Legacy Font Format Comparisons

Format Overview

Quick reference for the five legacy formats covered on this page. Each has a narrow use case in 2026, most are migration-out candidates for any active project.

For any modern project, web, app, ebook, or print, the answer almost always is to convert these formats to TTF/OTF (desktop and apps) or WOFF2 (web). Specific pair-by-pair comparisons follow below for cases where you need to understand the trade-offs during migration. For the format hub pages with deeper individual coverage, see PFB, DFONT, EOT, and SVG.

PFB (PostScript Type 1) Comparisons

PFB files contain PostScript Type 1 outline data. Adobe formally deprecated Type 1 in January 2023, removing rendering support from Creative Cloud apps. Any active project still using PFB should be migrated to OTF, which preserves the underlying CFF cubic-curve data inside a modern OpenType container. The comparisons below cover migration paths from other formats into PFB's territory and out of it.

WOFF vs PFB

WOFF (Web Open Font Format, 2010) wraps TTF/OTF outlines for web delivery; PFB is a desktop-only legacy print format. They serve completely different worlds. WOFF cannot be used in print software like InDesign or Illustrator; PFB cannot be served via @font-face to a browser.

Recommendation: If you have PFB and need it on the web, convert PFB → OTF → WOFF2. WOFF was a web format from day one; PFB has no web role.

DFONT vs PFB

Both legacy desktop formats, but for different platforms and different decades. DFONT is the Mac OS X 2001-era container that shipped with system fonts on macOS; PFB is the cross-platform PostScript Type 1 print format from 1984. Neither belongs in active projects.

• DFONT uses TrueType outlines internally (quadratic curves) and is essentially a Mac-only repackaging of TTF
• PFB uses PostScript Type 1 outlines (cubic curves) and ships as a binary print font, often paired with .pfm and .afm metadata files
• Conversion: DFONT → TTF (extract the TT outlines); PFB → OTF (wrap the CFF outlines in OpenType)
• Cross-platform need: If your team mixes macOS and Windows, neither format is suitable. Standardize on TTF or OTF.

SVG vs PFB

SVG fonts described glyph outlines in SVG XML, a verbose format that produced enormous files and offered no hinting. PFB describes the same outline information in compact binary with hinting. They have nothing in common except both being deprecated.

Verdict: Neither is appropriate for new work. SVG fonts were dropped from all major browsers by 2018; PFB was deprecated by Adobe in 2023. If you have content in either format, convert to OTF for desktop work or WOFF2 for web.

EOT vs PFB

EOT was Microsoft's 1997 attempt at DRM-protected web fonts for Internet Explorer; PFB was Adobe's 1984 print format. Both are dead, in different ways. Internet Explorer's retirement effectively ended EOT's relevance; Adobe's 2023 deprecation ended PFB's.

Migration: EOT → WOFF2 (modern web replacement). PFB → OTF (modern desktop replacement). They never had overlapping use cases, so no direct conversion makes sense.

DFONT (macOS Data Fork Font) Comparisons

DFONT was introduced in Mac OS X (2001) as a way to ship system fonts using the data fork of HFS+ files instead of the legacy resource fork. macOS 10.15+ has been gradually moving to standard TTF/OTF; DFONT is now mainly seen on system fonts for backward compatibility. For cross-platform projects, always convert DFONT to TTF or OTF.

TTF vs DFONT

The most common DFONT comparison. DFONT is essentially TTF data wrapped in a Mac-specific container. The internal outlines are TrueType quadratic curves, the same as standard TTF. The container is the only meaningful difference.

Conversion is lossless, extracting the TT outlines from DFONT produces a standard TTF with identical glyphs and hinting. Use our DFONT to TTF converter for the migration. There is no reason to deliberately create new DFONT files.

WOFF vs DFONT

WOFF is for web @font-face delivery; DFONT is for macOS desktop installation. No browser supports DFONT. To put a Mac font onto a website, convert DFONT → TTF → WOFF2 (the modern path) or DFONT → TTF → WOFF (legacy support). Use our DFONT to WOFF2 converter.

WOFF2 vs DFONT

WOFF2 is the modern web font format with Brotli compression, typically 30% smaller than WOFF, 60-70% smaller than raw TTF. DFONT is a legacy macOS desktop container. The conversion path is direct: DFONT → WOFF2 in one step using our converter, which extracts the TrueType outlines and wraps them in WOFF2's compressed container.

EOT vs DFONT

EOT (Microsoft IE-only, deprecated) and DFONT (macOS-only, deprecated), two different proprietary container formats from competing platforms, both now obsolete. Neither has relevance to modern projects. Cross-conversion: EOT → TTF → DFONT, or DFONT → TTF → EOT, both unnecessary unless maintaining specific legacy systems.

SVG vs DFONT

SVG fonts (XML-described outlines) and DFONT (Mac binary TT) have no use case overlap. SVG was deprecated in browsers by 2018; DFONT is platform-locked to macOS. If you have content in either format, the modern target is WOFF2 (for web) or TTF/OTF (for desktop and apps).

EOT (Embedded OpenType) Comparisons

EOT was Microsoft's proprietary web font format introduced in Internet Explorer 4 (1997), with DRM that bound fonts to specific domains. The W3C rejected EOT for standardization in favor of developing WOFF. With Internet Explorer's retirement (2022), EOT has no remaining use case. Any active website still serving EOT fallbacks should remove them, they only added bytes to no benefit.

OTF vs EOT

OTF (OpenType, 1996) is a desktop and modern web format with broad support. EOT was IE-only and never gained adoption outside Microsoft. They differ in scope: OTF is the dominant desktop font format and works on the web via @font-face (though WOFF2 is preferred); EOT was only for Internet Explorer.

• OTF outlines: can be either TrueType (quadratic) or PostScript CFF (cubic)
• EOT outlines: always TrueType-based (it's a wrapper around TT data)
• OTF features: full OpenType including GSUB/GPOS for ligatures and substitution
• EOT features: limited; advanced typographic features were poorly supported
• Domain restriction: OTF none; EOT bound to specified domains via DRM

Migration: If you have an EOT file and need a desktop OpenType, you may need to start from the original TTF or OTF, extracting from EOT's DRM container is not always clean. For web work, skip EOT entirely and use WOFF2.

EOT vs SVG (web fonts)

Both web font formats from the pre-WOFF era. EOT was IE-only with DRM; SVG fonts were cross-browser but enormous (XML-encoded outlines) and lacked hinting. Both are deprecated. Historical web font CSS often included an EOT URL for IE plus an SVG URL for older iOS Safari, the famous "bulletproof @font-face" syntax. Today neither fallback is necessary. WOFF2 alone covers 97%+ of browsers.

SVG Format Comparisons

SVG appears in two distinct font-related contexts: (1) SVG fonts proper, where glyph outlines are described in SVG path notation embedded in an XML document, deprecated in all major browsers since 2018; (2) SVG icons or sprites, used as a vector graphics format for icon systems, replacing icon fonts entirely. The pages below comparing SVG with other formats apply to SVG fonts specifically (the deprecated case).

OTF vs SVG (fonts)

OTF is the dominant modern desktop font format. SVG fonts encoded the same outline information (paths) but as XML strings, making them roughly 5-10× larger than the equivalent OTF for the same glyph set. They were cross-browser briefly (2008-2017) but became obsolete once WOFF/WOFF2 standardized and browsers dropped SVG font support.

Migration: SVG font → OTF requires recreating the font in a font editor (Glyphs, FontLab, Birdfont) by importing the SVG paths as glyph outlines. There's no clean automated conversion because SVG fonts lack metadata, hinting, and OpenType feature tables that OTF requires.

Icon Fonts vs SVG Icons

Icon fonts (Font Awesome-style) and SVG icons solve the same problem, delivering scalable vector icons to the web, through different mechanisms. The industry has decisively moved from icon fonts to SVG sprites and inline SVG. Modern frameworks (React, Vue, Svelte) consume SVG icons natively as components.

Recommendation: For new projects, use SVG icons (preferably as React components or sprite sheets). The only argument for icon fonts in 2026 is if you're already deeply invested in one, even then, migration paths to SVG are well-documented. Lucide, Heroicons, Phosphor Icons, and Tabler Icons all ship as SVG component libraries.

Other Comparisons

Online vs Desktop Font Converters

Two paths for converting fonts between formats: web-based tools (font-converters.com, Convertio, CloudConvert) versus desktop applications (FontForge, Glyphs, FontLab, TransType). Each fits a different workflow.

Recommendation: Online for one-off conversions and batch jobs (faster, zero setup). Desktop tools for actual font modification, adding glyphs, adjusting metrics, creating variable fonts, hinting. They serve different problems. For straight format conversion, online tools win on speed; desktop tools provide no advantage. For licensed commercial fonts, choose an online converter that processes in RAM with no file storage , see our alternatives comparison for privacy-conscious choices.