Re: terminal true type fonts
On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 04:26:11AM EDT, Jochen Schulz wrote:
> cga2000:
[..]
> > Well .. I'm not sure where anyone ever got the idea that fonts
> > should look blurred. I mean if I buy a book from amazon and I get a
> > "blurred" copy.. I send it back right away. For stuff that you
> > glance at it may be ok, but where reading is concerned .. I wouldn't
> > do it. Your eyes would desperately (and automatically) try to focus
> > thus causing eyestrain etc.
>
> Sure, but in my opinion fonts on my system don't look blurred. Ok, I
> admit it. They are blurred, but very, very little. Only text in
> italics doesn't look really good, but you don't want to read much of
> that anyway (thanks slashdot for not using italics anymore!) and IIRC
> this doesn't look good with non-AA fonts either.
>
> And if your printouts looked as blocky as the fonts in your moz.png, I
> guess you would return it, too.
I would be slightly annoyed at the publisher not showing more respect.
But that's hardly relevant. Screen fonts are designed to make the most
of the particular medium's limitations.
> Comparing printed documents with screen fonts gets you nowhere, IMHO.
Couldn't agree more..!
And this is precisely why I all but stopped using proportional fonts on
a computer screen.
Not worth the trouble.
I only find them useful for print previews. Aah .. but then, I am not
"reading" .. just checking the formatting.
> You wouldn't to read cyan text on black paper either. :)
Hmm.. for reading code in bed, possibly..?
:-)
Thanks
cga
Reply to: