font suggestion

[Felix Miata]

On 2011/05/05 17:06 (GMT-0700) Adam Williamson composed:

> On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 20:41 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

>>  On 2011/05/01 00:34 (GMT-0400) Tom Horsley composed:

>>  >  http://home.comcast.net/~tomhorsley/wisdom/fonts/fonts.html

>>  Other than WebKit is incapable of getting DPI right displaying pages, I don't
>>  see anything wrong here, but then I only use displays with enough pixel
>>  density to expect quality:

>>  http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/f15-2048x1536x144-desktop.png

> Bully for you, but try buying one at Best Buy...

I rarely go into Best buy. 
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Apple%26%23174%3B+-+MacBook%26%23174%3B+Pro+/+Intel%26%23174%3B+Core%26%23153%3B+i7+Processor+/+17%22+Display+/+4GB+Memory+/+750GB+Hard+Drive/1535918.p?id=1218267720296&skuId=1535918 
isn't something those stores stock?

1366x768, the apparent current laptop standard, and common for desktops, is 
nothing but 1024x768 extended sideways, with the same minimal quality to 
match unless no bigger than about 13".

OTOH, until you get past 17px or 18px, font's are limited to a 1px stem width 
without looking fat. A 1px width gives no allowance for prettifying. Tom's 
looks like 10px or so. There's no way to expect quality pleasing to everyone 
from so few pixels as is available in a 10px size or smaller. Every trick in 
the enhancement and selection repertoire must be tailored to each 
individual's hardware and preferences to expect a resemblance to decent. 
Otherwise, it's just hit or miss, with a lot of the latter. Obviously the 
settings in Fedora's section of that image are not a good match for the fonts 
actually used, like none at all or only light enhancement applied.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/