10 ms·

True, but using a built-in font does mean Firefox is consistent across operating systems. Unfortunately, it's tough to be consistent across both OSes and appli

by Boriss 12y ago

True, but using a built-in font does mean Firefox is consistent across operating systems. Unfortunately, it's tough to be consistent across both OSes and applications within an OS!

teacup50 12y ago
That's not what I want. I don't use the other operating systems, and I don't care if Firefox is consistent across them. You care if Firefox is consistent, and that's just arrogance, because you are not the platform. If everyone did what you're doing, then the platform would have no common consistency at all. Put away your designer arrogance; my Mac isn't your canvas on which to ruin platform consistency.
- ubernostrum 12y ago
  Wow, you're a really pleasant person. And not arrogant at all, nope.
  - teacup50 12y ago
    In this case, the decision is arrogantly wrong because it's predicated on an over-inflated sense of Firefox's position relative to the entire platform and ecosystem of consistent applications, and this position is based on self-interest, putting branding interests and their designer's ego ahead of the interests of their customers.
    - calinet6 12y ago
      Design exists. It is not egotistical by nature. It's not going away. Get used to it.
      - teacup50 12y ago
        Design that doesn't put the user first is egotistical by nature. There's nothing to get used to; design isn't new on Apple's platforms. If anything, Apple has driven software design more than any other platform or company. Apple's customers value -- and paid for -- a consistent ecosystem, on which Apple defines design guidelines and HIG requirements. Apple developers and designers work together to maintain a consistent ecosystem and the resulting mutual benefit. Get used to it.
- jasonlotito 12y ago
  > my Mac isn't your canvas on which to ruin platform consistency. So, you already have the solution: Safari. That is the the platform recommended, platform consistent solution you seek. It exists. With that being the case, what harm is there in other software accepting that just because Apple does it doesn't mean it's always the right solution? Even Apple can't settle on a standard font to use across all it's solutions. And using Apple as the gold standard assumes they never make or don't still have glaring UI/UX problems to overcome. Put away your arrogance. Not all software needs to meet your exacting standards. Heck, even Apple disagrees with you!
  - teacup50 12y ago
    It has nothing to do with a "gold standard", or "just because Apple does it". It also has nothing to do with Safari, or using an application solely written by Apple. On the platform, we contribute to the ecosystem by respecting the value of the whole. It's about humility: Understanding that you're operating as part of a larger whole, and that larger whole is more valuable to your customer if it is consistent and interoperable. The only reason to diverge from the common platform standards is if your divergence provides more value to the user in a way that doesn't detract from platform consistency. Sometimes, people come up with novel new ways to do things that genuinely fit right in to the established platform norms. Using a non-standard[1] user interface font to achieve cross-platform consistency isn't one of those cases. Diverging for the sake of your UX designer's ego or your "brand identity" does not provide value to the user. In fact, it's robs the user of value to the sole benefit of your product/brand concerns. Heck, even Apple disagrees with you! No, they really, really don't. [1] https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/Intro/Intro.html https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/UserEx...
    - jasonlotito 12y ago
      > No, they really, really don't. Yes, yes they do. They've made many changes that violate your next statement: > The only reason to diverge from the common platform standards is if your divergence provides more value to the user... I'm sorry if you feel that there should be only standard font used for UI elements (there isn't in Apple products), or that other users values aren't equally valuable. > It's about humility: Understanding that you're operating as part of a larger whole, and that larger whole is more valuable to your customer if it is consistent and interoperable. Apple is the biggest violator of this across all their platforms. If they don't do it, why should anyone else?

by Boriss 12y ago

True, but using a built-in font does mean Firefox is consistent across operating systems. Unfortunately, it's tough to be consistent across both OSes and applications within an OS!

teacup50 12y ago

That's not what I want. I don't use the other operating systems, and I don't care if Firefox is consistent across them. You care if Firefox is consistent, and that's just arrogance, because you are not the platform. If everyone did what you're doing, then the platform would have no common consistency at all. Put away your designer arrogance; my Mac isn't your canvas on which to ruin platform consistency.

ubernostrum 12y ago
Wow, you're a really pleasant person. And not arrogant at all, nope.
- teacup50 12y ago
  In this case, the decision is arrogantly wrong because it's predicated on an over-inflated sense of Firefox's position relative to the entire platform and ecosystem of consistent applications, and this position is based on self-interest, putting branding interests and their designer's ego ahead of the interests of their customers.
  - calinet6 12y ago
    Design exists. It is not egotistical by nature. It's not going away. Get used to it.
    - teacup50 12y ago
      Design that doesn't put the user first is egotistical by nature. There's nothing to get used to; design isn't new on Apple's platforms. If anything, Apple has driven software design more than any other platform or company. Apple's customers value -- and paid for -- a consistent ecosystem, on which Apple defines design guidelines and HIG requirements. Apple developers and designers work together to maintain a consistent ecosystem and the resulting mutual benefit. Get used to it.
jasonlotito 12y ago
> my Mac isn't your canvas on which to ruin platform consistency. So, you already have the solution: Safari. That is the the platform recommended, platform consistent solution you seek. It exists. With that being the case, what harm is there in other software accepting that just because Apple does it doesn't mean it's always the right solution? Even Apple can't settle on a standard font to use across all it's solutions. And using Apple as the gold standard assumes they never make or don't still have glaring UI/UX problems to overcome. Put away your arrogance. Not all software needs to meet your exacting standards. Heck, even Apple disagrees with you!
- teacup50 12y ago
  It has nothing to do with a "gold standard", or "just because Apple does it". It also has nothing to do with Safari, or using an application solely written by Apple. On the platform, we contribute to the ecosystem by respecting the value of the whole. It's about humility: Understanding that you're operating as part of a larger whole, and that larger whole is more valuable to your customer if it is consistent and interoperable. The only reason to diverge from the common platform standards is if your divergence provides more value to the user in a way that doesn't detract from platform consistency. Sometimes, people come up with novel new ways to do things that genuinely fit right in to the established platform norms. Using a non-standard[1] user interface font to achieve cross-platform consistency isn't one of those cases. Diverging for the sake of your UX designer's ego or your "brand identity" does not provide value to the user. In fact, it's robs the user of value to the sole benefit of your product/brand concerns. Heck, even Apple disagrees with you! No, they really, really don't. [1] https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/Intro/Intro.html https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/UserEx...
  - jasonlotito 12y ago
    > No, they really, really don't. Yes, yes they do. They've made many changes that violate your next statement: > The only reason to diverge from the common platform standards is if your divergence provides more value to the user... I'm sorry if you feel that there should be only standard font used for UI elements (there isn't in Apple products), or that other users values aren't equally valuable. > It's about humility: Understanding that you're operating as part of a larger whole, and that larger whole is more valuable to your customer if it is consistent and interoperable. Apple is the biggest violator of this across all their platforms. If they don't do it, why should anyone else?