111–118 of 118 posts
Another good one: FixederSys by Tom7 https://tom7.org/fixedersys/
Ironic that the page says > ... it does have a few small problems, such as not working on modern computers ... When connecting to this site in firefox says > An error occurred during a connection to tom7.org. Peer attempted old style (potentially vulnerable) handshake.
The content of this (very good) video is the culprit for the error:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe Morse is just "out", right now, in the geek population? I shall send out the signal for us to unite: ... ___ ... ___ ... Hm. Morse makes adding an ellipsis remarkably challenging!
IMO Morse code misses the point, because it doesn’t depict letters, it encodes the abstract characters into completely different “glyphs”. In particular, knowing the English letters doesn’t make you understand Morse code the way it makes you able to read Two Slice; you need to know the mapping between letters and Morse code. You can trivially encode any alphabet into a one-dimensional graphical encoding. But you coul…
Coral Pixels is pretty nice with a lighter background, but unreadable with a dark one.
Have you tried a darker background but with an inverted color filter on the text? (I'd try it myself but I'm not at my computer for this post)
I like https://viznut.fi/unscii/ - meant for ascii art but still works well in a terminal, and still gets unicode updates
I like https://viznut.fi/unscii/ - meant for ascii art but still works well in a terminal, and still gets unicode updates
I want better Topaz. My favourite font.
It's not exactly a better Topaz, but I made Topaz Unicode to be more Topaz: https://gitlab.com/Screwtapello/topaz-unicode
* https://github.com/jdebp/unscii/blob/2.1.1f/src/font-topaz.t...
Although Unscii populates Unicode from a number of sources and leaves the source fonts at their original repertoires.
A forgotten point is that modern pixel fonts all assume pixels have a 1:1 ratio: height the same as width, so an 8x8 character box is perfectly square. That's NOT true for many of the old computer displays. Most had finer resolution in the horizontal compared to vertical lines, so more pixels across than in the same distance down. 1:1 "square pixels" was an innovation of the Macintosh, and very unusual for the time.…
A forgotten point is that modern pixel fonts all assume pixels have a 1:1 ratio: height the same as width, so an 8x8 character box is perfectly square. That's NOT true for many of the old computer displays. Most had finer resolution in the horizontal compared to vertical lines, so more pixels across than in the same distance down. 1:1 "square pixels" was an innovation of the Macintosh, and very unusual for the time.…
Square pixels were certainly not an innovation of the Macintosh. The earliest raster scan workstation I'm aware of is the Alto, released in 1973. It and the ones that came after it like the Star and Dorado all had square pixels. So did the early 1980s engineering workstations like Apollo and Sun, which also came out before Macintosh.