It makes me curious how they are going to deal with the issue tracker, pull requests etcetera… did they hire him also to follow up on them? I guess they don’t really count on accepting pull requests (seeing also how the font sources are not in the git).
Very nice. It's awfully similar to Droid Sans, but the slightly lower x-height, and more more "playful" elements (like the gap in the lowercase 'g', the curve at the bottom of the lowercase 'l') make it bit more playful and legible. Above all, it feels more balanced, and accomplished, than Droid Sans.
I wouldn't think that bubbly windows with cheesy drop shadows and gee-whiz transparency effects would be the right choice for an operating system, either. And yet look at the last decade's design trends there, too.
Honestly, a somewhat playful humanist sans looks just fine in context, and a lot cleaner than many other trendy OS designs recently.
I have to agree with you on that. I was really looking forward to iOS 7 being a step forward in that regard, but it's as bubbly as anything else, and inconsistent to boot. At least Helvetica is nice and neutral.
I'm not a huge fan of Windows, but I must say that the new Microsoft-designed fonts (Cambria, Calibri, Corbel, Consolas) strike a great balance between neutrality and character for an OS.
Have to say that Consolas is the best monospaced font (that supports a large swath of Unicode) for my terminal emulator. I've always taken a rather dim view of non-functional niceties but have been swayed by just how damn nice the terminal looks while programming in Vim using Consolas. Well worth the purchase so that I could use it on Linux.
Agreed. Unfortunately I can't say the same about Frutiger ripoff Segoe UI. I got tired so quickly of that font, and I barely even use Windows 8. You still see it all the time on other Microsoft branded stuff though, and all I can think is 'meh'.
A neutral font like Helvetica is a much better choice IMO.
Segoe UI is extremely similar to Frutiger Next, which is an expanded and slightly reworked Frutiger. That's what the whole fuss was about -- Microsoft not paying for a Frutiger Next license.
My gnome-terminal seems to be using Source Code Pro from https://github.com/adobe/Source-Code-Pro at Semibold weight and 12 points, though I basically just fullscreen it and frequently resize up and down depending on requirements. In reality I probably mostly I use it at 14 or 16 points, on a black background of course.
compiz-fusion spins between desktop cube faces with ctrl+alt+arrow and a handy wacom tablet allow easy text selection, window placement and inkscape-driven thought-capture.
I'm very interested in striking a balance between a minimalist console and graphical thinking, and have become a big fan of tools like mscgen, graphviz, and inkscape.
Every time I use inkscape, default font selections irritate me to the point where I now generally the more tedious option of manually scribbling on the wacom tablet.
I like Constantia, by John Hudson. It has become my go-to font for screen reading, since it manages an almost-oldstyle feel without falling apart at current resolutions. MS did commission some good work for the C-series.
Sure it is, so long as it's legible. Operating systems aren't just for getting work done. We spend our digital lives there. Why shouldn't they feel comfortable? Feel like home?
Also, the l and the g are similar to Trebuchet too.
For me I wish more fonts made a clear distinction between 0 (number) and O (Letter), I, l, and 1, 5's and S's, and B and 8. Instead it seems to always be about a's and g's.
Who needs firefox OS (I do have the in-browser emulator running, though), I just changed my system font to this. I'll have opinions after a days usage.
Interesting. The character for greek k (kappa - κ ) is wrong though. The vertical line of the greek k doesn't rise above the rest of the character. It might seem small but it really strikes as ugly and wrong for anyone used to the language.
Are the italic versions actually oblique (slanted)? In other words, is there a typographic standard for labeling typefaces italics and oblique? I seem to remember that there is a distinction.
>is there a typographic standard for labeling typefaces italics and oblique
As I recall it, oblique type uses the regular glyphs just slanted, whereas a 'true' italic typeface employs modified glyph versions having additional calligraphy- or cursive-like flourishes.
In the following picture I've just made using Arial and Times, both fonts are claiming an 'italic' version. The Times one really is italic by the above definition, while the Arial one is 'oblique'.
This is a beautiful looking font and I could definitely see myself adopting it when typing papers.
I'd love to use it in my terminal, but my only problem is the zero isn't dotted or slashed. My terminal font is stupid-small (I think 10pt), and the 0 and O looking similar has bitten me in code a few times.
I really don't like the lower case "r" in the monospace font. It looks almost like a small capital I (the serif portion on the upper left is almost equal in size to the right section of the arc).
I like the rest of it, but the r is pretty distracting.
I'm not a fan. I just don't get why they adapted FF Meta. It's overly complex (the 'g' for example), and not a great display font. They should strive for simplicity, rather than individuality.
Android's Roboto and iOS's Helvetica Neue achieve this, my personal preference being for for latter.
Yeah, the kink in the lowercase y, the gap in the g, and a few other touches don't scale down well IMHO. I am a big fan of the trend of designing free typefaces for general use like this, though.
I'm really curious as to why they would use images over font-face in the style guide examples http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/styleguide/products/firefox-os/.... As a designer you want to see how the typeface performs in the wild, not snaps of it with some arbitrary aliasing.
It's not a bad typeface, although the kerning on the light weight needs a lot of work. If you're wondering what I mean, look at the word 'quick'.
Could you elaborate as to how? Examples aren't synonymous with rasterized images. They use font-face in the example column where they display Open Sans.
It's not a big deal but I just didn't understand your response
It's mainly because the raster images are going to be more accurate than @font-face as they'll display properly amongst all browsers and OSes just like a PDF would.
edit: Also the most obvious reason (which I forgot to mention) is that they are type specimens and type specimens are (AFAIK) always done in raster images.
Well for one thing FF Meta isn't free or Free and is probably also trademarked.
Having an OFL (Open Font License) font of high quality is a good thing.
Also OFL licensed is Andika (http://scripts.sil.org/andika) which I'm using in an app for children as the letters are mostly in the form that they would be handwritten was the best I could find in a few hours searching (free and paid) and most of the licenses for use in apps looked very expensive.
I agree, licensing seems the most plausible reason for releasing it under a different name.
Also, I like Andika. To me, it looks like a proportional-width interpretation of Monaco, a monospaced font that has shipped with Macs for the last few decades.
Those look pretty different to me. I mean, very clearly related, but with tons of small changes. Like, the angle of almost every terminal is different, and in general the new typeface is much more vertical.
Yes, as someone said below, what's the difference between most programming languages? Very small changes in the grand scheme of things, they mostly all have variables, classes, functions, etc. It's the same thing with fonts, they mostly all have the same sort of form, with variations. Put that font beside Arial and Helvetica and you can probably see similarities between them as well, yet they have a different name.
Arial should have never come to be. The only reason it exists is because changing it a little and giving it a new name meant Monotype didn’t have to pay Linotype license fees.
Arial was originally it's own font (Monotype Grotesque), but got squished to match Helvetica's metrics which is a good example of how fonts can be different and similar to each other.
As you can see, all the areas in which Monotype Arial is different from Linotype Helvetica are borrowed from Monotype Grot. The reason to make such a monster is purely financial.
One thing that occurs to me is how "sticky" it might help make your product. Today I downloaded the new version of the JetBrains python IDE, and I'm a longtime SublimeText user. My first reaction was to be really uncomfortable (not surprising.. it's a pretty huge new tool for doing something I'm very familiar with)... however, I was suprised at how much comfort returned once I was seeing code in my familiar font again.
I wonder if this is a useful tactic in making users of your platform continue to feel especially comfortable with it, by making other platforms feel particularly uncomfortable.
Seems like that would only be a positive thing for the market leader. Everybody else would be bringing more people over into a less comfortable experience. Market leaders don't want to lose people...new entrants primarily want to bring new people in.
Firefox OS doesn't even really exist yet. Obviously, they need to bring new people in, and want people to be comfortable.
At my work, one of the astronomers once sent a feature request that ended with this sentence: "I am not a software engineer, but I know enough about programming to know that this must be easy enough to do."
This particular user is the exception. For the most part, they're pretty understanding of how overworked we are. They tend to be content with workarounds and don't expect good performance. This is mostly because they all write code themselves and their own code is pretty lousy. To them, what we do is just a means to an end and they're not interested in appreciating the journey, as it were.
On the other hand, this classic xkcd is occasionally accurate. You get a few of these obnoxious ones from time to time: http://xkcd.com/793/
iOS doesn’t use a custom font, it uses Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, and Avenir. There’s no reason other OSes can’t just adopt an existing font to use system-wide. For instance, Futura is still up for grabs.
Another font that isn’t used anymore, but which was custom designed for a WebOS, is Font Bureau’s Prelude. I like that one a lot better than the choices all of the other platforms have made: http://palmwebos.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/webos-font-p...
Using an existing font for the sake of using it is << creating a new font and open sourcing it. More choice is good (especially with something like fonts) and open sourcing it is just icing on the cake. Everyone wins.
PS: Thanks for the tip on Futura, I had not heard of it before.
I understand how creating a ‘new’ font and open sourcing it makes sense for Ubuntu and Firefox, where lots of unpaid workers need to share assets. I don’t see how it would benefit companies like Apple and Microsoft. Back in the early 80s, Apple commissioned a custom version of ITC Garamond to suit its needs better. Bitstream named it ’Apple Garamond’. As with many proprietary corporate fonts, that font was never released or open sourced, in large part because it was an integral to Apple’s brand identity.
I mean the font, not the overall design. While I admit I can't rule out the possibility that the design on the left side of the image unconsciously influenced my reaction, I tried hard to only look at the font.
That was the first thing I noticed. Lowercase i and j stand out due to the dot being too high. When the dot is taller than uppercase letters something is wrong.
It's designed so that the different weights take approximately the same width, so that does mean that the lighter weights have larger tracking (ie spacing between letters) than the heavier weights.
I love the small g. Notice the differences between normal and italics (especially a, e, f, g, k). It's not just slanted, but curvier as well. Really makes it stand out.
I always put new fixed-width fonts in iTerm to see how it looks. I cranked the vertical and horizontal spacing down, and it looks like I could have went another notch on the vertical.
Fira is on the right. It doesn't look bad, but it's a little cramped and thin for what I like.
Indeed. I have two quibbles with it, which I've already submitted on Github: the position of the asterisk and the shape lof the lower case r (looks like a small caps i).
Does anyone know how/why Helvetica wound up the most appealing font?
Publishing content with Helvetica font seems to give the content an automatic, unconscious boost in credibility. Why is that?
It seems to be a primal reaction rather than a learned behavior. Helvetica looks the best to me because it looks the best, not because someone else said so.
Helvetica is great for logos, titles, headings, posters, etc., when you’re aiming for a specific (orderly/rigid/boxy/neutral/mid-to-late-20th-century, and generic, like corporate or government) kind of aesthetic. Helvetica is not a very readable typeface for body text – anything with more than a few words at a time – or anything small like labels on a map or diagram. This is because by design its letters have many extremely similar shapes which makes it harder to distinguish letters at a glance, and because it is designed not to flow.
There are particular situations where Helvetica is appropriate, but it is massively overused in contexts where it is a poor choice. A humanist sans serif like this new Mozilla typeface is much better for general purpose use.
I've really enjoyed flipping through this site which talks about the history of some fonts (as well as lots of other stuff about typograph): http://ilovetypography.com/
Does anyone know how/why Helvetica wound up the most appealing font?
It's not the most appealing, but it is quite a neutral font which I'd argue is the base of its appeal - there are no serifs, no whimsical curves, and it is associated with Modernism so it gives an impression of quiet authority going back to fonts like Univers and the International Style. That makes it appropriate for content that wants to be taken seriously, while not seeming too stuffy or traditional, so it has become popular for business use as well as in setting adverts, and of course it lends itself well to computer screens. Doubtless it will fall out of favour at some point, I have no doubt it will remain popular, but it's unlikely to maintain its hegemony.
It seems to be a primal reaction rather than a learned behavior. Helvetica looks the best to me because it looks the best, not because someone else said so.
What an incredible assertion. Without your culture, all the books you have seen, the adverts you have seen, the computers you use, your appreciation of helvetica would be entirely different. I'm sure there are cases where nature overcomes nurture, but in this case context is almost everything. You wouldn't even know what these squiggles represented without picking up a huge amount of cultural baggage associated with them, without listening to what other people say. Our opinion on fonts and matters of style is based almost entirely on cultural baggage.
The "old white dudes" of course being many of the top type designers in the world including Hermann Zapf who dislikes Helvetica, Spiekermann, and many others.
I wouldn't say it's the most appealing. It's just the most simple, universal, sans-serif font. (Times is probably the serif equivalent.)
Medium Helvetica is super legible and has great proportions. It gets out of the way and lets you concentrate on the content, which is why it's used for things like subway signs. It's kerning is balanced and works at large and small sizes.
Helvetica is kind of like denim. It doesn't go out of style, but you can wear it hundreds of different ways.
It's also Swiss. They generally make good stuff. :)
Helvetica is widely used by the U.S. government; for example, federal income tax forms are set in Helvetica, and NASA uses the type on the Space Shuttle orbiter.
You're unconsciously conditioned to associate it with formal/official operations. Same reason why I'm so fond of Courier (although I'm apparently somewhat alone in that)
https://twitter.com/espiekermann/status/382189483031949312