Apple fonts in 3.7?
ducasse at iam.unibe.ch
Fri Feb 20 17:48:23 UTC 2004
the tone of your email is displaced!
Doug deserves much more than that. At least respect the people that
spend their free time
improving squeak instead of toying with it. There are stuff that
andreas can say and
he is right but we know that he saying that with a big respect.
On 20 févr. 04, at 16:59, Martin Wirblat wrote:
>> I have to say I agree. With all due respect, I think Squeak has
>> generally taken a large step backwards in look and feel between 3.6
>> and 3.7. It's not a huge deal, but it is a bit of a shame. For me
>> personally, it's especially annoying that two of the changes I
>> dislike (New York font gone, new scrollbar arrows) don't have any
>> easy preference setting to undo them.
>> Ah well. I think I'm in the minority, and I can live with that.
> The minority? I guess you are absolutely in the majority, people just
> became tired of complaining about the default look of Squeak. If you
> count in the rest of the world, which yet has to make acquaintance
> with Squeak, it will be an overwhelming majority.
> The actual default font is simply the smallest and most unreadable
> font I ever saw on a complete system installed out of the box ( OS,
> app suite etc. ).
> This really is a SHAME.
> Discussing on which system and monitor we can distinguish a comma and
> a period or an I and a l, is like making a bad joke ignoring the
> obvious answer:
> The font is not what it should be: easily readable.
> So I would opt for at least 14 points of default size. And when I say
> at least, I mean at least. You sharp eyed programmers out there can
> turn on the smallest size of font Squeak offers, if you like that. But
> to generate interest in the rest of the world, Squeak has to advertise
> itself a bit, or the rest of the world is - after a quick look of say
> 10 sec - turned off.
> Advertising itself with microscopic letters? No, default Squeak has to
> use big fonts.
More information about the Squeak-dev