3 ms·
This is not an ugly font. It’s incredibly legible and IMO the lack of styling is pleasing to the eye.
by artursapek 2y ago
This is not an ugly font. It’s incredibly legible and IMO the lack of styling is pleasing to the eye.
- technol0gic 2y agoit also facilitates legibility, especially at a slight distance, as well as distortion (squishing, stretching) if necessary. Both of which are objectively desirable qualities of a font with massive control panels as its native habitat.
- rsynnott 2y ago> it also facilitates legibility, especially at a slight distance, as well as distortion (squishing, stretching) if necessary Except for the terrible, terrible ‘0’, which looks more or less identical to the ‘O’. IIRC sometimes similar fonts had a strike-through 0 for legibility; I think the BBC Micro keyboard did, for instance.
- bjclark 2y agoThe BBC Micro keycaps were made by Comptec (mentioned in the article) in Gorton Modified. Source: I work at signature plastics and have seen the original tooling for it.
- crazygringo 2y agoYes it's highly legible at distances, but you'd never want to use it for body text. The letterforms are not well balanced -- e.g. the bowl of the 'R' is uncomfortably high, same with the top half of the 'Y'. It would be tiring to the eye to read long text in. A lack of styling does not mean a good sense of balance. It is ugly but highly legible. Which is just fine for the kinds of functional engraving it's meant for.