Ubuntu includes the free commercial URW++ postscript fonts in /usr/share/fonts/type1/gsfonts (from the gsfonts package).
I've seen that the full set are also available in TrueType format (including several not in gsfonts, such as Garamond). If you download the ghostscript source, they're all there.
Is there any benefit to using the TrueType versions instead? Will the display improve? Will it affect printing?
Many people would argue that Postscript fonts are actually superior to TrueType. In fact, in a professional setting, Postscript and OpenType are used more frequently than TT. Advocates of TT argue that TT allows for better hinting (note that PS fonts can also have hinting), even though in many cases the popular fonts do not take full advantage of TT capabilities. PostScript fonts used to look jagged on vintage Windows machines without Adobe Type Manager, but that is the past.
Bottom line is, you will not notice much difference between the free TT and PS fonts, at least not in the price range you are paying.
See also:
Purple Fusion Graphics: Font Wars: PostScript vs. TrueType vs. OpenType
Truetype is implemented differently and therefore can have more information (more positions recorded for the vectors) and therefore is not losslessly derivable from the Postscript/OpenType versions, though the reverse is not true. The benefit of TrueType is portability across systems.
That said, this is the format, rather than actual implementation. So it depends on a given font, if the typographers have made use of certain features of the format, or not. It is a case-by-case basis rather than format-by-format basis.
Need to install fonts and take a look manually, or with font inspection/editing tools.
