[Developer]

Can the font size of the forum be increased please? It's tiny in Safari, Camino, and Internet Explorer. I don't want to increase my font preferences because they are already set to Times 16 which should be large enough. But the 9 point font in the forum is way too small to be comfortably read.

Edit:
Why can't I edit the subject?

[Zimphire]

I agree. I have my font set perfect for the rest of the web. I go to this page and I always have to increase it.

No one is using 600x800 anymore.

Time to move on.

[reader50]

Seems fine to me. Dual 1152 x 870 here.

ps - I don't recall anyone ever using 600x800.

[philzilla]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
No one is using 600x800 anymore.

i had to hold my iBook SE sideways to read that. then i turned it back the right way and it was back to being 800x600.

just because you don't use it, doesn't mean other people don't. over 40% of people on the web do, apparently.

i have to agree with the font issue though. it would be much easier to read if it was bumped up a notch.

[gorickey]

Bump it up and people will complain it's too big probably...either way you lose, but give it a shot and see what happens...

[Moonray]

The current size looks okay to me... and it appears to be the same size, Google and Apple use.

-

[gorickey]

Originally posted by Moonray:
and it appears to be the same size, Google and Apple use.

Hey, if it works for the (2) biggest global brands, it outta work for the MacNN Forums...

[Developer]

Originally posted by gorickey:
Hey, if it works for the (2) biggest global brands, it outta work for the MacNN Forums...

No. The forum currently is 10 point. Apple's default font is 12 point (that's 20% larger) and Google's is 13 point (that's 30% larger).

I don't think a larger font will be a problem on iBooks. What is a problem are large images or ads that force horizontal scrolling.

Anyway, my browser setting is Times 16. Why can't the user selected font size in the browser preferences be used? Then everybody is happy.

[Zimphire]

10 pt.. jeesh...

[Moonray]

Originally posted by Developer:
No. The forum currently is 10 point. Apple's default font is 12 point (that's 20% larger) and Google's is 13 point (that's 30% larger).

I don't think a larger font will be a problem on iBooks. What is a problem are large images or ads that force horizontal scrolling.

Anyway, my browser setting is Times 16. Why can't the user selected font size in the browser preferences be used? Then everybody is happy.

Would you mind looking at the source code of a normal Google page and tell me where you see 13 point? And would you mind having a look at http://www.apple.com/main/css/fonts.css as well and tell which 12 you are talking about?
And perhaps try any other browser than Safari which obviously takes the 16 from your Times 16 setting and tries to calculate some strange reducing or enlargement factor for all other fonts from that.

-

[Timo]

I vote (heh, like I have a vote) for increased font size. I visit a number of fora and MacNN is the only one where I click increasing the font size -- now twice.

[gorgonzola]

I have changed the post font to Verdana 11 (from Geneva 10). It seems significantly larger to me. As a side note, not much else has been changed (i.e. fonts in other parts of the forums), since I don't want to go around changing lots of things until I'm sure enough people like this.

It's not really "properly done," but should give you enough of an idea of what it will look like.

So, how is it? Let me know.

(Oh, btw, due to the nature of vBulletin, fonts in random parts of the site may have changed as a result of these modifications, but please don't bother posting opinions on any fonts EXCEPT the ones for the posts, since that's the only one I'm testing right now. The others haven't necessarily been adjusted to look "normal.")

[Mac Write]

I am legally blind so I can see this new font at all. with vb3 since everything is small I just use the font enlarge but on here that doesn't work. if this stays like this I will to another forum.

Why not make a test forum and apply this new style to that only to test it out. That way it won't affect all the forums and confuse people. just make an announcement. better yet leave the old style as classic and make it choosable in the user cp.

[gorgonzola]

I'm not really sure why the font enlarge feature of your browser isn't working; I'm not even sure we have any control over that. I just tried it in a few browsers (Safari, Mozilla/Camino, etc) and it works fine -- I'm able to make the fonts extremely large.

Obviously, we're trying to find a happy medium for the fonts on the forums right now, so just bear with us for a bit...

[Scotttheking]

I liked it better before it was changed.

[reader50]

I like Geneva better. Isn't Verdana prevalent in "best viewed with IE" sites.asp hosted on IIS?

[CheesePuff]

I'm enjoying this new Verdana font as the default font better then Geneva. IMO it makes the forms look nicer and a little better reading posts.

Of course if anyone had a problem with the Geneva 10 font size (which it's always been -- just that Safari 1.2 had some changes) they could just fix that in Safari's preferences.

[Moonray]

Verdana is the standard Microsoft Web font that comes with each installation of IE. Geneva is Apple's counterpart.

-

[dtriska]

Change it back, please. Everything looks awkward. And bad.

[Developer]

Originally posted by Scotttheking:
I liked it better before it was changed.

The font size is much better now.

But I agree that everything looks awkward since there is a size mismatch now. And please don't use Verdana.

[starman]

I'm on a 23" Cinema Display and it's too small, still .

Ok, seriously, it was fine to me before, it's fine to me now with the change. I just dropped by in here because I noticed it immediately (the font whore that I am).

Mike

[starman]

Originally posted by Developer:
The font size is much better now.

But I agree that everything looks awkward since there is a size mismatch now. And please don't use Verdana.

What's wrong with Verdana? Lots of sites use it. Should we use Apple Garamond instead?

Mike

[Cipher13]

Looks much nicer.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Scotttheking:
I liked it better before it was changed.

I agree, not sure what the big deal was.

I've got my display set at 1400x1050, and never had a problem.

[gorickey]

Originally posted by gorickey:
Bump it up and people will complain it's too big probably...either way you lose, but give it a shot and see what happens...

I hit the nail on the head on this one...

[xi_hyperon]

I like Verdana, as it is very easy to read. Strictly out of curiosity, why do those who oppose it here dislike it so?

[reader50]

I don't necessarily dislike it, though it is the M$ preferred web font. Mostly it's that I like Geneva a lot more. Geneva has been a default font with Apple for a long time.

[Developer]

Originally posted by xi_hyperon:
Why do those who oppose it here dislike it so?

Verdana

[benb]

Originally posted by reader50:
I don't necessarily dislike it, though it is the M$ preferred web font. Mostly it's that I like Geneva a lot more. Geneva has been a default font with Apple for a long time.

As did I. Verdana gives me the willies. Like looking at an IIS error page.

[gorgonzola]

Well, here's the problem. Geneva is fine, but it really only looks nice at sizes 9 and 10. If we're going to increase the size beyond that, we're going to need to find another font. There are some fonts that will remain 10 for necessity, because they have to fit in a tiny space, but we can't have part of the site in one font and part of the site in another. I feel that Verdana, despite its unfortunate association with Microsoft, happens to look good at a lot of different sizes, and it was designed for the web, so I went with it. Also, it's the font that the forums have been displayed in on Windows machines for many years. If people prefer Helvetica or Arial or whatever, I'm definitely open to it, but I think Geneva 11/12 would look abysmal.

As for people who said they liked it better before it was changed (Scott, dtriska, etc), please specify what you don't like: the increased size, or the Verdana typeface, or both? Right now, I'd just like to find a good size, and we can pick an appropriate font later. Here's a small sampler:



So please post an opinion that makes clear specifically what you like and don't like, otherwise it's difficult to figure out what to try changing.

Finally, for people who thought it was fine before, here's the issue. It was too small for some people to read at the prior typeface (for whatever reason), so a more relevant opinion would be whether you mind this new typeface. I think it's much easier to deal with fonts that are too big than fonts that are too small, so I think it's reasonable to change it even if the people who would like the change are in the minority. That said, we would like a setting that doesn't irritate people who thought it was fine before.

I hope my points were clear; let me know what you all think in some more detail, and I'll try out some other settings. This will take some time to sort out, because we'll have to go through many different options, so your patience will be appreciated. Thanks.

[awaspaas]

May I put my vote in for Helvetica 12? The size is similar to the Verdana 11 but it's just such a nicer typeface. Verdana was designed for the web, yes, but it was also designed for braindead Windows machines that don't know how to render type anyway. With Quartz graphics, Helvetica is a beautiful and very readable font, at just the right size, in my opinion.

[spiky_dog]

my vote is for all whiners to use Mozilla Firebird and set the smallest font size limit at whatever they want

that said, when using safari i always did have to bump the font size up a notch when surfing the macnn forums compared to everywhere else...

[awaspaas]

Originally posted by spiky_dog:
my vote is for all whiners to use Mozilla Firebird and set the smallest font size limit at whatever they want

that said, when using safari i always did have to bump the font size up a notch when surfing the macnn forums compared to everywhere else...

That's not the point. Geneva looks like arse if it's made bigger, which it needs to be. And I'd wager that if there were a poll, people would prefer the look of Helvetica 12 to Verdana 11. Verdana is way too "Windows" for a Mac forum, in my opinion.

[Moonray]

How about Lucida Grande as first choice?

-

[itai195]

Just Geneva, Verdana, Arial, and Helvetica. What'd Tahoma do to deserve this?

Personally I'm just fine with hitting command + in Safari. Of the above, I like Helvetica 12 or Verdana 11.

[Macola]

Why not just use pixels instead of points?

http://www.w3.org/2003/07/30-font-size

[reader50]

Am I the only one who thinks the Geneva 11/12 samples look great?

The Arial 12 and Helvetica 12 both look good too, but not quite as good.

[Moonray]

Originally posted by gorgonzola:
...macnn-fonts.jpg...

Please use .gif or .png next time for graphical stuff with few colors.

-

[awaspaas]

Originally posted by Macola:
Why not just use pixels instead of points?

http://www.w3.org/2003/07/30-font-size

Thank you, I'm glad somebody posted that. That would solve many problems and increase consistency between browsers, etc.

(Helvetica 12!!)

[OreoCookie]

Well, I have a larger screen, but I hate fullscreen-browsing. So please keep a design that's usable for smaller sizes as well. I wouldn't mind increasing the font size to 12.

[Kenneth]

17" Studio Display (1280x1024) here...
Font smoothing style: Medium (best for FP)
Safari 1.2
with a pair of glass
15-inch away from the display

No problem whatsoever.

[Moonray]

Originally posted by Macola:
Why not just use pixels instead of points?

http://www.w3.org/2003/07/30-font-size

I see there are pixels defined.
See HTML source of http://forums.macnn.com/61/feedback/200288/increase-font-size-in-forum-please/.
So did you just give a random hint or did i miss something?

-

[Cipher13]

nm.

[Developer]

What about Lucida Grande 12? Looks great on screen and is Apple.

[Simon]

This is a Mac board and scrolling sucks.

My vote goes to Geneva 9.

[awaspaas]

Notice Helvetica 12 actually takes up less room than Lucida Grande 11, but looks bigger.

[gorgonzola]

I have switched it to Lucida Grande 11. 12 seems a tad big. I can bump it up if people really want it, of course.

Unless people love this, I'll try Helvetica 12 next.

Yes, a lot of the site is still in Verdana. Just look at the formatting of the post content.

[Developer]

Originally posted by gorgonzola:
I have switched it to Lucida Grande 11. 12 seems a tad big.

What about 11.5 as a compromise? Is it possible to specify fractional font sizes in HTML?

If not, I can read both Verdana and Lucida Grande 11, so I'm fine with them (prefer Lucida Grande). You can keep the very small font for the signatures I think.

[tooki]

My vote is to revert to Geneva 10. Anyone who has trouble with tiny fonts can easily use text zoom or minimum font size thresholds to maintain legibility.

(Note that Geneva 9 and 10 antialiased look rather ugly, IMHO. I have my system font settings set to antialias only over 10pt, so that Geneva will use the hand-tuned bitmaps of 9 and 10 point.)

Helvetica 12 is, IMHO, out of the question. Don't get me wrong -- helvetica is one of my favorite fonts, and it didn't become the most commonly used print font worldwide for nothing -- but it is hard to read onscreen. Its letterforms and letterspacing are too tight for screen reading. If you look at the sample above, there isn't enough room between characters.

Now, I actually kinda like this Lucida Grande 11 thing. (Interesting tidbit: Ludica Grande ignore's OS X's font settings, and always antialiases.) But if we do that, then we need to check our secondary fonts, since only OS X systems have Lucida Grande installed.

tooki

[tooki]

Originally posted by Developer:
What about 11.5 as a compromise? Is it possible to specify fractional font sizes in HTML?

No doubt you could enter it into the HTML, but I doubt most browsers would respect it (in part because many font rendering engines, such as Mac OS 9's, didn't natively support fractional point sizes). Also, on the Mac, 1 pixel equals exactly one "digital point". So the total height of a 12 point font should be 12 pixels (we'll pretend, for argument's sake, that this is actually how it worked in real life). On an un-anti-aliased display, it would be hard to render fractional point sizes, since it would no longer line up with the pixels.

tooki