What's the difference between a dependent function type$( \Pi - types)$ and a family of types?

I was reading the book "Homotopy Type Theory", and got confused about the distinction between a family of types $B : A \to \mathcal U$ and a dependent function type $\Pi_{(x:A)} B(x) : \to \mathcal U$. From the book,

Given a type $A : \mathcal U$ and a family $B : A \to \mathcal U$, we may construct the type of dependent functions $\Pi_{(x:A)} B(x) : \mathcal U$. There are many alternative notations for this type ...

, where the family of types $B : A \to \mathcal U$ is just a function

whose codmain is an universe

But I don't see any construction introduced, just a new notation $\Pi_{(x:A)} B(x) : \mathcal U$. What is the actual construction, and how is the construction different from that of the type family $B: A \to \mathcal U$ itself?

More specifically, given a dependent function $f (x:A) :\equiv \Phi$, which takes an $x:A$ and returns a value in $B(x)$, shouldn't the type of $f$ be $B$, which being a function by definition, does exactly taking $x$ to $B(x)$ (, or $x \mapsto B(x) \equiv B$)? What's the new notation about?

A type family $B : A \to \mathcal U$ is a map from the inhabitants of type $A$ to a type.
However a dependent function $\Pi_{(x:A)} B(x)$ maps from an inhabitant of $A$ to an inhabitant within type $B(x)$. So the inhabitant's type can change depending on the argument.
For example you could have the type family $\mathcal V : \mathbb{N} \to \mathcal U$. Where $\mathcal V(x)$ is a type inhabited by natural numbers less than $x$.
You could then have a dependent function $max : \Pi_{n:\mathbb{N}} \mathcal V(n)$ which returned the largest inhabitant of $\mathcal V(n)$.
In this example $max(1)$ would return $0 : \mathcal V(1)$.