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

Web fonts, boy, I don't know

meowni.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 333 posts

Re: Web fonts, boy, I don't know

#161

Post by NumberCruncher »

jamra wrote: post #143
NumberCruncher wrote: post #140

Tl;dr: if you are travelling in a foreign country and you think about whatever fonts... girl, you are doing it totally wrong. Buy a city guide, printed on good old fashioned paper, even if it is so 1990, and get a fuck off-line! Or just talk to the natives! In person!

I think you are a bit off with your comment. Having a web connection makes traveling much nicer. The authors mistake was not pre purchasing a data sim with a fast connection. Amateur traveler complaining about nonsense

The next time I pick up a chick I chatted up on a trip and I can't find back to my b'n'b because we both are so wasted and I don't have internet connection to use google maps I hope you will be there. At first to be able to use your 4G phone and at second to prove you how wrong you are.

Re: Web fonts, boy, I don't know

#162

Post by callalex »

matt4077 wrote: post #142
phkahler wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> they've come to symbolise over-indulgence Yes! Why should a web site specify fonts at all? The user should set their browser to a default that they like and most sites should be happy with that. People just use web fonts because they can. If there's a particular reason you need to override the users preference then fine.

And why should anyone be allowed to set colors, or sizes, or shapes? Why don't we use .txt as the format for the web? Because design happens to be one avenue of human expression. If you keep denying that, or label users enjoying it as superficial, you'll end up with something like North Korea, where everyone gets to choose from two approved hairstyles, walks around in "male shoe" or "female shoe" and goes home to eat…

System fonts are literally hitler

Re: Web fonts, boy, I don't know

#163

Post by erikpukinskis »

esonderegger wrote: post #84
5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #7

I have had the exact experience in the last month. Being on a slow connection, I've come to loath web fonts. There is nothing wrong with them in general but it's just that they've come to symbolise over-indulgence and a myopia towards the users actual task-focused needs as opposed to aesthetics. Part of the issue is dealing with progressive enhancement as far as slow internet connections go. How do you solve that pro…

Have none of you ever worked for a designer or marketing person who was unwilling to accept that a bit of text might wrap on Windows (Arial), but fit on one line on a Mac (Helvetica)? Until we can get the major operating systems to include some of the most popular open-source fonts, we're stuck with web fonts. If macOS, Windows, Debian, iOS, and Android all came with Roboto, Source Sans, Lato, Merriweather, Raleway,…

This is because a vanishingly small percentage of designers have truly, in their heart, accepted the web as a medium.

They'll sit lovingly with a bunch of dinged up old lead typesetting tools, positively jizz over imperfections in ink distribution, but try to talk to them about system fonts, box models, or free phones and their eyes glaze over and they drift off into their color calibrated RAW dreamland.

In schools they teach people to embrace media but that only applies to fetishized antique media.

They'll use half of the GPU to render CRT glow too, with 8-bit graphics, gush about material metaphors in their visual design, but they won't consider the material properties of the actual distribution medium for their work.

We still haven't seen a true modernist design movement in the digital age. Maybe very briefly for a year or two in the nineties when browsers were good enough to be interesting but not good enough to do anyrhing. It'll come eventually, but it's taking its sweet time.

Re: Web fonts, boy, I don't know

#164

Post by callalex »

Spivak wrote: post #51
prodigal_erik wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would love an attribute on script and link tags that could be conditional based on connection speeds. I can't help but think of Android's "battery saver" toggle, which leaves me wondering why there's a battery waster feature and why it's on by default.

Same with the "data saver" toggle, I turned it on when I first got my phone and haven't turned it off since.

That's different though. The tradeoff there is proxying all your internet traffic through Google servers.

Re: Web fonts, boy, I don't know

#166

Post by dom0 »

Nadya wrote: post #141
lomnakkus wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Categorizing type as "a design choice" dismisses it as fashion rather than function, which I don't think is the case. I think it's a question of how often it's one vs. the other. There are precious few good examples of web font usage -- so few, in fact, that I can't even think of one off the top of my head. > Type can put fashion over function, but it can also enhance function by making text more readable, How so?…

You aren't alone and some go even further! I make my own "enhancement suite" for any website I frequent. I blacklist all Javascript by default and whitelist only Javascript necessary for things to function. I use Greasemonkey to add my own functionality to a page, sometimes blacklisting the "default" functionality and rolling my own code to replace it in a more "me-friendly" way. And finally, Stylish, so that I can c…

For some sites I use a lot I do this as well. Mostly CSS fixes, for example widening GitHub's layout to some 1300px. But also removing annoying "design-crap", substituting fonts etc.

Re: Web fonts, boy, I don't know

#167

Post by ZeroGravitas »

theandrewbailey wrote: post #75
Mahn wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heck, this is my #1 complaint of almost anything on a mobile browser. It's easily the worst offender when it comes to mobile in general; I wish browser vendors put a bigger focus on fixing this, somehow.

Google is fixing it, but it's punishing them in search, not Chrome. http://arstechnica.com/business/2016/08/google-to-punish-sit...

Google also has tech to show these banners but only if you've visited the same site a few times already, and then not every time. (This link talks about web app installs first, then native app installs later)

https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2015/03/increasing...

"The user has visited your site twice over two separate days during the course of two weeks."

Re: Web fonts, boy, I don't know

#168

Post by scholia »

Nadya wrote: post #141
lomnakkus wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Categorizing type as "a design choice" dismisses it as fashion rather than function, which I don't think is the case. I think it's a question of how often it's one vs. the other. There are precious few good examples of web font usage -- so few, in fact, that I can't even think of one off the top of my head. > Type can put fashion over function, but it can also enhance function by making text more readable, How so?…

You aren't alone and some go even further! I make my own "enhancement suite" for any website I frequent. I blacklist all Javascript by default and whitelist only Javascript necessary for things to function. I use Greasemonkey to add my own functionality to a page, sometimes blacklisting the "default" functionality and rolling my own code to replace it in a more "me-friendly" way. And finally, Stylish, so that I can c…

Would it be feasible to have an "enhancement pack" website where less talented people (ie me) could get fixes like this.

I remember doing stuff like this with Proxomitron in the good old days....

Re: Web fonts, boy, I don't know

#169

Post by ivanhoe »

Problem is that lazy loading will introduce a flicker on fast connections or if the font is already in browser's cache since re-rendering of the page takes some amount of time (more content, slower it will be). And if you have multiple pages, this means this will affect even people on slow connections on every page except the first one. So it's not a win-win solution, one side will have more or less degraded experience.

Re: Web fonts, boy, I don't know

#170

Post by Gruselbauer »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #163
esonderegger wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have none of you ever worked for a designer or marketing person who was unwilling to accept that a bit of text might wrap on Windows (Arial), but fit on one line on a Mac (Helvetica)? Until we can get the major operating systems to include some of the most popular open-source fonts, we're stuck with web fonts. If macOS, Windows, Debian, iOS, and Android all came with Roboto, Source Sans, Lato, Merriweather, Raleway,…

This is because a vanishingly small percentage of designers have truly, in their heart, accepted the web as a medium. They'll sit lovingly with a bunch of dinged up old lead typesetting tools, positively jizz over imperfections in ink distribution, but try to talk to them about system fonts, box models, or free phones and their eyes glaze over and they drift off into their color calibrated RAW dreamland. In schools t…

Any recommendations as for investigating your last point? What would constitute a truly modernist design in your view? Good food for thought, thanks.
Post reply on HN