As I understand it, they mostly did this for themselves. A change of one pixel doesn't concern any user, but it communicates the pride you take in your work.
> As I understand it, they mostly did this for themselves.
Wouldn't say so. All these people do the best work they can - the average consumer might not consciously tell the difference, but they will notice carelessness, at least subconsciously.
Companies spend loads of money on Corporate Fonts. Most consumers will tell you that they can't tell apart Arial and any other sans-serif font; yet many companies decide that a proprietary font is a vital identity asset. Doesn't that say a lot about the meaning of typography?
The Siemens Sans font [1] is particularly fascinating: It is a very subtle modification of the ubiquitous Frutiger font [2]; most people would probably tell you that even Frutiger looks like Arial too them. And yet, Siemens spent loads of money on Siemens Sans Global, a version that "includes all of the world’s major script systems". Personally, I think that Siemens Sans is maybe the most beautiful sans-serif font ever designed. See for yourself: Do you feel a difference?
As I understand it, they mostly did this for themselves. A change of one pixel doesn't concern any user, but it communicates the pride you take in your work.