4 ms·

I'm sorry, but who are these guys to judge any sort of font? Lower-case glyphs in their body font are as wide as they are tall and have really weird kerning. It

by MrDOS 13y ago

I'm sorry, but who are these guys to judge any sort of font? Lower-case glyphs in their body font are as wide as they are tall and have really weird kerning. It's virtually unreadable.

mitchty 13y ago
I can't speak too much to this as its still technically NDA. But the whole font engine is rather changed. This almost looks like a leak of some NDA type material but dynamic type is actually quite cool. Additionally the "thinness" is largely not that big of a deal with the retina displays. Past that I'm not saying anything more. It is really nice to have some... designed text that you can hook into and use that the user can control. It scales really well readability wise, I'll just say screenshots don't quite do text in ios7 justice, and it is really easy to make it more readable if it isn't to your eyes. But I'm sure they'll always be neue helvetica haters in general so meh, whatever, use/hate what you want to.
- aroch 13y ago
  For what it's worth; anything publicly disclosed during WWDC isn't under NDA. The keynote talked about the hew UIKit and text rendering engine.
  - mitchty 13y ago
    True, but I don't think that covers code samples does it?
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
Steko 13y ago
"virtually unreadable" The tendency among typography enthusiasts to label all sorts of things unreadable or illegible has descended into farce.
- ctidd 13y ago
  Legibility and readability are technical terms in the field of typography. From what I've seen, the new iOS typography is adequately legible, but somewhat lacking in readability. To proclaim similar descriptions -- which might or might not be exaggerated -- fascicle is very condescending toward typographers and other design professionals. When people go further in their negative characterizations, the terms stop being used so technically. To call type completely unreadable or illegible is generally an intentional overstatement, and it's understood as such by members of the design community. It's like calling code shit. Is it literally shit? No -- but saying it is doesn't make a developer incompetent or even wrong. It's a clearly contextual statement, and it's rightly interpreted as such. Please give typographers some credit and don't assume we're somehow overreacting.

by MrDOS 13y ago

I'm sorry, but who are these guys to judge any sort of font? Lower-case glyphs in their body font are as wide as they are tall and have really weird kerning. It's virtually unreadable.

mitchty 13y ago

I can't speak too much to this as its still technically NDA. But the whole font engine is rather changed. This almost looks like a leak of some NDA type material but dynamic type is actually quite cool. Additionally the "thinness" is largely not that big of a deal with the retina displays. Past that I'm not saying anything more. It is really nice to have some... designed text that you can hook into and use that the user can control. It scales really well readability wise, I'll just say screenshots don't quite do text in ios7 justice, and it is really easy to make it more readable if it isn't to your eyes. But I'm sure they'll always be neue helvetica haters in general so meh, whatever, use/hate what you want to.

aroch 13y ago
For what it's worth; anything publicly disclosed during WWDC isn't under NDA. The keynote talked about the hew UIKit and text rendering engine.
- mitchty 13y ago
  True, but I don't think that covers code samples does it?

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

Steko 13y ago

"virtually unreadable" The tendency among typography enthusiasts to label all sorts of things unreadable or illegible has descended into farce.

ctidd 13y ago
Legibility and readability are technical terms in the field of typography. From what I've seen, the new iOS typography is adequately legible, but somewhat lacking in readability. To proclaim similar descriptions -- which might or might not be exaggerated -- fascicle is very condescending toward typographers and other design professionals. When people go further in their negative characterizations, the terms stop being used so technically. To call type completely unreadable or illegible is generally an intentional overstatement, and it's understood as such by members of the design community. It's like calling code shit. Is it literally shit? No -- but saying it is doesn't make a developer incompetent or even wrong. It's a clearly contextual statement, and it's rightly interpreted as such. Please give typographers some credit and don't assume we're somehow overreacting.