The licensing could be a problem, which is probably why they weren't included. But why can't it be made that all we need to do is choose a font instead of using fonts that may have licensing issues? Use Sans as the default font for all those scripts, until you change it to whatever font you have installed to run the script with.

Yes I understand this, but why have fonts being called for that aren't provided somehow or pre-installed?
Can't this be eliminated?
That's what has caused this confusion in the first place.

Not sure, I know little to nothing about Linux.

Yes, remember back a few weeks ago when I put my fonts into addon manager and I wanted to move all the default fonts to their own folder?

Yes I vaguely recall you mentioning that.
Is Sans the default font for you when you open your Gimp?

I don't know, I will have to check. As far as I know, Linux has all the same default fonts as Windows

Linux distributions are not monolithic and in terms of licensing, each distro has their own policy.

By default, Fedora doesn't include any software, images or fonts with proprietary licensing, Fedora includes a default set of fonts, which are free from proprietary licensing. They also recommend Liberation Fonts as a replacement for Microsoft Core Fonts For The Web.

Some Linux distributions include proprietary fonts, out of the box, but either way, these fonts can be easily installed in any Linux distribution. Personally, I got in the habit of installing and using Microsoft Core Fonts For The Web because so many websites used them. Now that Liberation Fonts are a suitable replacement, MS Core Fonts aren't really necessary. I usually go ahead and install them anyway, tho.

There is also the issue of Subpixel Rendering used in various font engines. Microsoft holds the patent for this technology until 2019. Many Fedora users are using infinality to get really nice font rendering in Linux.

I've become increasingly impressed more and more with Linux and the way things are handled by this OS.

I discovered that the more I used Linux, the better I liked it too. I don't game very much anymore and I don't need any specific Microsoft commercial apps, so for personal use, I don't actually need Windows for anything. When I do work with Windows, it's for business purposes or as a favor for family & friends.

Wow, Wallace is finally breaking loose and coming over to the brighter side. woo hoo

Well, I like the way Sweden runs their county too, but I'm not going to become a citizen of Sweden any time soon.

I was talking about Linux silly.

Yes I know.

Linux and Windows are not mutually exclusive. It's a trivial matter to run both on the same machine, either by dual booting or through virtualization. I ran both Linux & Windows for a couple of years before deciding I didn't need Windows anymore.

I recently installed a second HDD and could install Linux on it. I did install it on my old machine, but at the time I really wasn't very impressed.

Well, you do need to actually run and use Linux on a daily basis, over a period of time, to get a feel for what it's all about. There is a learning curve to overcome, being that internally, Linux is not at all like Windows. It took me nearly two years to feel comfortable enough to cut the Windows' umbilical.

Many people routinely use both and argue they have the best of both worlds.

One thing that is pretty impressive about Linux is that it's a much more secure platform than Windows. I've been running Linux for many years and have never gotten a virus or any other type of malware. It's also less privacy invading than Windows.

Being free and open source is good too.

I'd like to give it another go. You have a link to a good ISO download?