4 ms·
The problem with Unifont is that is was never designed to actually support real text, it just has glyph support. So if you need "it can do every language I migh
by TheRealPomax 10mo ago
The problem with Unifont is that is was never designed to actually support real text, it just has glyph support. So if you need "it can do every language I might want, while looking pretty good" you're far better off with the (much newer) family of NoTo fonts, which aren't just free to use, but explicitly use the modern SIL Open Font License.
- foxrider 10mo agoYeah, I can't really speak well about other languages, but these Armenian letters look really rough.
- Kwpolska 10mo agoThe Latin letters look rough too.
- ErroneousBosh 10mo agoThey all look really rough. It's like a font from a 1980s home computer.
- duskwuff 10mo agoNoto is also a scalable font with multiple weights and styles (e.g. bold, italic, etc). Unifont is a 16-pixel bitmap with no styles, so it's only really usable at one size (or maybe two if you want 32px text).
- ErroneousBosh 10mo agoThe only problem with the Noto fonts (installed in Ubuntu for example by default) is that now you have to scroll through hundreds of useless squiggle fonts in your font picker.
- TheRealPomax 10mo agoThat's not a problem, that's a learning opportunity.
- shiomiru 10mo ago> which aren't just free to use, but explicitly use the modern SIL Open Font License. Unifont is also dual-licensed under GPLv2/SIL OFL.