stopped reading when he started comparing pixel measurements with printed books.
16 pixels For Body Copy. Anything Less Is A Costly Mistake
121–130 of 146 posts
Re: 16 pixels For Body Copy. Anything Less Is A Costly Mistake
#122Most web sites break down when fonts are upscaled. Sad but true. I configured my mother's firefox to do that, it works, but most of the web doesn't look good. Which is sad. My eyes aren't very good too and they prefer bigger fonts. In fact, most people have vision problems those days.
You can use NoSquint to upscale entire pages globally (much like Firefox's built-in per-site zoom). It doesn't mess up layout like font-only scaling, though it can do that too, if you want.
The problem with scaling the entire layout is that you end up with a lot of horizontal scrolling, in a lot of cases, which is more annoying than a semi-broken layout.
Of course, that all depends on how much you need to zoom in. For me, that's about 6x.
Re: 16 pixels For Body Copy. Anything Less Is A Costly Mistake
#123I agree completely with this article. As I've gotten older (now 43) I have had more and more trouble reading web sites. In fact, I've noticed lately that I don't even try on some sites that have "small" fonts, I just close the tab. There are some sites that I really like and I generally depend on my browser to help me out. Chrome has a good habit of remembering my page zoom on a particular site so I don't even notice…
You can also define a "minimum font size" in your browser options. This trick really changed my life. Sadly, the rendering can turn ugly on websites with a poor and/or overly complex design (e.g.: facebook.com).
I used 18px minimum in Safari for a long time and I'm just 25. If a site breaks, you can just hit cmd+'+' to zoom it up, which will usually fix the layout.
I am now on Chrome which zooms uniformly and when HackerNews comments are just barely readable, the 'reply' links seem to be twice their size, when in Safari they were the same (minimum) size. Neither approach is pretty. :(
Re: 16 pixels For Body Copy. Anything Less Is A Costly Mistake
#124I agree completely with this article. As I've gotten older (now 43) I have had more and more trouble reading web sites. In fact, I've noticed lately that I don't even try on some sites that have "small" fonts, I just close the tab. There are some sites that I really like and I generally depend on my browser to help me out. Chrome has a good habit of remembering my page zoom on a particular site so I don't even notice…
Another solution is a custom style sheet. Opera has had that capability forever, since about 2001. I use Opera for most browsing, with a custom style sheet to force all text to a certain font and style. This varies by device: Calibri 12pt is the most readable at work where I sit close to the screen on a smallish monitor, while Verdana 12pt works better on my home desktop and laptop screens. My stylesheet also forces…
+1 for Opera. It is the only web browser I can get to obey my own style sheet.
I also use my own style sheet, with my own choice of font. I use a slightly modified version of one of the w3c core styles.
In Firefox, I just set a my own font, a minimal font size of 16px, and my own link, background and foreground colours.
The web to me is just plain ugly outside my browsers.
Re: 16 pixels For Body Copy. Anything Less Is A Costly Mistake
#125I agree completely with this article. As I've gotten older (now 43) I have had more and more trouble reading web sites. In fact, I've noticed lately that I don't even try on some sites that have "small" fonts, I just close the tab. There are some sites that I really like and I generally depend on my browser to help me out. Chrome has a good habit of remembering my page zoom on a particular site so I don't even notice…
25, moderate myopia and astigmatism (thanks Mom and Dad, respectively), fully corrected with glasses, I zoom in constantly. Including on HN!
Same here only a decade on your age.
I've been zooming since Netscape.
No privacy in the office for me sadly.
HN is unreadable for me without a little fine tuning.
Re: 16 pixels For Body Copy. Anything Less Is A Costly Mistake
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Get glasses!
I have contacts that correct my vision to just about 20/20. Maybe I just have higher than average DPI screens, but most sites (hn included especially) are simply too small for me to sit at a comfortable distance and read comfortably. I don't know where the rest of you eagles come from.
Agreed. Eyesight doesn't get better as you get older, it only gets worse. Why strain your eyes trying not to "look old"? Your eyes should be relaxed when you read.
Re: 16 pixels For Body Copy. Anything Less Is A Costly Mistake
#127I agree completely with this article. As I've gotten older (now 43) I have had more and more trouble reading web sites. In fact, I've noticed lately that I don't even try on some sites that have "small" fonts, I just close the tab. There are some sites that I really like and I generally depend on my browser to help me out. Chrome has a good habit of remembering my page zoom on a particular site so I don't even notice…
I'm a big fan of the Readability bookmarklet (readability.com/bookmarklets), which lets you set the page's font, size, colors, etc. As a bonus, it nukes most of the clutter such as ads and sidebars.
This is nice, but if you want consistency, and you browse alot, you have to use a different solution. Unless you are quite patient.
You can always cut and paste instead.
Re: 16 pixels For Body Copy. Anything Less Is A Costly Mistake
#128I'm 37 and I zoom almost every website I use - I also like to be distant enough from the screen. I also very often use ctrl+A to have white text on blue background (I know, most designers will hate me at this point - but keep in mind that I usually sit in front of a screen 12 hours a day, 10 hours a day on weekends...). Last thing, I just hate sites that use facebook comments - eg techcrunch - because fonts don't sca…
Seriously consider an alternative. Tweak your browser to your liking. You can always break out into a different browser, if you want to see the site the way the author intended.
I use my own style sheet with opera, and customise firefox flipping between the two, and occasionally breaking out into chrome.
I also find the terminal more readable than the browser, so have made my browser look like the terminal - I even use a monospaced font. Because that is what I'm comfortable with.
W3m and Elinks are actually really nice to use, readability wise.
Funny to read your highlight method, I use that when away from my computer.
Re: 16 pixels For Body Copy. Anything Less Is A Costly Mistake
#129I think I need to put together a form email, or possibly a webpage to link to, to send to web designers who pontificate about web design and reaching your audience---on a webpage that doesn't fit in my window AND has disabled my scrollbar . Meaning I literally cannot read it without sending it off to Readability or otherwise adjusting my browsing setup. This fault is honestly an order of magnitude more common among w…
Opera has a nice fit to width toggle.
Re: 16 pixels For Body Copy. Anything Less Is A Costly Mistake
#130Most web sites break down when fonts are upscaled. Sad but true. I configured my mother's firefox to do that, it works, but most of the web doesn't look good. Which is sad. My eyes aren't very good too and they prefer bigger fonts. In fact, most people have vision problems those days.
Another nice solution with Chrome and Opera is to set a default zoom. Up it to about 140%, and it will scale the page without breaking it.