4 ms·

My first computer was a Commodore64. My only real complaint at the time was how the "!" was displayed. It was a straight line with a square dot. It felt inco

My first computer was a Commodore64. My only real complaint at the time was how the "!" was displayed. It was a straight line with a square dot. It felt incomplete somehow and IIRC looked too much like another character (can't remember which one, maybe "i"??). Then I got my first VGA output with a 386. The exclamation mark was now curvy and sexy! Thick at the top, curving down to a point, finished with a round dot. I thought everything was right in the world. I miss that font. I've tried reusing bitmapped fonts that give me my desired output but I find it just doesn't work in enough places that it's too annoying. Maybe it messes up curses output, or UTF-8 incompatibilities?

Someone 6y ago
You have to give Commodore (or whoever designed that font) some slack. VGA (in typically used character modes) had more bits per character, and its fonts didn’t have to be designed to be legible when displayed on a television set (screen not designed for text display, and signal converted to antenna signal and back) Also, are you sure about that “round dot”? https://github.com/spacerace/romfont/blob/master/font-images/zoomed/zoomed_IBM_VGA_8x16.png https://github.com/spacerace/romfont/blob/master/font-images... doesn’t show it, and any non-squareness would require a width of at least 3 pixels (more likely 4) to draw.
- UI_at_80x24 6y ago
  I guess I was wrong about the dot. But I also remember the taper on the exclamation mark being finer and less blocky. Obviously I remember through rose coloured glasses. Wolfenstien3D didn't look as bad as modern screenshots show either! =) I don't doubt the C64 designers did the best with what they could; but I was absolutely impressed with how good the "!" looked on that VGA screen.
reaperducer 6y ago
My only real complaint at the time was how the "!" was displayed Then you must have missed the atrocity that was the Commodore's @ symbol. None of the early computers did a good job with it. I remember the Tandy machines were particularly bad.
- bonzini 6y ago
  The top and bottom halves of the CGA X character was not symmetric. It's so ugly I can picture it in my head.

Someone 6y ago

You have to give Commodore (or whoever designed that font) some slack. VGA (in typically used character modes) had more bits per character, and its fonts didn’t have to be designed to be legible when displayed on a television set (screen not designed for text display, and signal converted to antenna signal and back) Also, are you sure about that “round dot”? https://github.com/spacerace/romfont/blob/master/font-images/zoomed/zoomed_IBM_VGA_8x16.png https://github.com/spacerace/romfont/blob/master/font-images... doesn’t show it, and any non-squareness would require a width of at least 3 pixels (more likely 4) to draw.

UI_at_80x24 6y ago
I guess I was wrong about the dot. But I also remember the taper on the exclamation mark being finer and less blocky. Obviously I remember through rose coloured glasses. Wolfenstien3D didn't look as bad as modern screenshots show either! =) I don't doubt the C64 designers did the best with what they could; but I was absolutely impressed with how good the "!" looked on that VGA screen.

reaperducer 6y ago

My only real complaint at the time was how the "!" was displayed Then you must have missed the atrocity that was the Commodore's @ symbol. None of the early computers did a good job with it. I remember the Tandy machines were particularly bad.

bonzini 6y ago
The top and bottom halves of the CGA X character was not symmetric. It's so ugly I can picture it in my head.