop down and the font style in the second drop down to the right of this. In your first image I am assuming you have clicked on the second drop down to the right of the first. maybe I am wrong it might be the first drop down to select Apple or LT.  In the list you have Helvetica (6) and Helvetica Neue (14) – I assume these are the Apple resident versions. Then the LT version is the Linotype one separated out. I've also attached a screenshot of my drop down like yours with the rogue font. I think the solution is to ditch the rogue font. Can't do anything about Apple. Then buy a new version from Monotype which hopefully will display the full range separate from Apple and make selection easier.  

[lacerto]

Ouch! It is odd that the family name shows as "HelveticaNeue" -- it is the same that caused conflicts with the legacy Helvetica Neue you have, and the Apple provided Helvetica Neue. The actual fontnames are also odd (IMO). Perhaps someone on the forum has this font installed on their mac who could confirm that these fonts work without problems and specifically with Affinity apps. But it seems really strange that a font by Linotype could have such family and font names! [Ignore -- I completely misunderstood] Why not Neue Helvetica -- and fontnames shown e.g. here:

https://www.linotype.com/1266/neue-helvetica-family.html

This is quite confusing!

[kenmcd]

It all works properly when the font developer follows current best practices for configuring the name fields inside the fonts. And the application works properly.

Issues affecting this...

Many old font families do not follow current best practices. The numbered font families fall into this category. 

Many fonts found out on the internet are broken - such as the no-space version you have.

More confusion is added by Helvetice Neue initially being released as Neue Helvetica (or those were Type 1 conversions, dunno) - and some of those are floating around out in the ether.

Helvetica Now uses modern naming best practices to avoid all of this.

Affinity applications do not handle style groups (R/I/B/BI) properly. They do not handle multiple R/I/B/BI groups properly (like in Helvetica Neue LT Std from AFF11). And they break the R/I/B/BI style linking by automatically setting the Bold button for any font weight above Bold (700). This also affects (breaks) other font families such as Avenir which I have previously discussed here in the forum.

Re Windows fonts - Windows only has one version if each font activated (even if multiples have been installed), and Windows applications read which font is activated from the Windows registry. Multiple font files may be present in the Fonts folders because if a font file is locked (because an app is using it) when a new version is installed, the new font file has a suffix added to the file name (underline and a number) and that one file is the font activated in the registry. Affinity applications appear to simply scan the Windows Fonts folders - and thus are confused by the multiple files for the same font name. Sometimes nothing appears in the font list. Sometimes the wrong font is embedded. Sometimes the text is garbled.

Helvetica Neue LT Std could be modified to work properly in Affinity applications (meaning so the Affinity apps do not screw it up).

 

[lacerto]

7 hours ago, Tony Pritchard said:

I've also attached a screenshot of my drop down like yours with the rogue font. I think the solution is to ditch the rogue font.

Sorry, I did not read properly your post, and wrongly thought that your screenshot showed something you are about to purchase. But it just shows what you tried to install but resulted in conflict. So yes, ditch it!

I had a closer look on what is available in Linotype's new packages and this is what I found out:

• The current packages have a family name based on "Neue Helvetica", but come in several different flavors; as for character sets, the largest ones are sold under family name Neue Helvetica World", with 6 styles each containing about 1,700 glyphs; the Paneuropean version has complete 51 styles with support for Greek and Cyrillic glyphs (total of about 630 glyphs); the Pro flavors that I referred above seem to be otherwise same but just miss support for Green and Cyrillic; these all come in OpenType TTF flavor [EDIT: and OpenType PS flavor]; there are also leaner versions with OpenType PostScript flavor which seem to be more or less based on old classic PostScript and which are less expensive and contain less glyphs; I would avoid these unless you have just basic needs
• Since Apple provided Helvetica Neue with 14 styles have support for Cyrillic and Greek, I think that the "Pro" versions are the ones to go for unless you have specific need for these glyphs also in other sub styles. The Pro versions have better support for OpenType features and have also Latin Extended character sets
• This is an example of how the Pro versions are named (the World and Paneuropean versions have short letter indicators appended but are otherwise similar):
  File name: HelveticaNeueLTPro-Roman.ttf
  Windows menu name: HelveticaNeueLT Pro 55 Roman
  PostScript name: HelveticaNeueLTPro-Roman
  PostScript full name: Helvetica Neue LT Pro 55 Roman
  The crucial thing is that you won't have conflicts with Apple versions with these fonts.
• MyFonts.com seems to sell license "by user", while Linotype sells "by computer" (5 at minimum). I do not think that there is any practical difference if you basically purchase for your own use; price-wise there does not seem to be difference (Linotype lists the prices including VAT, MyFonts.com excluding).
• Adobe FontFolio 11 versions are basically Pro versions but just with family name Helvetica Neue LT and without support for Cyrillic and Greek, and they are in OpenType PostScript flavor (unlike modern Linotype versions that are in OpenType TTF flavor [EDIT: and also in PS flavor] ). 

I would personally go for the complete Pro package, but considering that you already have the basic styles as Apple versions (though with limited OpenType features), there might be point in purchasing just individual styles, or e.g. condensed value pack: https://www.linotype.com/1606101/neue-helvetica-condensed-family-product.html (though Apple package comes with Condensed Bold and Black).

[lacerto]

After spending a while checking what is available I fell for Helvetica Neue World value pack -- that is pretty good with all its subscripts and modern OpenType features:

 

What is important here is that the current family name is -- after all -- Helvetica Neue started, and NOT Neue Helvetica, as was implied when viewing the fonts. This means (I assume) that if there is not anything after "Helvetica Neue" in the family name, this font would indeed conflict with intrinsic Apple Helvetica Neue. So if you end up purchasing, please ensure that the family name differs from plain "Helvetica Neue". If you get the most economical value packs that do not have Latin Extended character sets, there is a chance that these fonts do come with plain "Helvetica Neue". If you go for the more expensive "Pro" packs, or "Paneuropean", these fonts will have (I guess) these additional identifiers appended to family name.

Anyway: when family names differ, Affinity apps do not mess with Helvetica, so you can have all these installed and they work fine:

[Tony Pritchard]

Thanks kenmcd and lacerto

I have a few statements from Monotype.

1) Richa states that these are sister sites under the parent company Monotype
https://www.myfonts.com/
https://www.fonts.com/
https://www.fontshop.com/
https://www.linotype.com/
So I would hope the same information applies to all sites and that their agents issue standard advice.

2) Arun (customer care MyFonts) states:
• System Helvetica font will appear as HelveticaNeue-Roman/Regular, whereas the fonts purchased from our website will appear as HelveticaNeueLT Pro-55 Roman. 
• Naming of Monotype fonts will distinguish them, as you can't deactivate Apple resident/system fonts.

3) Richa supplied me with this link that discusses OTF, TTF and CFF: https://www.linotype.com/8120/the-difference-between-cff-and-ttf.html

4) Interesting that one of the sister sites allows only one user whilst another related under the same parent company seems more generous. I'm on my own. 

5) I am a retired graphic designer and design educator. My typographic approach was fairly minimal eg one typeface, one change of size and one change of weight. I compared fonts over the years but Neue Helvetica always won out as a basic 'workhorse'. I used it as a standard no nonsense typeface for workshops until the clashes started happening and so for teaching we moved to Avenir. So long as there is reasonable pedigree I never really got hung up on the typeface thinking it's what you do with it that is important. Being retired I've almost got to start again. So I bought Affinity. And now I am closing in on a new purchase of Neue Helvetica.

6) Having stated the above this one seems a good balance of range and price: https://www.myfonts.com/products/neue-helvetica-pro-basic-family-package-379965

7) The book I am doing uses 45, 55 and 85 plus italics. As it is print it is likely that I'll do a print ready PDF. But usually you might package everything including the Fonts. I don't think Adobe allows this with their font library. I know Monotype license covers such things but somehow we have to function. I'll do my best to stick within the rules. 

Thanks for your help in this investigation as its been stalling me for a bit.

[lacerto]

1 hour ago, Tony Pritchard said:

• System Helvetica font will appear as HelveticaNeue-Roman/Regular, whereas the fonts purchased from our website will appear as HelveticaNeueLT Pro-55 Roman.

I suppose the support referred to font-level naming difference. But I am not sure if that is enough in Affinity apps. It is crucial that the family name under which the sub styles are grouped, is different. In the original post you had a "near conclict" at family-name level (space character being the only difference), but the actual font names were definitely unique!

1 hour ago, Tony Pritchard said:

Naming of Monotype fonts will distinguish them, as you can't deactivate Apple resident/system fonts.

Do they mean user-performed renaming? You would need a font editor for that.

1 hour ago, Tony Pritchard said:

Interesting that one of the sister sites allows only one user whilst another related under the same parent company seems more generous. I'm on my own.

Yes, odd. I have not read the licenses carefully but at least in our family company more than 1 user can use the same font resource simultaneously (installed on multiple computers). As said, I do not think that there are technical methods to control usage so whether using "1-user" license legally installed on multiple computers but accessed by more than 1 person is illegal usage, or use of "5-computer" license by multiple people is illegal usage, I cannot tell. We have always just used "5-computer" licenses so therefore I purchased from Linotype. Perhaps something has changed recently because when I purchased Helvetica Now, it was a 5-computer license and I purchased from MyFonts.com.

 

1 hour ago, Tony Pritchard said:

over the years but Neue Helvetica always won out as a basic 'workhorse'.

Yes, it is a good and versatile font. Though based on what you mentioned, I am not sure if you couldn't just get everything you need by using the intrinsic Apple version? But if you go for the basic Pro package, I would confirm with the sales person that the font family is something else then just "Helvetica Neue" (same as in intrinsic Apple version). Since as mentioned, the font sites give misleading information as they let the user understand that the family name is now Neue Helvetica. It is not.

My guess (and hope) is that the family name of the fonts included in the basic Pro package (called Neue Helvetica Pro) you referred is Helvetica Neue Pro. That would guarantee that it works correctly with Affinity apps and installs correctly on a mac that has intrinsic Helvetica Neue installed.

1 hour ago, Tony Pritchard said:

I don't think Adobe allows this with their font library.

No, the Adobe Fonts (cloud fonts) are not allowed to be packaged. (And within Adobe ecosystem, why should it be necessary, since if an open layout, i.e. a package, is sent, the receiver is supposed to have CC account to be able to open the packaged .indd or .idml file in the first place.) It would also be illegal to include them in Affinity packages.

[Tony Pritchard]

• I will ditch my original non Apple version

• Monotype meant that the way they have named the fonts will be enough to distinguish them from Apple. I will not have to rename the fonts.

• Maybe the sister sites have different company names but as they are the same company Monotype then the ultimate deal should be the same.

• I hear that there are issues with the intrinsic Apple proprietary fonts. The Monotype version can be used for traditional print and isn't just a screen font. Monotype would provide fonts with original integrity (they own the company that designed the original) within one family from 25 to 95.

• The intrinsic Apple versions are very limited. I could use Light, Regular and Bold, but I don't think there is enough of a distinction between regular and bold. Extra bold is 75 and Heavy which I intend to use is 85. Neither are intrinsic to Apple. Monotype would provide the full range plus the italics.

[Old Bruce]

3 minutes ago, Tony Pritchard said:

The intrinsic Apple versions are very limited.

Here are the versions I have on my MacBook, these are the Apple versions.

[Tony Pritchard]

Thanks Old Bruce

[Tony Pritchard]

Hi Lacerto et al

I have had another exchange with MyFonts / Monotype, this time Veronica. 

• The font is called Neue Helvetica. The reason for Helvetica Neue in the display of fonts in the software is this: "the name has historical reasons - customers who had installed Helvetica complained they didn't find the Neue Helvetica (because it was listed under N, not under H ...). So Linotype decided to make the change in the name so that Helvetica and Helvetica Neue would be listed one after the other".

• There seems to be a lot of caution when talking license ie Monotype cannot comment on Apple. 

• I asked whether the intrinsic Apple fonts were the same as Monotype's. Veronica replied that Apple and Monotype are not the same fonts. 

• Veronica confirmed that the Monotype fonts would cover the needs for the traditional print book. I raised my concern that the answers didn't feel very straight. 

• I asked directly whether this font family would work and whether anything could go wrong https://www.myfonts.com/products/neue-helvetica-pro-basic-family-package-379965 Veronica replied "Affinity Publisher is a desktop application - so yes, you can use the desktop fonts in this application in order to create the documents for your book. Was that straight enough?"

• I am not sure there is much further I can go with this. I think I should take the risk and buy. 

[lacerto]

1 hour ago, Tony Pritchard said:

• The intrinsic Apple versions are very limited. I could use Light, Regular and Bold, but I don't think there is enough of a distinction between regular and bold. Extra bold is 75 and Heavy which I intend to use is 85. Neither are intrinsic to Apple. Monotype would provide the full range plus the italics.

I have the same 14 fonts that Old Bruce shows, and while the Apple versions do not have the same features as modern versions (e.g. the Pro flavor that you are considering), they do come with Cyrillic and Greek character sets that are not available in Pro versions.

EDIT: The screenshot you provided shows that you have 12 styles of the Apple version, perhaps two are conflicting with the version you had tried to install and therefore are not included. Try what happens after you have removed installation of the "rogue" version.

Monotype support person could not unfortunately provide much help. I think the single crucial question to ask them would be asking what is the exact family name of the font that is displayed when the font is selected on macOS. It must be something different than Helvetica Neue. E.g. Helvetica Neue Pro would suffice, or Heveltica Neue LT, or anything that helps them to become a family of their own.