What is the most common Screen Size and Color Depth (forpanopticlick)

In article , Sage wrote:

Is there a way to "reduce" the fonts to a standard package?

only if you want to have everything look wrong.

When I type email, in Google Mail, I don't care *what* font is
used. Same with typing this message to you in Usenet.

this isn't about gmail or usenet.

go visit various web site and you'll see many different fonts.

forcing people to use courier or helvetica ain't gonna happen.

a. I don't even *know* what font is being used, and,
b. I wouldn't care if some other (reasonable) font was used.

you might not, but those who care about how things look certainly do.

In article , Sage wrote:

what a boring world it would be if everyone used the same font.

I didn't say the "same font". I said the "same fonts".

there are millions of fonts, so there cannot be a standard 'set'.

How many fonts does the average person need?

that depends on the person and whether they want to settle for things
looking ugly or not.

We're not talking specialists.

nobody said anything about specialists.

We're talking mom and pop, who basically surf the web and read
their email?

no we're not.

How many fonts does the average person (explicitly) use anyway?

quite a few, and it need not be explicitly.

I use a monospaced font and a kerning font,and that's about it.
So, two Truetype fonts would do me just fine.

maybe it would for you but what a boring world it would be if everyone
used the same two fonts.

I guess my question would be how "I" could make "my" fonts more
"standard" so that they don't give me away.

you can start by taking off the tinfoil hat, but the answer is, you
can't have a standard set of fonts because there isn't a standard set
of fonts. apps and web sites can install their own.

| However, it is possible with threaded views to view only unread
| messages, and I for one prefer that combination, especially in groups
| where threads are long-running and someone may reply into a backwater of
| thread.

I can see why you might want to do that, but
then you're still basically viewing messages
independently, not seeing the progression of
the conversation. In a thread with 60 posts in
5 subthreads you might see 3, in different subthreads.
So then you're back in the same boat: You depend
on repasted text to know what's being talked about.
Unless you have a remarkable memory you're likely to
make a mistake similar to the problem caused by
people who use a simple list view -- 6 people posting
the exact same answer. They'll do it because they
haven't yet seen other answers to a question.
You'll likely do it because it's just so hard to keep
track of it all without seeing the thread structure.

In alt.os.linux Sage wrote:
I could live with two (one monospaced and one not mono spaced), both
truetype, and that would cover almost everything I do, which is read

The problem is: the "original" set of TrueType Fonts (.ttf) are all
copyrighted by MicroSoft for M$-Windows, so
a) you cannot use them in Linux
b) you cannot create fonts that look "exactly the same"
because in both cases MicroSoft will sue you (cq the creator) and they
have more money for lawsuits than you (cq that creator) have/has.
So you'll loose that just by running out of money for those lawsuits.

So Linux had to mske do with the Type1 fonts (first) cq TrueType fonts
(later) that were DIFFERENT from the MicroSoft ones.

PS: the original X11 fonts were all fixed size ones, so you needed a
different set for each font-SIZE.

Mayayana wrote:

you're still basically viewing messages
independently, not seeing the progression of
the conversation. In a thread with 60 posts in
5 subthreads you might see 3, in different subthreads.
So then you're back in the same boat: You depend
on repasted text to know what's being talked about.

You *do* provide that, just not the clue to who said it.

Unless you have a remarkable memory you're likely to
make a mistake similar to the problem caused by
people who use a simple list view

I do tend to keep a mental track for "known good posters" of who's been
saying what in the main groups I visit.

In article , Sage wrote:

nospam wrote, on Sun, 25 Jan 2015 11:25:54 -0500:

Is there a way to "reduce" the fonts to a standard package?

only if you want to have everything look wrong.

When I type email, in Google Mail, I don't care *what* font is
used. Same with typing this message to you in Usenet.

a. I don't even *know* what font is being used, and,
b. I wouldn't care if some other (reasonable) font was used.

It looks fine to me in whatever font I'm using.
How does this message (the font) look to you?

What font am I using anyway?
And why would I care to change it?

Some of us have more uses for fonts than just reading through Usenet
articles. My wife makes a pretty good dollar as a graphic designer; we
have hundreds of fonts for her to choose among. When I was doing web
design, I played with some of the fonts that Google keep in their cumulo
nimbus, with varying degrees of success. I see we're cross-posting into
a winders group here, with varying degrees of articulate discussion.
--
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing room scene.
-- notes for Blade Runner

On Sat, 24 Jan 2015 21:50:12 -0500, Mayayana wrote:

| ...but he prefers to get killfiled by more and more of us here.
|
| I find some of his posts interesting and of value...
| So my ellipsis wasn't meant to imply quite the same completion as yours

Yet you and some others like to keep the argument
going. Over and over again. As though it's somehow
causing you to suffer.

You have misread the intent of my post.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

nospam wrote, on Sun, 25 Jan 2015 13:35:36 -0500:

you can start by taking off the tinfoil hat, but the answer is, you
can't have a standard set of fonts

Let's just agree to disagree.

I can't imagine that, for a standard person, the font matters
all that much for their email and usenet and web browsing.

For example, I have no idea what font I'm using right now, and,
I don't care.

If it's a "standard" Truetype font, all the better.

Warren Oates wrote, on Sun, 25 Jan 2015 16:11:06 -0500:


Some of us have more uses for fonts than just reading through Usenet
articles. My wife makes a pretty good dollar as a graphic designer

That's a totally different story.
She would almost certainly be uniquely fingerprinted instantly.

But, most of us are not graphics designers.

Saying your wife and I have similar font needs is like saying EVERYONE
needs to have a FAA license to fly a commercial jetliner, when most of
us just sit in the seats of that jetliner.

Eef Hartman wrote, on Sun, 25 Jan 2015 20:34:33 +0000:

So Linux had to mske do with the Type1 fonts (first) cq TrueType fonts
(later) that were DIFFERENT from the MicroSoft ones.

I didn't know this, but it still wouldn't matter if the names are
the same for the "standard" set of fonts.

I do agree that you'd want truetype fonts so that you don't have
to have each font size in store.

nospam wrote, on Sun, 25 Jan 2015 13:35:33 -0500:

fonts are *very* complex, and basically works of art.

I could make do with CourierNew and Helvetica.
You're implying they are works of art.
I disagree.

They're just stinking basic characters that have been around
for thousands of years.

Who cares if they have a fancy serif, or a hooked ascender or a short
bracket or a long spine or a curved beak or a straight shoulder or a
round counter or a long tail or an offset axis?

It's just a freakin' character.

Do you buy your text books based on the font?
Do you choose your newspaper based on the font?
Do you choose your web site based on the font?

No. The "artistry" of a font is an absolutely meaningless thing.
It's for someone who cares more about pretty than functional.
Most of us are functional.

Eef Hartman writes:
The problem is: the "original" set of TrueType Fonts (.ttf) are all
copyrighted by MicroSoft for M$-Windows, so a) you cannot use them in
Linux b) you cannot create fonts that look "exactly the same" because
in both cases MicroSoft will sue you...

Typefaces are not protected by copyright in the USA. Thus you *can*,
with impunity, create fonts that look "exactly the same". And people
frequently do so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protection_of_typefaces
--
John Hasler

Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA

| You *do* provide that, just not the clue to who said it.
|

I do to some extent, but only as needed to
clarify what part of a post I'm responding to.
I never just leave all the foregoing text. If
you're only seeing new posts then attribution
without the text of the last 2 or 3 posts
wouldn't do you much good. You still wouldn't
have any idea what the discussion was about.

| I do tend to keep a mental track for "known
| good posters" of who's been
| saying what in the main groups I visit.

I guess that's one way to do it, but it does
degrade the discussion in general if you're
just picking and choosing bits to respond to,
without knowing the course of the discussion.

In article , Sage wrote:


That's a totally different story.
She would almost certainly be uniquely fingerprinted instantly.

Well, yeah, I know that even paranoid people have enemies, but I really
truly don't think anyone's poring over our list of fonts and coming to
the conclusion "Oh, aye, that's Warren and Winnifred, over there in
Walton Close; see, they're using Firefox on a Macintosh with a screen
resolution of 1440 x 900 (@60 Hz!!)." And we'd be all, "Okay, it's a
fair cop, we should be topped for this."
--
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing room scene.
-- notes for Blade Runner

In article , Sage wrote:

Do you buy your text books based on the font?
Do you choose your newspaper based on the font?
Do you choose your web site based on the font?

The publishers of those artifacts are extremely careful about the fonts
that the choose.
--
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing room scene.
-- notes for Blade Runner