When designing a new typeface, how early on do you decide what format will be the target? I suppose providing only one format is more efficient, since you can focus on one type of hinting only and provide the best results. Despite some opinions that OTF* is the future and the fact that PostScript hinting is allegedly easier, I suppose when you want to achieve the best results on all platforms, you still go for TrueType?
If so, do you perform a manual conversion at some point in the designing cycle, and you take it from there, applying any new improvements to the TT version? (I would not be inclined to go that way....)
When designing a textured typeface, I presume you would use PostScript so that the conversion doesn't result in any quirks and to cut down on file size (since hinting is negligible in that case). But if you have a family consisting of solid and textured styles, then you'd likely use one format for all of them, right?
I have ambiguous feelings regarding the whole schism between the formats. I suppose the only reason for so many differences between them (not just curve type but also how renderers treat them, their hinting mechanisms, etc.) is simply the available technology, the already developed software? Or are the hinting differences directly and inherently related to the curve types? (I could see how using delta hints would be more useful when there are more nodes available to shift).
* Technically fonts with both TrueType (quadratic Bézier) and PostScript (cubic Bézier) curves can have either the .otf or .ttf extension. Why would they though?