Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Fonts Redesigned

fonts.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 268 posts

Re: Google Fonts Redesigned

#221

Post by DiabloD3 »

jedberg wrote: post #185
Mahn wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd be delighted if both IE and Edge went away forever. To be fair Edge is a pretty solid browser these days, I don't think you can put them on the same league. I've been using it for some time now and other than a slightly different font rendering engine I have yet to find a fault on it; everything works like you would expect in a modern browser. Development wise, we test for Edge ocasionally and so far we haven't…

You mean you haven't found any Edge edge cases? (Sorry I couldn't help myself)

How Edgey.

Re: Google Fonts Redesigned

#222

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

Mahn wrote: post #152
irrational wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At my work we just decided this week that we will no longer support IE or Edge. We won't actively block them (or show a message) and if the site works in those browser then great. But, we won't test in IE or Edge and we won't make any bug fixes just for those browsers. Frankly the number of users using those browsers (low for our site) versus the number of hours required to fix problems with those browsers (high in o…

> I'd be delighted if both IE and Edge went away forever. To be fair Edge is a pretty solid browser these days, I don't think you can put them on the same league. I've been using it for some time now and other than a slightly different font rendering engine I have yet to find a fault on it; everything works like you would expect in a modern browser. Development wise, we test for Edge ocasionally and so far we haven't…

Not bad [0]; although still a bit of catching up to do, it's nowhere near as far behind as IE traditionally was. Apparently, Edge is the first desktop browser to support columns properly, which I give it massive props for.

[0] http://caniuse.com/#compare=edge+13,chrome+51

Re: Google Fonts Redesigned

#223

Post by HelloNurse »

recursive wrote: post #110
lallysingh wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fair play after the IE-ification of the web before that.

I don't think Chromification is any better.

Indeed, in 2016 requiring IE can be forgiven as a symptom of Microsoft captivity and/or being behind the times, while requiring Chrome is a proud proclamation of some mixture of not caring about standards, not caring about UX, not caring about users, not caring about proper web design (in order to avoid proprietary features), and being an ignorant and arrogant Google fanboy.

Re: Google Fonts Redesigned

#224

Post by [deleted] »

colemickens wrote: post #196
Artemis2 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google doesn't want you to use Chromium. Use Chrome instead, it's exactly like Chromium but with all the Google bloatware installed!

>with all the Google bloatware installed! Oh yeah? Like what? Sorry, does anyone downvoting want to actually explain to me what "bloatware" is "bundled into" Chrome? Or just more errant bullshit that's tacitly accepted because it's anti-Google rhetoric fired from the hip without substance? Those audio/video codecs... so much bloat! https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs... Or maybe you're upset…

[deleted]

Re: Google Fonts Redesigned

#225

Post by crawlerie »

CharlesW wrote: post #206
skosch wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hear, hear :) Same for many others, e.g. Montserrat or many of Vernon Adam's designs. That being said, I find the redesign wonderful and long overdue. Maybe now they'll find the time to update their collection.

Any suggestions on finding the latest, greatest versions of these fonts? For example, I found what appears to be the home page of Monsterrat ( http://montserrat.zkysky.com.ar/en ) but it directs me to Google Fonts. Similarly, I searched for "vernon adams fonts" and I don't see what looks like a canonical page for them.

Brick.im[1] hosts free fonts on Fastly's CDN. Fonts are directly converted from their sources to .woff only; doesn't support other font formats. No subsetting means the fonts can be very large, especially those with full OpenType features.

Most of the fonts are of the latest version though. Fonts not included in Google Fonts, like Linux Libertine/Biolinum, Aileron, and Heuristica are included.

If you don't mind the performance hit, you can use it.

[1]: http://brick.im

EDIT: As for where you can find the new versions of the fonts, you can browse through brick.im's Font repository[2] and click on the `SOURCE` files.

The new Montserrat versions are located here: https://github.com/JulietaUla/Montserrat/

[2]: https://github.com/alfredxing/brick/tree/gh-pages/_fonts

Re: Google Fonts Redesigned

#226

Post by comex »

WorldMaker wrote: post #112
lallysingh wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fair play after the IE-ification of the web before that.

Is it? The complaint at the time was the number of websites that outright blocked non-IE browsers rather than just letting the non-IE browsers try their best to render the pages, closing the web. Just because the tables are now turned it's appropriate for Google to break the open web? It seems evil from the standpoint of trying to support an open web (the arguments are the same now as they were back then), and it see…

> Not to mention if you were going to do it based on standards support and caniuse.com statistics, it's Safari now that is the one that lags behind.

It is?

http://caniuse.com/#compare=edge+14,firefox+50,chrome+54,saf...

Skimming it, Safari seems to do a bit better than Edge if you just count boxes; at any rate it's not significantly worse.

Re: Google Fonts Redesigned

#230

Post by buro9 »

I would love if they released the server logic that chose which file to include.

With http/2 I'd like to host the files so that they are served from the same origin, I'd also like to cache the CSS longer than a day.

At the moment I hit two domains (and I preconnect) to try and speed this up:
Then in my CSS I import:

    @import url(https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Source+Sans+Pro:400,600|Merriweather:400,400italic,700italic,700);
That URL loads:

1. More fonts than I need.

2. Different font files depending on... useragent?

I'd prefer to self-host so that I could user http/2 server push for new sessions, and so that I could extend the caching.

The same origin via http/2 would accelerate all of the connections, and removing the need for the additional TLS connection to 2 Google properties will speed it up too.

These are about my only criticisms of Google fonts, that the little bit to make it really useful for those who want webfonts and performance is the bit that's hidden.

Post reply on HN