IKEA's Typeface Dilemma

Recently, I saw some online articles and blog-posts on IKEA's typeface change. I think this is an important issue. The use of typeface affects company branding, and thus how the audience perceives the company and its products. Details, such as choice of typeface, don't seem to matter that much, but they do have a subliminal effect to the viewer.

Futura and Verdana were created at different times for different purposes. Futura is one of the best typefaces that has been used over the years, and its geometrical characters have a beauty that you don't see in many other typefaces. It was created in the 1920's and intended for printing, and it doesn't read well on the screen unless used in a larger size. Verdana was created during the 1990's, and it shows its best value when viewed on screen. The serif is exaggerated, and the lowercase letters have tall x-height for easy reading of small type. However, when it is printed, especially in a large size, the letterform looks too exaggerated. They both have great value, but don't work too well when used in the medium for which they weren't created.

I just saw the IKEA online catalog, which has the same layouts as the printed catalog. I clicked some of the online pages while I was flipping through the printed catalog, and I can see why Verdana was used for screen viewing, but still miss Futura in the print catalog very much. I don't know what is the best answer to this dilemma, knowing that designing the two versions with different typefaces would result in almost double the production time.

I believe the IKEA's typeface change ended up showing the company's vision on their products and sensitivity on their design. This is the issue which affects many companies who have similar branding issues.