Font Hipsters(daringfireball.net)
daringfireball.net
Font Hipsters
http://daringfireball.net/2011/10/font_hipsters
15 comments
I'm an engineer with a pretty keen eye for design, but I've never understood these font wars. At a certain point, whether your serif is 3% longer, or the loop in the letter a is downwards or upwards, none of that helps or hurts readability. What companies really need to start working on is their rendering technology. The Segoe family was designed for clear type, one of the most readable and cross-screen technologies available today. Mac OSX suffers horribly from a blurriness on non-Apple displays, and as unfamiliar as I am with the tech that underlies Linux distros like Ubuntu, they haven't seem to hit any screen right yet. ClearType handles bleed, leakage, contrasts, all seamlessly. Apple has only designed for their devices, so yes, it tends to look very good on their tech. Android gets the worst of both worlds: no good algorithm, and no control of hardware.
One has to wonder just how much Apple stock Gruber owns.
If you define originality as a clumsy patchwork of existing pieces.
Roboto may be clumsy, but it's far from a patchwork of existing pieces. (if you look, really look, at those comparison charts, you'll notice that even the "frankensteined" source fonts have significant differences from the Roboto glyphs they inspired, in weight, shape, and proportion. the bar on the capital Q looks nothing alike, for the most blatant example.)
it's not the case that Roboto is a ripoff of an existing face, or even four existing faces (for the special case of "an existing face" == Helvetica, I posted about this at length here at my blog, complete with ranting and bad photoshops: http://http204.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/all-sans-serifs-are-...). it is the case that it's a product of its times and took inspiration from faces which already existed -- because if you create a font from scratch, intentionally trying to do only things which have never been done before, you're likely to end up with something completely unreadable.
that said, to me, it's super unrefined, chunky, and challenging to read -- it's outright broken at small sizes (and, thus, on low-DPI displays) where letters blob out around the edges due to poor hinting.
I'd much rather they just bring back Droid Sans. :(
it's not the case that Roboto is a ripoff of an existing face, or even four existing faces (for the special case of "an existing face" == Helvetica, I posted about this at length here at my blog, complete with ranting and bad photoshops: http://http204.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/all-sans-serifs-are-...). it is the case that it's a product of its times and took inspiration from faces which already existed -- because if you create a font from scratch, intentionally trying to do only things which have never been done before, you're likely to end up with something completely unreadable.
that said, to me, it's super unrefined, chunky, and challenging to read -- it's outright broken at small sizes (and, thus, on low-DPI displays) where letters blob out around the edges due to poor hinting.
I'd much rather they just bring back Droid Sans. :(
Going through those entries, it looks like he read all the posts bashing Roboto and gradually convinced himself that it sucks.
I am trying to figure out how it went from decent looking typeface...
He never said he thought it was decent looking.
He never said he thought it was decent looking.
I see no inconsistencies.
Can someone please explain daring fireball to me? Every single post appears to be about how great Apple is. That can't seriously be the blog, can it? Why would people read this?
I think Gruber seems to be a smart guy but all of his posts seem to praise Apple and hate on non-Apple especially Google. I think he says some interesting things but I just can't take the guy seriously. He's like the RMS for Apple.
What makes DF interesting (or at least relevant) is that John Gruber tends to think like Apple does (as a collective). Steve Jobs even went so far as to use Gruber's rationalization during the iOS vs Flash debacle as an example of a well reasoned argument.
The short version is: Gruber is a good read if you want to know what Apple is thinking.
The short version is: Gruber is a good read if you want to know what Apple is thinking.
His columns are almost always written about Apple's actions either in hindsight or in the very near term future, but he makes very few predictions or longer-term insights.
I find Gruber unreadable simply because he is so predictable. If it's about Apple, then it's praise; and if it's about Android, it's criticism.
That said, I think he's smart and knows exactly what he's doing. His audience is probably about 95% Apple product owners and he does a great job at suppressing any cognitive dissonance they may have regarding their Apple purchases - which keeps them coming back.
Reading his column is just another ritual for faithful followers of the Church of Apple.
That said, I think he's smart and knows exactly what he's doing. His audience is probably about 95% Apple product owners and he does a great job at suppressing any cognitive dissonance they may have regarding their Apple purchases - which keeps them coming back.
Reading his column is just another ritual for faithful followers of the Church of Apple.
I find the Roboto font looks great.
http://androidspin.com/2011/10/19/miui-theme-itching-for-the...
Does Gruber have an urge to pick on everything Android does to make himself feel better about iOS? I think Android 4.0 brought a lot more improvements than iOS 5 did, but I guess he just has to find something to pick on.
http://androidspin.com/2011/10/19/miui-theme-itching-for-the...
Does Gruber have an urge to pick on everything Android does to make himself feel better about iOS? I think Android 4.0 brought a lot more improvements than iOS 5 did, but I guess he just has to find something to pick on.
It's almost like people who aren't you can have different opinions than you.
1: Once you are apparently incorporating four difference fonts as influences, aren't we in the realm of originality?