Re: Recommended typefaces

On Mon, 22 May 2006 23:20:53 GMT, "*** Chambers"
<richard.chambers7@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Will wrote

I agree about Courier - truly horrible. I use it in documents to
denote code.

I also agree abou Palatino - very pleasant on the eye.

In my code editor I use Lucida Sans. Also very nice.

I have just tried your Palatino Linotype and Lucida Sans on a test page in
Word. Both of your recommended fonts disappoint me, because of poor
visibility of the decimal point. To see what I mean, type the number 2.111
in either of these fonts, and compare the visibility of the decimal point
with the clarity you see in Courier New.

I remain of the opinion that there is no better font than Courier New if you
are dealing with large amounts of numerical data that include decimal
points.

I will remember that for maths writing, but when it comes to reading
posts, I vastly prefer a serif typeface (I'm using, ATM, Bookman Old
Style 10pt).

After reading all these RRs recommending monospaced reading, I
switched to Courier, Courier New, Lucida, etc. and read for as long as
I could stand it. While they are all clear, I found they slowed my
reading. It was almost as my mind's voice was saying, "okay, I'll read
this slowly so as you'll unnerstand me". Very halting.

Maybe people who have a past life involving reading vast amounts of
material printed on typewriters or primitive printers find mono fonts
fit their comfort zone?
--
Richard Bollard
Canberra Australia

To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT.
.