Amazon's Thin Helvetica Syndrome: Font Anorexia vs. Kindle Readability (teleread.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon's Thin Helvetica Syndrome: Font Anorexia vs. Kindle Readability (teleread.com)

Posted by timothy on Friday February 5, 2016 @06:26AM from the hey-tell-that-to-the-highway-sign-folks dept.

David Rothman writes: The Thin Helvetica Syndrome arises from the latest Kindle upgrade and has made e-books less readable for some. In the past, e-book-lovers who needed more perceived-contrast between text and background could find at least partial relief in Helvetica because the font was heavy by Kindle standards. But now some users complain that the 5.7.2 upgrade actually made Helvetica thinner. Of course, the real cure would be an all-text bold option for people who need it, or even a way to adjust font weight, a feature of Kobo devices. But Amazon stubbornly keeps ignoring user pleas even though the cost of adding either feature would be minimal. Isn't this supposed to be a customer-centric company?

156 comments

Ob by Hognoxious · 2016-02-05 06:34 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Thindle! I'm here all week. Don't forget to fondle your waitress.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Customer-centric? by djbckr · 2016-02-05 06:35 · Score: 3, Informative

Since when is a large corporation customer-centric? It's stockholder-centric, silly!
1. Re:Customer-centric? by Lunix+Nutcase · 2016-02-05 06:36 · Score: 2
  
  It's Jeff Bezos-centric.
2. Re:Customer-centric? by Opportunist · 2016-02-05 06:47 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  The only reason for a corporation to put the customer in the center is to fleece him from all angles.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
3. Re:Customer-centric? by edibobb · 2016-02-05 06:59 · Score: 2
  
  Correct. When a company reaches a certain size (along with its management egos), there is typically a transition from customer satisfaction to customer behavior alteration.
4. Re:Customer-centric? by Captain+Splendid · 2016-02-05 07:10 · Score: 1
  
  "Gimme some room here! I can't quite reach into all of his pockets!"
  
  --
  Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
5. Re:Customer-centric? by idontgno · 2016-02-05 07:45 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "Of course our customers are satisfied! What makes you think they have any choice in the matter?"
  
  --
  Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
6. Re:Customer-centric? by clodney · 2016-02-05 08:22 · Score: 1
  
  Since when is a large corporation customer-centric? It's stockholder-centric, silly!
  And since stockholders prefer that the corporation actually have customers, they usually think it is a good thing if the corporation is customer centric. See how that works?
7. Re:Customer-centric? by bigfinger76 · 2016-02-05 08:29 · Score: 1
  
  Comcast is publicly traded.
  
  There goes that idealistic theory...
8. Re:Customer-centric? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 09:03 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  When the Kindle Touch was replaced by newer Kindle e-readers, many were unhappy because all audio features and functionality were removed. That is one reason that I have not replaced my Kindle Touch with a newer model. Another reason is that the internal memory was dropped fro 4GB to 2GB. I see that they increased the memory back to 4GB on current devices, but they refuse to add a slot for a micro-SDHC card.
  It is my belief that features should never be taken away when a new version or model of a device is produced. Its ok to ad new features, but not to take features away. Especially features that owners of the device like and use.
  BTW, Amazon could easily have produced a slightly modified Kindle Keyboard that would have been very useful to visually impaired users, but chose not to. All it would have taken was extending the voice prompts that the device already had to include functions that would allow visually impaired users to use the kindle store or side-load ebooks and organize them without assistance from a sighted person.
  I have two Kindle Touches, both with new batteries, so I am set for some time to come. I bought the first one new, because of it being reviewed as having the most readable screen at that time. This was before I had cataract surgery. I bought the second used on eBay. No problems with either one. If I did need to replace them, I would probably buy another used Touch, there are plenty of them available on eBay.
  Oh, and just for information, you CAN control the fonts and font sizes in most web browsers.
9. Re:Customer-centric? by radiumsoup · 2016-02-05 13:26 · Score: 1
  
  Comcast is also in a cronyist relationship with the government via their licensed monopolies. So...they don't have to worry about customer centricity like the competitive industries (except to the extent that they are now losing, at a record pace, eyeballs to the likes of streaming services. I daresay the majority of cable provider customers are only there for the internet...I know I am.)
10. Re:Customer-centric? by doccus · 2016-02-06 06:23 · Score: 1
  
  Well haven't they initiated the "customer satisfaction surveys" yet? And , of course , do nothing afterwards. But they CAN then say "we 'listen' to our customers" .
11. Re:Customer-centric? by timothy · 2016-02-09 15:57 · Score: 1
  
  I bought a Kindle Paperwhite used, from a friend of mine, and it's been great -- quite an amazing device, really. But I was disappointed (not hugely, just a twinge) that it didn't come with audio features; I had hoped it would be my car audiobook player as well as book replacement -- hadn't researched enough, and it hadn't occurred to me that they would have removed such a good feature.
  
  --
  jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
Trend towards illegibility by QuietLagoon · 2016-02-05 06:43 · Score: 5, Insightful

The current trend towards very low contrast, low weight fonts by many websites and devices is most disturbing. One has to wonder why webmasters are so ashamed of their content that they want to make it so difficult for people to read it.
1. Re:Trend towards illegibility by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · 2016-02-05 06:48 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I'm still hoping it's a stupid trend, like all those ugly flat icons in dull washed-out pastel colours and GUI elements that are invisible but that you're expected to already know that they're there, what they represent and how they work.
2. Re:Trend towards illegibility by gstoddart · 2016-02-05 06:50 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Did we mention the whitespace?
  Because I see the trend to add a half an inch of space around everything to make a layout suitable for ... well, I don't know what actually. Not reading, that's for sure.
  My bank recently changed the layout of their web pages ... I used to be able to see all of my accounts on one screen. And suddenly I have to scroll the damned page to read the exact same amount of information on a 23" monitor.
  I think "webmasters" just continue to have no fucking idea about readability and functionality, and instead just do what all the other idiots are doing.
  Just an endless series of things in which all pieces of text get so much personal space as to be absurd.
  They're all taking plays out of the same book, I just can't figure out what the hell it's supposed to be making better ... well, I strongly suspect it's everyone optimizing for tablets and not caring how shitty it looks on everything else.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
3. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Merk42 · 2016-02-05 06:56 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Did we mention the whitespace?
  Because I see the trend to add a half an inch of space around everything to make a layout suitable for ... well, I don't know what actually. Not reading, that's for sure.
  My bank recently changed the layout of their web pages ... I used to be able to see all of my accounts on one screen. And suddenly I have to scroll the damned page to read the exact same amount of information on a 23" monitor.
  I think "webmasters" just continue to have no fucking idea about readability and functionality, and instead just do what all the other idiots are doing.
  Just an endless series of things in which all pieces of text get so much personal space as to be absurd.
  They're all taking plays out of the same book, I just can't figure out what the hell it's supposed to be making better ... well, I strongly suspect it's everyone optimizing for tablets and not caring how shitty it looks on everything else.
  Or maybe they do user testing via interviews and/or giving different people different versions and it turns out the winning version is unfortunately the one you don't like.
4. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 07:05 · Score: 0
  
  The whitespace thing happens because of two reasons:
  1) Apple did it, so it must be good. (But Apple did it out of necessity. Simple software with a simple UI. They don't do that to complex software.)
  2) Companies don't want to pony up the cash for proper iconography, so they get either lopsided icons (not square-proportioned ones) or they use text in place of icons. There's nothing wrong with text in place of icons, if you keep the text short. But they use long phrases and even entire sentences in place of icons. Because of laziness and stupidity, that's why. So to break up the wall of text that results from constructing your UI entirely out of text (but still slut-shaming walls of text), you have to add eleventeen shit-tons of whitespace.
  The fixes are simple:
  - You aren't Apple.
  - Your software is more complicated than the basic utilities that ship with the operating system. (Or they should be, otherwise, why are you making clones of simple shit?)
  - Pay the money it takes to get proper icons made.
  - If you want a text-based interface, stop being so afraid of text. Own it or GTFO.
5. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Lord+Bitman · 2016-02-05 07:05 · Score: 1
  
  Modern techniques have made this sort of testing a *lot* easier than it used to be.
  It hasn't made it any more common, though.
  
  --
  -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
6. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Hognoxious · 2016-02-05 07:07 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Care to give us more details of the methodology they used, what with you being such an expert and everything?
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
7. Re:Trend towards illegibility by gstoddart · 2016-02-05 07:11 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Well, sure .. that's likely. Probable I'd even say ... with the caveat they specifically selected the one which I'd hate the most. ;-)
  It just boggles the mind, it used to present as a nice, neat table, which conveyed all information succinctly in one screen, in a way not unlike how an accountant would present it.
  Now I have to look all over the place scroll, and click twice as many things, and search among a bunch of clutter and pastel colors. Like that makes sense or adds to the usefulness.
  Over 20 years ago a friend said HTML had set back user interface design by 20 years ... the astounding thing is, every few years it keeps making them worse.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
8. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 07:12 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Join the fight!
  http://contrastrebellion.com
9. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 07:19 · Score: 0
  
  My latest gripe is that Windows 7 (at least) with a High DPI monitor has "thin" Segoe UI fonts that are impossibly hard to read compared to that same font on a Normal DPI. Other fonts such as Tahoma are "thicker" and easier to read. Other user interfaces like Ubuntu with Unity are actually nicer by default due to better fonts.
10. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Megane · 2016-02-05 07:31 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  The current trend? I remember ten-ish years ago, way too many web sites were setting body text to 85% text size, 85% gray. And some would put that over a 15% gray background. Fuck that shit.
  
  --
  #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
11. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Pseudonymous+Powers · 2016-02-05 07:43 · Score: 2
  
  Well, sure .. that's likely. Probable I'd even say ... with the caveat they specifically selected the one which I'd hate the most. ;-)
  It just boggles the mind, it used to present as a nice, neat table, which conveyed all information succinctly in one screen, in a way not unlike how an accountant would present it.
  Now I have to look all over the place scroll, and click twice as many things, and search among a bunch of clutter and pastel colors. Like that makes sense or adds to the usefulness.
  My admittedly curmudgeonly and unscientific theory is that, one, most people are stupid, and two, stupid people hate reading, so three, stupid people react unfavorably to high text density. Plus, the kind of people who volunteer to participate in market research are even stupider on average. So when UI designers ask this supposedly random sampling of people which interface they like better, most of them, being stupid, choose whatever has the least text, because on some subconscious level they're afraid that they're going to be asked to read it.
  Bah, humbug, get off my etc.
12. Re: Trend towards illegibility by Aboroth · 2016-02-05 08:00 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  My theory is that now that there are people who do nothing except design and tweak the user interface, they can't ever be "done" or else they risk people realizing how wasteful it is to have that job position and lose their job. Most of the time, once a UI is done and works well, it's best to leave it alone with the required minimal changes that need to be done be assigned instead to the general project maintainers, not specialized "UX" designers. They might actually think they're useful, like most people want to believe, so they'll come up with things to justify their employment. It's easy for them to set up and game a "study" to justify whatever change it is they want to make to the UI in order to keep busy and keep their job. The more drastic the change is, the more work it is, the more they can argue the merits of keeping their pointless job going, and the more controversy and fluff they can inflate their head with to self-justify their own importance.
13. Re:Trend towards illegibility by MattskEE · 2016-02-05 08:11 · Score: 1
  
  I think that this trend partly a shift towards more mobile-oriented webpages and being targeted towards the large mobile devices like tablets and touch-screen laptops. I don't like the trend, but I think that's what is behind it.
14. Re:Trend towards illegibility by jeffb+(2.718) · 2016-02-05 08:13 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  My kingdom for mod points.
  Seriously, everybody go look at this website, now linkified for your convenience.
  http://contrastrebellion.com
  It's concise; it won't take much of your time. And if you're too cool to cope with high-contrast text, well, feel free to smear some Vaseline on your horn-rimmed glasses before following the link.
15. Re:Trend towards illegibility by jhecht · 2016-02-05 08:19 · Score: 2
  
  Perhaps it's time to extend handicap accessibility standards to cover type illegible to those of us with anything less than perfect vision?
16. Re: Trend towards illegibility by vel-ex-tech · 2016-02-05 08:25 · Score: 1
  
  I've noticed the same thing but pretty much everywhere I look. Small stupid tweaks here or there that change nothing but hey, without those, I wouldn't have a job either. What's the alternative to having a large economy of people doing useless jobs that contribute nothing to the world? It's almost as though we could just pay a large number of people to just stay home and pursue a hobby.
  We can't have universal basic income, though! That's communism, and the wrong person might get a free lunch! Also didn't you know?! If somebody doesn't have to work making somebody else money for a living, they just spend all their time doing drugs and getting drunk! So, we'll all continue to be employed, rearranging our UIs every few years, changing the reasons for absence available on an absence request form, switching the position of the email and phone inputs to where they were 3 months ago, etc, but we can all rest assured that nobody will get a free lunch.
17. Re:Trend towards illegibility by cruff · 2016-02-05 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  And suddenly I have to scroll the damned page to read the exact same amount of information on a 23" monitor.
  It is obviously a plot to get you to by a 36" 4K monitor.
18. Re:Trend towards illegibility by SeaFox · 2016-02-05 08:55 · Score: 1
  
  One has to wonder why webmasters are so ashamed of their content that they want to make it so difficult for people to read it.
  If it's a news site, probably to hide that the cheap freelance "editors" they hired to replace their classically educated journalists have such a poor grasp of the English language. Race to the bottom, and all that...
  OT: When did that change in title happen, anyway? Why is everyone an "editor" now, instead of a "reporter"?
19. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 08:57 · Score: 0
  
  agree with the undiscoverable GUI elements, but flat icons are actually a usability boon -- the human brain is able to recognize simple shapes much faster than more complex, more realistic icons
20. Re:Trend towards illegibility by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · 2016-02-05 09:03 · Score: 1
  
  Except that most companies seem to have gone with simple, flat and single-colour icons, making them harder to distinguish from one another. Colour blindness in one form or another is affecting most of the population.
21. Re:Trend towards illegibility by GrumpySteen · 2016-02-05 09:08 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Colour blindness in one form or another is affecting most of the population.
  If by "most of the population", you mean 4.5% of the population, then yes, but I don't think many people will agree with your definition of "most."
22. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anne+Thwacks · 2016-02-05 09:28 · Score: 1
  
  add a half an inch of space around everything to make a layout suitable for ... well, I don't know what
  Because if you don't do it, Google says they will de-list your website for being Un-mobile friendly.
  Eventually, Webmasters cannot say that being customer-friendly is more important than Google friendly, because "no google=no customers".
  You might think there would be laws about "demanding money with menaces" and "abuse of monopoly", but where there is money there no law that cannot be "accidentally misplaced".
  
  --
  Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
23. Re: Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 09:35 · Score: 0
  
  Why does Quicken produce a new version every year where the only thing that changes is the UI?
  They are still missing features related to finance, yet they spend all their time re-skinning the same old core functionality.
  Probably they've let go all the staff that knows anything about money but Intuit has an endless supply of people who know nothing about what the application actually *does*.
  I'm sure the next version of Quicken I see will be all Metro-ized..... like the version before that was web-ified. What's the UI fashion of the day? Let's do it!
24. Re:Trend towards illegibility by demonlapin · 2016-02-05 09:36 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  There's also the complication that people who are unfamiliar with a UI tend to prefer simpler ones, while those who use it all the time prefer dense presentations and are perfectly happy to learn complex command strings in order to speed their work. I would like a very different UI for my bank account than, say, an accountant would.
25. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Merk42 · 2016-02-05 09:39 · Score: 1
  
  There are various companies that offer user testing online. There's also the scenario where the company calls in random people, perhaps off the street, or via their email list and brings them in to see paper/digital mockups.
26. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 09:44 · Score: 0
  
  It's two things:
  1. When goog's "mobilegeddon" struck last year, all web sites were redesigned to fit two-inch wide screens. Two-foot wide screens no longer count.
  2. Endless copying of what's trendy. All web sites now must have a huge photo at the top and centered, too-large type on a white background. At the bottom, three large round icons. All other designs are bad!
27. Re:Trend towards illegibility by mikael · 2016-02-05 10:45 · Score: 1
  
  I feel the same with trying to find a good font for editing source code. I like the zero's with the dot in the middle (Andale Mono), the dashes/minus signs should stretch all the way across (Courier New) and just about join up, not some 50/50 dashed line (Andale mono). The characters should fill most of the space in glyph box. Some fonts are just too square (Unispace), others are just too thin (TW-Sung), too small (TlwgMono Bold), too narrow (TakaoMincho). What looks good in the font selection window, looks awful in a command line (eg. Monospace 12)
  Perhaps the font file options need to be more configurable - allow the user to select vertical/horizontal scaling and distances between characters rather than just like it/lump it with a particular font.
  
  --
  Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
28. Re:Trend towards illegibility by reboot246 · 2016-02-05 12:43 · Score: 1
  
  And what they desperately need is a proofreader. The website for my local paper (al.com) has dozens of misspelled words and several grammatical errors per day. They recently fired a bunch of people and the only ones left apparently don't have even an elementary school education.
29. Re:Trend towards illegibility by dbIII · 2016-02-05 13:38 · Score: 1
  
  Even worse, an unresizable rendered box popping taking up less than a quarter of the screen and forcing the user to mess about with the web designers custom scrollbars.
  A transaction box that cannot show dollar amounts at the same time as where the dollars are supposed to be transferred to is useless guys even if it gets around pop-up blockers.
30. Re:Trend towards illegibility by perryizgr8 · 2016-02-05 15:55 · Score: 1
  
  I haven't seen "ugly flat icons in dull washed-out pastel colours and GUI elements that are invisible" since never. What fucked up OS are you using?
  
  --
  Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
31. Re:Trend towards illegibility by perryizgr8 · 2016-02-05 16:03 · Score: 1
  
  Make text great again!
  
  --
  Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
32. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 16:08 · Score: 0
  
  gstoddart with your 10 below plantlife IQ you have no mind to boggle first of all, imbecile. You're amusing in a clown kind of way though. A court jester attempting at portraying a professor hahahahaha.
33. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 16:12 · Score: 0
  
  gstoddart that piggy bank of yours has a webpage? WoW. Talk about IoT! Does it pay much interest on the few pennies a broke joke loser like you has?
34. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 16:17 · Score: 1
  
  I have participated in surveys/tests like that, and they often lack the important choice, "None of the Above" since they are too narrowly focused on preconceived notions to think outside of their little boxes.
35. Re: Trend towards illegibility by DNS-and-BIND · 2016-02-05 16:36 · Score: 1
  
  You win this thread's award for hijacking a perfectly good line of conversation into your left-wing talking point. We were talking about obnoxious UI.
  
  --
  Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
36. Re: Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 16:40 · Score: 0
  
  In the near future we can gather up a lot of useless people, hair dressers, account managers, phone sanitizers, and ship out in space to colonize other planets. In the meantime..
37. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 17:12 · Score: 0
  
  I haven't seen "ugly flat icons in dull washed-out pastel colours and GUI elements that are invisible" since never. What fucked up OS are you using?
  Android
38. Re:Trend towards illegibility by mjm1231 · 2016-02-05 17:15 · Score: 1
  
  I agree with every point the site makes. But I don't think the glorious rebellion will be won by tweeting at our oppressors.
  
  --
  Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
39. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Burz · 2016-02-05 17:17 · Score: 1
  
  IMO, the real problem is font rendering characteristics emanating from FOSS systems. Bootup a basic fedora or debian system and what you will see fonts that are WIRY as all heck. Turning on subpixel rendering and hinting doesn't help enough, IMO. You can attack the problem with a font like Cantarell, which is nicer but also a real oddball. Or you can change your rendering to match a system like OSX using an out-of-date patch called 'infinality'... http://www.infinality.net/
  Ubuntu, interestingly enough, seems to be an exception to this rule. Its rendering loses a lot of that wiry look. Its a significant improvement though still not quite as good as OSX or Windows. Its not surprising that infinality has a preset to emulate Ubuntu as well as other OSes.
40. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 22:08 · Score: 0
  
  While I agree with his point of grey text, his site illustrates everything what's wrong with the current state of web design.
  The site looks like it was generated with the same template that all hypeing marketing droids seem to use nowadays.
  And personally, reading high-contrast text on a dark background triggers visual migraines for me, so I barely got to the bottom of his page.
41. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Stephen+Chadfield · 2016-02-05 22:27 · Score: 1
  
  Debian with this: https://wiki.debian.org/Fonts#... fonts.conf looks great IMHO. I wish I knew why this configuration is not the default...
42. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Hognoxious · 2016-02-05 23:12 · Score: 1
  
  Brilliant idea. Let's test how a car handles by showing someone a drawing of a lego model of it. And instead of clinical trials we'll test medicines for efficacy & safety by asking people which bottle looks nicest.
  They're charlatans and anyone who uses them is an idiot.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
43. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-06 01:03 · Score: 0
  
  Inb4 Windows 8
44. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-06 01:17 · Score: 0
  
  What's so charlatan about presenting a screen to people and then interviewing how they feel about the screens?
45. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-06 01:29 · Score: 0
  
  They do it because they want to distinguish themselves from all the plebes who use colors and fonts proven to maximize legibility. The understatement feels all sophisticated and design-y. It's like whispering to get people's attention. (Try it. By now everyone should know that if you really want to avoid attention you should murmur instead of whispering.) Maybe they think they'll get approbation from their fellow design-idiots, real users be damned.
46. Re:Trend towards illegibility by MrL0G1C · 2016-02-06 02:48 · Score: 1
  
  All webmasters should do time+motion study to get it into their heads that people want to do things quickly and 1 click is better than 5 clicks.
  Google seem to delight in adding extra clicks in order to deter you from logging in or out, Logging in to google breaks my password managers 1-click functionality and requires 2 extra clicks. Fully logging out involves several page loads and no less than 7 clicks.
  
  --
  Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
47. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-06 03:20 · Score: 0
  
  Of course, user researchers figure out what their primary user base is ahead of time so they know who to target in their research. And it's usually something stupid, like ages 15-25 with perfect eyesight.
48. Re: Trend towards illegibility by Merk42 · 2016-02-06 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  The A/B test variety is two (or more) fully functioning versions of a website. Just because you don't like the results of a test, doesn't mean the execution is flawed.
49. Re:Trend towards illegibility by obsess5 · 2016-02-06 05:28 · Score: 1
  
  This has actually been going on a long time and not just for websites. Magazines have been doing it for ages. For example, I remember when BYTE computer magazine (for those who remember it!) changed their font to a real lightweight font. A lot of people complained, but BYTE responded, like everyone does, that user testing had shown that readers preferred the lightweight fonts. My problem was that if the light was reflecting off the page at the wrong angle, the text was unreadable. (And most places you can't control the location of the lighting.) I agree with you, though, that the trend with websites is especially aggravating.
50. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-06 11:18 · Score: 0
  
  Did we mention the whitespace?
  Because I see the trend to add a half an inch of space around everything to make a layout suitable for ... well, I don't know what actually. Not reading, that's for sure.
  My bank recently changed the layout of their web pages ... I used to be able to see all of my accounts on one screen. And suddenly I have to scroll the damned page to read the exact same amount of information on a 23" monitor.
  I think "webmasters" just continue to have no fucking idea about readability and functionality, and instead just do what all the other idiots are doing.
  Just an endless series of things in which all pieces of text get so much personal space as to be absurd.
  They're all taking plays out of the same book, I just can't figure out what the hell it's supposed to be making better ... well, I strongly suspect it's everyone optimizing for tablets and not caring how shitty it looks on everything else.
  Or maybe they do user testing via interviews and/or giving different people different versions and it turns out the winning version is unfortunately the one you don't like.
  That's assuming "webmasters" have any say in the matter. Blaming a "webmaster" for anything other than botching the implementation is like blaming a burger flipper for the quality of their food source, when their responsibility really is about not over or under cooking said food.
  Go after the "UX" consultants/experts, instead.
51. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-06 11:26 · Score: 0
  
  The current trend? I remember ten-ish years ago, way too many web sites were setting body text to 85% text size, 85% gray. And some would put that over a 15% gray background. Fuck that shit.
  Some dev shops had good enough monitors, that the high-contrast of their setup gave them a false sense of how things will work for users, vs the reality of the many users of lower-quality (and non-calibrated) monitors. This screams for testing to accessibility standards.
52. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Hognoxious · 2016-02-07 06:04 · Score: 1
  
  Obviously abstract thinking is beyond you.
  tl;dr: a subjective assessment of a static mockup tells you nothing about the performance of an actual dynamic object.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
53. Re:Trend towards illegibility by rpstrong · 2016-02-07 10:28 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  I'm a member of that 4.5%, and I can confirm that my color blindness affects most of the population.
  You all look different.
54. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Vegemeister · 2016-02-07 19:58 · Score: 1
  
  Alternately, just disable hinting. Hinting is a menace.
55. Re: Trend towards illegibility by Hognoxious · 2016-02-10 07:04 · Score: 1
  
  Make your mind up. At first you were talking about paper mockups.
  As for A/B testing, it's going to be A=15% grey on an 85% grey background and B=15% grey with a bit of a green tinge on an 85% grey background. It's too expensive to compare much more than trivial cosmetic differences.
  You're making it up as you go along.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
56. Re: Trend towards illegibility by Merk42 · 2016-02-10 10:48 · Score: 1
  
  Make your mind up. At first you were talking about paper mockups.
  I didn't address paper mockups because an AC already had.
  Paper mockups would be used when they only want to test one thing that doesn't make sense to build an entire site for. It's more about measuring visual hierarchy, visibility, and clarity of interactive elements.
  "Here is a paper mockup of our nav, where would you look first to find {thing}?" If the users doesn't know to click on a thing, it doesn't matter how well it works once a person clicks there.
  It wouldn't be effective to build an entire site for that any more than it would be to test drive every single car when the only thing you're deciding on is its exterior color.
  
  As for A/B testing, it's going to be A=15% grey on an 85% grey background and B=15% grey with a bit of a green tinge on an 85% grey background. It's too expensive to compare much more than trivial cosmetic differences.
  You're making it up as you go along.
  Now who's making it up as they go along?
  
  Of course there is a cost involved since you're developing multiple versions, but the theory is that you'll end up with a better version, so it has a high ROI.
57. Re:Trend towards illegibility by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-11 07:39 · Score: 0
  
  I think I've got a solution for you. http://www.high-logic.com/font-editor/fontcreator.html
58. Re:Trend towards illegibility by RatherBeAnonymous · 2016-02-11 07:57 · Score: 1
  
  It's not just web sites. I once called up my Apple sales rep and went on a 10 minute tirade about how they print the serial numbers on the bottom of Macbooks and iMacs. It's 1 mm high dark grey print on medium gray aluminum. Who the fuck thought that was a good idea? We had a fleet of new Macbooks come in and two technicians who were tasked with inventorying them spent probably half an hour looking all over the damned things looking for the serial numbers before they came to me, and it took me another 10 or 15 minutes to find them. Every model previous to that had the serial numbers and MAC address brinted in sharp black lettering 1.5mm high on a white label. Yes, I did measure it. You know what support told me? They said, "you can just boot the computer to find the serial numbers," the smug bastards.
huge savings on ink by goombah99 · 2016-02-05 06:45 · Score: 5, Funny

e-ink is hugely expensive. This saves them a ton of money. but don't turn it on negative contrast or you'll be replacing toner cartridges like mad.
Seriously why is e-paper so expensive. even on placed like alibaba you can't buy e-paper for less than the cost of a kindle itself. You could probably buy used kindles just to re-sell the e-paper screens and turn a profit.

--
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
1. Re:huge savings on ink by queazocotal · 2016-02-05 06:59 · Score: 1
  
  The patents haven't currently quite run out.
2. Re:huge savings on ink by Obfuscant · 2016-02-05 11:26 · Score: 2
  
  e-ink is hugely expensive. This saves them a ton of money. but don't turn it on negative contrast or you'll be replacing toner cartridges like mad.
  Doofus. e-ink doesn't use toner, it uses ink. You don't put toner carts into your ink-jet printer, do you?
  Turning on negative can cause the e-ink to leak out of the e-book and get all over your hands. Impossible to wash off. And don't get me started on the damage that running an e-ink device through the washing machine with a load of whites can cause.
  E-ink is expensive because it is a dead-end technology. There are so many more uses for LCD displays that volume drives prices down. e-ink works for e-book readers, that's about all. You can read your e-books on a full-function tablet device, so why buy something locked to one vendor? (Yes, I know that e-ink is very good for reading things so e-book readers have a niche.)
3. Re:huge savings on ink by dbIII · 2016-02-05 13:31 · Score: 1
  
  Seriously why is e-paper so expensive
  Badly run monopoly.
  They could be making a fortune in volume if they had not decided to charge a high price to a limited number of partners for "premium" devices.
4. Re:huge savings on ink by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-11 00:38 · Score: 0
  
  "E-ink is expensive because it is a dead-end technology"... My Pebble tells another story. Color e-ink, readable at virtually ANY angle, with any illumination.
5. Re:huge savings on ink by ctrl-alt-canc · 2016-02-11 01:58 · Score: 1
  
  > Doofus. e-ink doesn't use toner, it uses ink. You don't put toner carts into your ink-jet printer, do you?
  
  Obligatory xkcd quote
6. Re:huge savings on ink by grumbel · 2016-02-11 02:31 · Score: 1
  
  Pebble uses an e-paper display, not an e-ink display, and e-paper is a polarisier-free LCD.
"customer-centric" by Mr.+Slippery · 2016-02-05 06:45 · Score: 5, Funny

Isn't this supposed to be a customer-centric company?
Hi! Welcome to the internet. I see you're new here. So let me give you some advice: Amazon eats babies. With puppy sauce. Avoid them at all costs.

--
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
1. Re:"customer-centric" by MightyMartian · 2016-02-05 06:59 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  You simply need to pick a different route. Epubee and FBReader do the job for me. Even better, I actually have an unencrypted copy of the epub, just in case there is some sort of "licensing" issue.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
2. Re:"customer-centric" by Anne+Thwacks · 2016-02-05 09:33 · Score: 1
  
  Amazon eats babies. With puppy sauce.
  So that is why dealing with them leaves such a bad taste in the mouth! And all along, there was little me thinking it was just the wresting with the UX.
  
  --
  Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
3. Re:"customer-centric" by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 09:48 · Score: 0
  
  I know they eat babies, but free shipping! That's all I care about!
Advertisement pretending to care about consumers by CajunArson · 2016-02-05 06:47 · Score: 1, Insightful

Hilarious how this so-called "poster" acts all high+mighty pretending to care about consumers vs. big bad Amazon while simultaneously shilling and name-dropping for a competitor of Amazon.
The righteous indignation of the Pot over the Kettle's blackness is truly breathtaking.

--
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
What is this Kindle you speak of? by dhaen · 2016-02-05 06:47 · Score: 3, Interesting

Mine is 5 years old and never required an update - I love the font - and the whole device. I occasionally buy from the Amazon store, so that still works. If they try to enforce an update I'll rely on other sources of book files.
1. Re:What is this Kindle you speak of? by Threni · 2016-02-05 08:54 · Score: 2
  
  I have a Kindle Paperwhite 2 and I love the new upgrade. Not noticed changes to that font, but I only use Bookerly. The UI changed with this release; options like airplane mode is easier to get to, and everything looks more modern and less boring, without a single negative change to the important thing; reading books. Goodreads integration so it's easy to track what you're reading, have read and will read. It sucks if people are having problems reading a particular font but you can inject fonts into books if you like.
  You probably can't get this upgrade if your kindle is that old. I upgraded from one bought around the same time to the PW2 just for the built in light, but between that, the touch screen and the new fonts it's a totally different device.
2. Re:What is this Kindle you speak of? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 15:14 · Score: 0
  
  Bought a PW2 some time ago. Never connected it to the internet, hacked it on basically day one, and after a while found a way to patch the font/margin sizes to be less crap. Still, stuck with only ~6 fonts since I've got a version past where you could just add fonts. Still, overall it's a rather nice device and I've read a lot more from getting it (got it to read through a bunch of ebooks (and some comics*) I got through Humble Bundles).
  Best part? Gargoyle to view IF. Second best is just having a lot of books, even if it's limited to 2GB.
  *If interested, your best bet is to use Calibre and convert to mobi after you alter "ebooks/mobi/utils.py". IMAGE_MAX_SIZE by default is 10MB which is absolute ridiculous for a 1024x768 screen (obviously the actual size rarely (ever?) hits that, but even down to 150K should be quite acceptable for BW images). Of course if there were SD support... Instead, you're basically not going to have your whole comic collection on your Kindle. :~(
Amazon isn't a customer-centric company by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 06:47 · Score: 0

This doesn't surprise me in the least. Amazon isn't a customer-centric company. I recently complained to them because they started showing ads before movies even when I'm a prime subscriber. I pay for prime so I can watch movies and TV shows without ads. When I left feedback complaining about it I got an email from support saying they canceled my prime subscription (without asking me).
So it doesn't surprise me that Amazon would make some change and not care what the customer thinks. They will do nothing unless there's a huge outcry.
This is also a great example of why some people don't like automatic updates.
1. Re:Amazon isn't a customer-centric company by ZipK · 2016-02-05 07:00 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  When I left feedback complaining about it I got an email from support saying they canceled my prime subscription (without asking me).
  You're lucky they didn't cancel your Tesla order too!
Font Geeks by fatalbert1 · 2016-02-05 06:48 · Score: 5, Funny

Designers tend to be font geeks. If you have ever worked with designers they're normally pretty sure they know what is better for you than you do.
1. Re:Font Geeks by UnknownSoldier · 2016-02-05 08:06 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  > If you have ever worked with designers they're normally pretty sure they know what is better for you than you do.
  Not in my experience as an OpenGL/WebGL, UI, and graphics expert.
  Most designers focus on form and forget that function is WAY more important.
  I work for a fortune 50 company and most UI designs _visually_ tell me they don't know what the fuck they are doing half of the time. They pursue change for the sake of change without taking the time to **think** about what the fuck they are _actually_ doing and how it will impact the user's experience.
  i.e. They don't understand the importance of consistent button layout & usage, balance of whitespace to content, don't have a freaking clue about SNR (everything is monochromatic), don't understand anything about contrast (i.e. alternative table rows with 2 different backgrounds), don't care about things being mis-aligned by 1 pixel, don't understand the GPU's of any of the devices -- such as how to use a texture atlas, don't understand pow2 textures, don't understand kerning, Signed Distance Field (SDF) fonts, don't understand the pros & cons of skeuomorphism, etc. Basically all the UI + Graphics stuff they are SUPPOSED to know but don't jack on.
  Here are some of my UI rules:
  First rule of Good UI:
  * Empower the user to do what they want, and then get the hell out of the way.
  Second rule of Good UI:
  * "Contrast" is the difference between signal and noise. Too much signal effectively it means zero contrast. Congratulations, you just made EVERYTHING become noise.
  Third rule of Good UI:
  * The holy trinity is Signal, Noise, Whitespace. Whitespace is not signal, and not noise, but is the boundary between the two.
  Fourth rule of Good UI:
  Function is more important then form.
  Fifth rule of Good UI:
  An expert knows when to follow the rules and when to break them. A **little** spice is fine, such as skeuomorphism. Anti-skeuomorphism means zero spice = bland, boring, and looks like crap with the latest fad of "flat" UI & gaudy colors.
  Sixth rule of Good UI:
  If your UI is not running at _least_ 60 Hz (sub 17 ms), you're doing it wrong. If you don't understand the difference between 24 (or 30 Hz), 60 Hz, and 120 Hz you really don't have a fucking clue about smooth UI.
  Seventh rule of Good UI:
  If you don't understand the importance of _trying_ to target 1 ms response time for everything, you're doing it wrong.
  Eighth rule of Good UI:
  If you don't know how to design fonts for low-density SCREEN displays (sub 72 dpi) (aka pixel fonts) vs medium-density PRINT (sub 300 dpi) you don't know your craft.
  Ninth rule of Good UI:
  UI & User Experience is built upon software. Software is built up on hardware. If you don't understand the importance of ALL three, such as the size of the texture cache, you're doing it wrong.
  Tenth rule of Good UI:
  If you don't give users the option to customize the colors and placement of widgets, you're doing it wrong. Congratulations, you probably made all the color deficient people pissed off! One of the reasons World of Warcraft became popular -- because all the UI mods empowered users.
  All the modern UIs from Apple, Google, Micrsoft is a complete clusterfuck of these principles. It is like everyone forget everything we learnt about UI from the past 20 years.
2. Re:Font Geeks by dgatwood · 2016-02-05 08:11 · Score: 1
  
  And when a reader vendor messes with their design, they get cranky. Still, I suspect that there's a good reason for this change.
  If memory serves, Kindle historically had significant bugs in its rendering, caused by bugs in WebKitGTK. One of the bugs I've seen involved fonts with miscalculated baselines showing up with text that was squished in bizarre ways. Another bug resulted in fonts being rendered either too heavy or too light with the default antialiasing mode—I don't remember which. If they fixed these bugs, it probably resulted in significant rendering changes to ancient fonts like Helvetica.
  In other words, assuming the device actually got closer to correct rendering, this is a good thing.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
3. Re:Font Geeks by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 08:35 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  So UnknownSoldier = APK. Got it!
4. Re:Font Geeks by UnknownSoldier · 2016-02-05 09:04 · Score: 1
  
  LOL!
  Nice joke, but, nah, I manually blocks hosts via the fantastic hosts plain text file which can be done at the router level -- he is always spamming some 3rd party solution.
Three Billy Goats Gruff by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2016-02-05 06:52 · Score: 1

Isn't there some patent troll running around suing over fancy font technology on readers or handhelds or something?

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
in common with all other multinationals by ihtoit · 2016-02-05 06:54 · Score: 1

Amazon don't give a fuck for their customer base. They know that no matter how much you bitch, you'll always be first in line to by their next generation piece of shit gadget, warts and all, because you're fucking addicted to one-upping him/her next door.
I'm not. My phone is a dozen years old and I'll use it until it breaks. My next one is already lined up: it's another V3.

--
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
1. Re:in common with all other multinationals by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 08:01 · Score: 0
  
  Is all the profanity and anger a result of your suppressed addiction to one-upping him/her next door?
Helvetica by Rei · 2016-02-05 06:54 · Score: 4, Funny

At least the Helvetica Syndrome is far better than the Helvetica Scenario.

--
It's times like this I wish I had a friend named 'The Professor'.
1. Re: Helvetica by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 07:30 · Score: 0
  
  You've saved me the effort of logging in to post this. THE LORD'S OWN WORK, SON!!!
Why not make the font LIGHT GREY too... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 06:57 · Score: 0

Apparently that's 'fashionable' amongst the wankers who call themselves 'designers' nowadays. What a shame they can't actually design something original.
Thin fonts are lighter ... by cwarrior · 2016-02-05 07:00 · Score: 2

Everybody knows that thinner fonts weigh less than thicker fonts. While you're losing readability, you're benefiting from having a lighter device.
Fbreader. by queazocotal · 2016-02-05 07:00 · Score: 1, Informative

Open source, and works just great for me.
1. Re:Fbreader. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 07:12 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, yes, I'll just switch from my e-ink reader to my backlit tablet. Totally the same thing.
2. Re:Fbreader. by dbIII · 2016-02-05 13:50 · Score: 1
  
  Or use an e-ink reader with Fbreader. There are many. Many have far better hardware than Amazon and Kobo devices (eg. larger and smaller form factor, some are significantly tougher (eg. flexone), better PDF handling, choice of software, ability to install your own fonts, android apps, bluetooth for keyboards etc) The thing that sucks about all of them is they cost more than the ones that are tied to a "store", but it also means that no update is ever going to delete any of the files you put on them.
3. Re:Fbreader. by stasike · 2016-02-05 19:54 · Score: 1
  
  There are e-ink devices that run FBReader.
  A few of those need rooting - usually the ones that are based on Android. Please note that there are Android based e-ink devices that have google play store or at least can use side-loaded apk without rooting.
  At least one e-ink device manufacturer - PocketBook - provides FBReader as the main reading app. It also supports installation of third-party apps, including Coolreader. PocketBook can use any font you copy to device with fine-grained settings of size, margins, line-spacing, justification, content of the status line. It also supports large number of other configuration options, "screensavers" (pictures displayed then the device is switched off), user dictionaries (the manufacturer provides [unofficial] windows application for generating dictionaries), third-party apps (the manufacturer provides [unofficial] SDK) so you even have a linux console of full-blown Vim [on older version of firmware]. No hacking or rooting needed to make changes.
  The most recent generation of firmware is screwed-up compared with the legendary firmware from two generations of PocketBook devices ago. But even this slightly screwed-up firmware 5.xy is vastly more configurable than other main-stream devices, such as Kindle, Kobo, Nook ...
  PocketBook is the most popular device that is sold in brick-and-mortar stores here in Europe. Nobody except Amazon high ranking executives knows how many Kindles they sell here.
  If you are stuck with Kindle or other device, you can always liberate the DRM-ed content, just search for apprentice Alf. From this liberated e-book you can generate pdf file with page-size of your e-ink display and any fancy typographical formatting you wish.
Customer centric? by msauve · 2016-02-05 07:01 · Score: 1

Amazon, customer centric? Have you ever tried to use their search feature? It just gives you a few relevant hits, widely interspersed among completely unrelated crap.

--
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
1. Re:Customer centric? by neo-mkrey · 2016-02-05 09:16 · Score: 1
  
  I use Amazon search a few times a week for years and it works fine for me. Maybe it's a user education and training issue on your part?
2. Re:Customer centric? by Anne+Thwacks · 2016-02-05 09:39 · Score: 1
  
  Are you trying to sell "search training" course on Udemy?
  You type in something, it displays something completely unrelated (but more profitable for Amazon).
  It is working as designed. I am not working as Amazon designed. I have gone elsewhere.
  
  --
  Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
3. Re:Customer centric? by msauve · 2016-02-05 14:24 · Score: 1
  
  Nah, they just have a good index for "butt plugs."
  
  --
  "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Amazon really screwed the pooch on fonts by kriston · 2016-02-05 07:03 · Score: 2, Insightful

Since Day 1 of the E-Ink Kindles, Amazon has been indignantly screwing the pooch on fonts. It is hard to understand why this is still the case. Bookerly is not a good font; there is no actual science behind the claims made in their marketing about it. There's just no good size to select, either.
At least they finally started allowing you to ignore the publisher-preferred font in recent years. Some books published that way were illegible and it's obvious that Amazon employees do not use their own products.

--
Kriston
1. Re:Amazon really screwed the pooch on fonts by dgatwood · 2016-02-05 08:00 · Score: 2
  At least they finally started allowing you to ignore the publisher-preferred font in recent years. Some books published that way were illegible and it's obvious that Amazon employees do not use their own products.
  It's a fine line. If a reader goes too far in overriding default fonts, you can have readability problems with things like drop caps. Same goes for overriding the font color (e.g. forcing the color to black could result in black-on-black text if you have an inverted-text decoration at the top of a chapter). And some manufacturers' devices annoyingly override fonts by default, which results in a diminished experience in books that use different fonts to convey meaning (e.g. computer books that use code font for symbol names).
  IMO, what we really need are standards that all the reader vendors agree upon, including:
  
  A set of rules for when styles do and don't get overridden by these vendor overrides
  A ban on use of the universal selector in vendor overrides
  A requirement that publisher fonts be enabled by default until the user explicitly overrides the font
  And so on. Then again, half the readers ignore large swaths of the CSS specification already (and probably the HTML and EPUB specs, where applicable), so I cynically wonder if they would just ignore these sorts of standards, too....
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
2. Re:Amazon really screwed the pooch on fonts by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 10:47 · Score: 0
  
  Such a standard would just be used by the publishers as a recipe to follow to make sure that all readers ignore the user fonts and only use the publisher's preferred fonts.
3. Re:Amazon really screwed the pooch on fonts by dgatwood · 2016-02-06 12:44 · Score: 1
  
  No, the seller would just reject such books, as most of them already do. Such a standard, if followed universally, would just ensure that publishers can have some confidence that the reader won't override things that truly must not be overridden (which is *never* the main body font).
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
sans-serif by magarity · 2016-02-05 07:06 · Score: 1, Troll

Sorry, I only read serif fonts.
1. Re:sans-serif by wonkey_monkey · 2016-02-05 07:24 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, I only read serif fonts.
  It's funny how apologising for a personal preference manages to come off as smug and superior. Is it because you hope that anyone reading about your anti-establishment trend-defying quirks will be incandescent with impotent rage at how much more awesome you are than them, and at how this issue doesn't even affect you?
  Sorry, I don't own a TV.
  Sorry, I only drink yak's milk.
  Sorry, I only wipe my bum with Egyptian cotton.
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
2. Re:sans-serif by UnknownSoldier · 2016-02-05 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  Quit trolling.
  If you don't know or understand both the strengths and weaknesses of sans serif fonts (good for screen) and serif fonts (good for print) then you just look like a pretentious, ignorant, bastard.
3. Re:sans-serif by lgw · 2016-02-05 10:35 · Score: 1
  
  Serif is always going to be fatiguing for an e-reader. If you have a reasonable font for modest DPI (not just any random print font), we're long past the terribly-low DPI days.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Probably a result of dev/designer demographics... by jeffb+(2.718) · 2016-02-05 07:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

I think we all see that there's a big push toward The New Shiny for implementing Web UIs, and a push toward hiring young frontier-chasers in place of older developers and designers who are perhaps more attached to older, less cutting-edge technologies.
Well, surprise -- younger people IN GENERAL have an easier time focusing on close targets, perceiving low-contrast images, and dealing with generally lower light levels.
Now, most of the designers I've worked with at least pay lip service to accessibility, universal design, and maybe even special-needs users. But when they're showing mockups to decision-makers, they still seem to push for what's trendy -- and, hey, the twenty- and thirty-somethings in the room have no trouble reading it, and if the forty- and fifty-somethings do, they sure aren't going to call further attention to their "differently youthful" status by complaining about it.
As a result, we see today's visual design. If we squint enough.
They are copying Samsung by NMBob · 2016-02-05 07:11 · Score: 1

who is always copying Apple. They are all the same.
Of course, the real cure would be... by DogDude · 2016-02-05 07:11 · Score: 1

... to buy an actual BOOK from a LOCAL book store.

--
I don't respond to AC's.
1. Re:Of course, the real cure would be... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 08:02 · Score: 0
  
  Or buying an electronic device you have control over.
  The trend seems to be not doing that, and then acting surprised when it does things you don't like.
2. Re:Of course, the real cure would be... by radish · 2016-02-05 08:41 · Score: 1
  
  Because paper books have all sorts of options for adjusting the font size and weight.
  
  --
  ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
3. Re:Of course, the real cure would be... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 14:08 · Score: 0
  
  Fucking why? Waste goddamn space? Waste ten times the energy? Why? So you can feel like a smug cunt as you jack off into the crunchy pages of Ayn Rand again?
  Fuck off.
4. Re:Of course, the real cure would be... by DogDude · 2016-02-06 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  Why would one have to adjust the font size and weight of text? If you have vision problems, there are large print versions of most books.
  
  --
  I don't respond to AC's.
Is this really a big problem? by NotDrWho · 2016-02-05 07:12 · Score: 1

I've heard a lot of complaints about Amazon and the Kindle. But I don't think I've ever once heard anyone complain about the font contrast.

--
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
How to fix it by tlambert · 2016-02-05 07:14 · Score: 0, Flamebait

How to fix it:
"Open a book, magazine or other document on the Kindle. Press the “Menu” button on the bottom of the device. The text size options are displayed with the current size underlined. Press the right arrow on the 5-way controller to increase the font size."
There, fixed, unless you are being an ass about how many character there are horizontally and vertically as well.
If you need the "large print edition" of something, quit trying to pretend your are not getting old, or that you eyes are better than they actually are, and give in to the "usability for humans with sub-par ocular hardware" settings, and be done with it.
1. Re:How to fix it by dbIII · 2016-02-05 13:54 · Score: 1
  
  All the e-readers I've used allow you to choose a different font as well. I have not used a Kindle but it probably has that option somewhere.
2. Re:How to fix it by tlambert · 2016-02-05 15:24 · Score: 2
  
  All the e-readers I've used allow you to choose a different font as well. I have not used a Kindle but it probably has that option somewhere.
  So does Kindle. What he's bitching about is that the Kindle supplied font he was using as a workaround for his having bad eyes is no longer usable as a workaround, because the update included a slightly different version of the font, such that it no longer appears to be bolded, as it did previously.
  He doesn't want to up the point size on the font, which the Kindle would allow, and which also work around the problem. Presumably, this is an "I'm not old, dammit!" reaction to the use of the larger point size as a workaround.
  He doesn't want to use the publisher font (also an option), because the publisher (presumably) picked a font that *also* does not work around his eye problems, either.
  Or none of these things, and he's just one of those people who are pissy about wanting to side-load custom fonts, and apply them to his entire library, and this is his wedge issue to allow him to ride that particular hobby horse.
  Or not even that, he's just being pissy about the fact modern technology is moving away from accessibility in many ways, and he's using this as a wedge issue because he wants to be able to intermediate presentation to do things like automatically text-to-speech.
  Because if he *REALLY* cared about the font, it's a completely work-aroundable problem. All you have to do is DRM-strip the book in question, replace the font in the book image with whatever font you want (which makes it a "publisher font", as far as the Kindle knows), and then set the device to use the "publisher font", and presto, you have whatever damn font you want, without Amazon needing to allow side-loading of pirated fonts. Which is apparently something they are contractually prohibited from doing.
  In point of fact, there are many blogs that discuss how to perform the procedure on individual books, such that they are using whatever font you want them to use. I'm partial to this one, since it demonstrates the control panel image on the Kindle as part of the setup process for doing the conversion, and the particular image they used shows that the Helvetica font on the device appears to be bolded, compared to all the other available font selections.
  Blog demonstrating replacing the font used by a book on a Kindle:
  http://blog.the-ebook-reader.c...
Re:Advertisement pretending to care about consumer by gstoddart · 2016-02-05 07:23 · Score: 1

The righteous indignation of the Pot over the Kettle's blackness is truly breathtaking.
This seems to be part of the editorial tone being established by the new owners.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Whiney rant by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 07:31 · Score: 0

I expect these whiney rants from Bennett Haselton. WTF?
Monospace! by blueshift_1 · 2016-02-05 07:34 · Score: 1

I want read using the same God would read from. Courrier New. Monospace trumps all.
1. Re:Monospace! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 08:10 · Score: 0
  
  You forgot a few words and misspelled your alleged font of choice.
2. Re:Monospace! by gustygolf · 2016-02-06 01:47 · Score: 1
  
  Courier is way better than Courier New
  Courier New looks anaemic on paper.
  Comparison
  (Posting in monospace just to make a point.)
  
  --
  "Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 58 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment" -- slashdot, driving users away.
Increase Font Size by nuckfuts · 2016-02-05 07:36 · Score: 1

If you're having trouble reading the font because it looks to skinny, just increase the font size to where you can read it.
1. Re:Increase Font Size by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 08:25 · Score: 0
  
  Some of them really are too skinny--at normal print size (11-13pt) you're lucky if there's a faint gray line where some of the key lines for readability are, and I've run across a few fonts that on many screens only really get the right visual balance (readable and not headache-inducing) when you've cranked them up to, say, 36pt or 72pt.
  I don't know about you, but I'm not terribly interested in reading anything very long with letters that are half an inch high, no less a full inch high, and sometimes there's no reasonable way to get the thing to display normal text at that size anyway.
  My guess is that the version of Hevectica they've loaded onto Kindles is optimized for HD screens--thin fonts display a lot better there. Why they can't use an older version or get it optimized for eInk if they had to have a shiny new version of it is a mystery for the ages.
2. Re:Increase Font Size by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 09:23 · Score: 0
  
  Sadly this doesn't work. I have a bunch of technical books that I rely reading on the font (that I usually use + margin + linespacing). The technical books contain formula and code fragments. Increasing the font will cause the formula and code segments to completely mess up. ... besides that... why should I change my preferred reading environment just because Amazon doesn't get it right ?
Sold our Kindles because how they handle fonts by dhanson865 · 2016-02-05 08:33 · Score: 5, Interesting

My wife got a Kindle a few years ago and liked it but still found it hard to read.
At one point I saw her reading something in Comic Sans and I thought it was odd and unrelated.
Somewhat later she found about about dyslexie font and OpenDyslexic font and started using them on various devices.
I found out you could manually import fonts onto the kindle paperwhite so we ordered one.
Amazon patched all the Kindles to block importing fonts and limit you to the preloaded fonts.
There is a workaround involving downloading free ebooks and converting them in such a way that you embed the font but it isn't an option for the vast majority of what she would like to read on the Kindle.
We then sold our Kindles and she just reads on a laptop instead.
To add to the fun it isn't just Amazon, I haven't found a way to add the dyslexie/opendislexic font to a non rooted android phone. How hard would it be for device manufacturers to just add a simple font import or heaven forbid actually include more fonts in the base configuration?
As is phones/phablets/tablets are more common than Kindles and now big enough/cheap enough to make the Kindle less important but it's just moved my concern about this issue from Amazon to Android.
1. Re:Sold our Kindles because how they handle fonts by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 11:49 · Score: 1
  
  I recently bought my first e-reader after having borrowed a family members Kindle for a while. I liked the display, but everything about Amazons software and ecosystem was locked down, frustrating, and clunky (when it wasn't out-right broken).
  After returning the Kindle to its owner, I did some research online and ended up buying a Kobo, in part because you actually can add your own fonts.
  The whole experience has been much better, as long as you can overlook Amazon's ebook prices. It's almost as if Kobo understands that I own the reader.
2. Re:Sold our Kindles because how they handle fonts by dbIII · 2016-02-05 14:00 · Score: 2
  
  I'll second that, changing fonts on a Kobo is a very simple task and adding new fonts to the list is possible. It's also easy to side load books from project gutenberg or wherever.
  I prefer my Boox but it's a large thing to carry around - iPad size. The small Kobo readers are more portable so handy things to avoid being bored while waiting or to have something to read over lunch.
3. Re:Sold our Kindles because how they handle fonts by stasike · 2016-02-06 19:57 · Score: 1
  
  Many e-book reading apps for Android allow you to side-load font for that app.
  Just create fonts directory on an SD card and place your fonts there. I know it works for FBReader and Coolreader and I think it works for other apps. Just google up details.
It's an e-reader, not paper by Solandri · 2016-02-05 08:33 · Score: 1

The whole point of a LCD or e-ink display made of pixels is that you can display whatever you want. There's no requirement like paper where you have to pick a font and your'e stuck with it. Manufacturers need to let the device's owner load up and use whatever fonts they want. I mean sure the publisher and device manufacturer can recommend a font, but they have no business dictating what font is used on your device. Forcing you to use one particular font is like making a radio with a tuning knob, but only allowing you to listen to one station.
Apple guilty as well by bogie · 2016-02-05 08:38 · Score: 1

Before Amazon made any changes Apple was leading the way. Of course plenty of people like the new font but then again there are an awful lot of guides on how to how to make the fonts more readable in IOS and El Capitan.

--
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
There are plenty more issues with 5.7.2 update ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 09:19 · Score: 0

http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3252412&postcount=84
http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3252481&postcount=91
undo moderation by godel_56 · 2016-02-05 09:54 · Score: 1

Post to undo faulty moderation.
Its not an ereader, it's a shop. by sjwest · 2016-02-05 09:59 · Score: 1

You may think its a ebook thing but its a remote store for amazon. That statement works for the nook and b & n.
I own neither so when somebody makes an reader that works everywhere without doing voodoo like calibre on content and the like i might get one.
1. Re:Its not an ereader, it's a shop. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-09 22:22 · Score: 0
  
  I use Nook Simple Touch With Glowlight (what a name) with a replaced firmware. It's just an Android system, no store tie-ins. Works great, simple to use: connect to PC, copy files like you would to a USB flash drive, read with CoolReader on the reader. Good hardware, battery can last months, 4 years later everything works like new, including the glowlight.
Kindle Font Issue: Four Words by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 13:09 · Score: 0

Americans with Disabilities Act
yeah, right, but advertisers WANT slow readers by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 13:15 · Score: 0

"Another experiment confirms that reading time is lower when there's high contrast between the text and the background. What's more, contrast sensitivity declines with age."
More time to look around the page and wonder at the tapdancing, farting icons (hat tip Vonnegut).
Re:Advertisement pretending to care about consumer by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-05 16:06 · Score: 0

Ah yes, the keen insights (lol, not) of slashdot's own resident imbecile, gstoddart. Yet another scathing review from a moron! Spare us retard. Spare us.
Paperwhite fonts by mattr · 2016-02-05 19:54 · Score: 1

The new Bookerly is excellent and I use it or Caecilia if need more weight. However I must say that the font SIZES that are available are awful!!
There are many sizes around 5 or 6 point which is too small. Then only 2 sizes in ordinary size and 2 giant. I would like to have smoothly variable ecmal point scaling like on epub apps. If that is incompatible with low power cpu then let me get fonts from the net, and be able to buy goof ones from the store.
I would pay money for this.
Also I wish it would read zip / cbz amd let me doenload them as well as image files from browser.
Also I bought an amazon gift card overseas (in a Tokyo convenience store) but amazon.com refused to accept it. I wish they would just listen "shut up and take my money."
1. Re:Paperwhite fonts by mattr · 2016-02-05 22:00 · Score: 1
  
  Decimal point, I meant to say.
Amazon not customer focused by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-06 20:08 · Score: 0

Amazon doesn't even allow Android kindle users to left justify text, making it far more readable.
They could care less about what Android users want. Just a simple fact.
Amazon not customer focused by ca19 · 2016-02-06 20:08 · Score: 1

Amazon doesn't even allow Android kindle users to left justify text, making it far more readable. They could care less about what Android users want. Just a simple fact.