Agreed -- this one is *finally* looking rather good. I've previously used Courier New and Andale Mono. I found Andale Mono to look slightly better, but I use ClearType with Windows and the anti-alias seem to reduce the readability of Andale a bit more than Vera already at 10 pt. I'd assume even worse at 9 pt.
The TrueType format was made by Apple. The OpenType format is an extension to TTF, adding support for PostScript font data and designed by Microsoft and Adobe with the following features:
- broader multi-platform support - better support for international character sets - better protection for font data - smaller file sizes to make font distribution more efficient - broader support for advanced typographic control
This sounds good, but remember MS was part of the design group and this is MS pages. I found this in the FAQ to look fishy in particular:
Q What does the OpenType initiative mean to Adobe's font business?
A The OpenType initiative represents a new opportunity for Adobe to expand its font business into the Windows market because Type 1 fonts will now work out of the box on all Windows systems. In addition, because Adobe will license TrueType technology, it will now be able to develop and market TrueType fonts.
So this could've been a "standard" created by Microsoft and not surprisingly supported by Adobe for the reasons in the FAQ entry I quote above. If that was the major reason for Adobe to support it, it looks more like MS did this "standard" on their own, hoping several others to license it and Adobe simply being an early adopter. I have no idea if this is as properly standardized as TrueType, or if it's more like an "Microsoft extension" which could explain why Bitstream/Gnome didn't want to support it.
Here's another FAQ entry:
Q What is being proposed to the World Wide Web Consortium?
A Adobe and Microsoft together will submit a proposal for Web page font embedding using OpenType to the W3C's working group on style sheets. --snip -- Ultimately we hope that this proposal, or a modified version of it, will be endorsed by the W3C as the standard way to use fonts on the Web.
The FAQ was never updated to say if W3C did indeed decide to endorse it as a standard for font embedding. If W3C instead decided to go for the much more common TTF format, thinking it should suffice, then that would be yet another reason to not use OpenType fonts.
Perhaps someone else has more insight into Bitstream's reasons not to use OpenType?
Is this the first advertisement where you notice a statement like this? Or do you comment like this for each ad you see? Or perhaps just MS advertisements?
Something similar happened when Microsoft released Windows 95... Even if that OS isn't pure 32-bit, it ran 32-bit software and was intended for it as well. Still, lots of 16-bit software were floating around with hideous Windows 3.1 interfaces. And Windows 3.1 got this "Win32s" thing for emulating 32-bit apps.:-P
It was rather ugly IMHO, but it was necessary to move on.:-)
I think new Phoenix builds are made daily and based of the Mozilla trunk, so if you d/l it today, you'd get all the bug fixes of 1.4a, right? But there's of course the problems with knowing which build works well and not since these haven't gone through any special additional testing.
This [url=http://www.mozillazine.org/forums/viewforum.p hp?f=23&sid=980d1241d72b63403d02b5e535daffac]Phoen ix Build Forum[/url] is quite helpful to determine if a nightly is "good" or not.
But I also miss a 0.6 with new interesting Phoenix-specific features!
Yeah, I also find it funny that their main April's Fools joke is about something *we* often joke about -- their dupes...
It's amazing that even the *fourth* time (where the editor hasn't updated the news item to say "Yes, it's obviously a dupe" like they use to), people are still saying "uuuhh what are the editors smoking".
Had anyone here heard about the slowdown problem before it made the news? No? I really wonder how common it is in reality... And if it's very uncommon, I wouldn't go as far as saying their test procedures are insufficient just because of this.
- SP1 on its own doesn't since I haven't got any problems. - Large memory allocations doesn't since I'm using such programs quite often.
???
There must be something else involved too... I'm even quite sure *most* of us haven't got any ptoblems whatsoever, otherwise we'd heard about this long before it made the news recently.
You mean like Itanium was not supposed to be a real processor or even fast, but just a demonstration of IA64 before the "real" Itanium II processor appears?
Bullshit.. But a really creative reintrepetation.
This comparison is flawed because Phoenix or Minotaur aren't successors to Mozilla or Mozilla Mail.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed -- this one is *finally* looking rather good. I've previously used Courier New and Andale Mono. I found Andale Mono to look slightly better, but I use ClearType with Windows and the anti-alias seem to reduce the readability of Andale a bit more than Vera already at 10 pt. I'd assume even worse at 9 pt.
why no opentype? wasnt that meant to be the next big thing?
Yes, I thought so as well...
TrueType info, OpenType info, TrueType vs OpenType FAQ.
The TrueType format was made by Apple. The OpenType format is an extension to TTF, adding support for PostScript font data and designed by Microsoft and Adobe with the following features:
- broader multi-platform support
- better support for international character sets
- better protection for font data
- smaller file sizes to make font distribution more efficient
- broader support for advanced typographic control
This sounds good, but remember MS was part of the design group and this is MS pages. I found this in the FAQ to look fishy in particular:
Q What does the OpenType initiative mean to Adobe's font business?
A The OpenType initiative represents a new opportunity for Adobe to expand its font business into the Windows market because Type 1 fonts will now work out of the box on all Windows systems. In addition, because Adobe will license TrueType technology, it will now be able to develop and market TrueType fonts.
So this could've been a "standard" created by Microsoft and not surprisingly supported by Adobe for the reasons in the FAQ entry I quote above. If that was the major reason for Adobe to support it, it looks more like MS did this "standard" on their own, hoping several others to license it and Adobe simply being an early adopter. I have no idea if this is as properly standardized as TrueType, or if it's more like an "Microsoft extension" which could explain why Bitstream/Gnome didn't want to support it.
Here's another FAQ entry:
Q What is being proposed to the World Wide Web Consortium?
A Adobe and Microsoft together will submit a proposal for Web page font embedding using OpenType to the W3C's working group on style sheets. --snip -- Ultimately we hope that this proposal, or a modified version of it, will be endorsed by the W3C as the standard way to use fonts on the Web.
The FAQ was never updated to say if W3C did indeed decide to endorse it as a standard for font embedding. If W3C instead decided to go for the much more common TTF format, thinking it should suffice, then that would be yet another reason to not use OpenType fonts.
Perhaps someone else has more insight into Bitstream's reasons not to use OpenType?
I can't wait to see how the tabbed browsing implementation looks/feels.
But the real news about Safari is that it's so darn quick with innovative features!
Oops! Confused the link. Sorry.
Hmm...
:-)
GamePro didn't fell for anything -- the submitter who didn't read their article did.
And even if it was the case, too bad the guy spreading the joke was out of sync with real life. Like the date, and stuff.
Is this the first advertisement where you notice a statement like this? Or do you comment like this for each ad you see? Or perhaps just MS advertisements?
Something similar happened when Microsoft released Windows 95... Even if that OS isn't pure 32-bit, it ran 32-bit software and was intended for it as well. Still, lots of 16-bit software were floating around with hideous Windows 3.1 interfaces. And Windows 3.1 got this "Win32s" thing for emulating 32-bit apps. :-P
:-)
It was rather ugly IMHO, but it was necessary to move on.
Unfortunately, no one can be told what a 32-way NUMA-Q with Preempt Enabled is. You have to see it for yourself.
Tried 2 different browsers, page is b0rked.
:-)
Nah, not until Opera has taken action.
Gaah! I've posted too much on vBulletin boards. >:-(
Here's the link again:
Phoenix Build Forum. Again, it contains valuable tips on which nightly is good or if some should be avoided due to major bugs.
I think new Phoenix builds are made daily and based of the Mozilla trunk, so if you d/l it today, you'd get all the bug fixes of 1.4a, right? But there's of course the problems with knowing which build works well and not since these haven't gone through any special additional testing.
p hp?f=23&sid=980d1241d72b63403d02b5e535daffac]Phoen ix Build Forum[/url] is quite helpful to determine if a nightly is "good" or not.
This [url=http://www.mozillazine.org/forums/viewforum.
But I also miss a 0.6 with new interesting Phoenix-specific features!
Yeah, I also find it funny that their main April's Fools joke is about something *we* often joke about -- their dupes...
It's amazing that even the *fourth* time (where the editor hasn't updated the news item to say "Yes, it's obviously a dupe" like they use to), people are still saying "uuuhh what are the editors smoking".
Dang humorless nerds =)
AAaah!!! Microsoft is shouting at me! :-O
first time i read it as "I am not anal"
;-)
Or, if you're a sci-fi nerd liking Isaac Asimov, you'd read IANAL as "I, Anal".
naah, that would make you happy
... will Rubi-Con 5 become Rubi-Con 1? :-P
Sorry, I was drunk when posting that one...
Categorized List of Fixes in Windows XP Service Pack 1 (SP1)
Yes, I'll tell myself that -- something improved. I'm just not sure exactly what it is.
u pport/ServicePacks/Windows/XP/SP1FixList.asp
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=/s
Had anyone here heard about the slowdown problem before it made the news? No? I really wonder how common it is in reality... And if it's very uncommon, I wouldn't go as far as saying their test procedures are insufficient just because of this.
- SP1 on its own doesn't since I haven't got any problems.
- Large memory allocations doesn't since I'm using such programs quite often.
???
There must be something else involved too... I'm even quite sure *most* of us haven't got any ptoblems whatsoever, otherwise we'd heard about this long before it made the news recently.
I'm no Linux zealot =)
I'm just saying that MS has said that they'll support it but they don't. Is that hard to understand?
There's talk of phasing in Palladium, starting with Longhorn Server in 2005.
There is no planned server edition for Longhorn, much less with a fixed release date of 2005.
It deserves the support MS has said it should get. Please read up before posting *yet* another of those comments.
I expected it to be called like that, and then I checked the recent changes:
March 18th
Renamed the executable to thunderbird instead of minotaur. We may switch this back though.
Is this yet another trademark problem, as with Phoenix?
You mean like Itanium was not supposed to be a real processor or even fast, but just a demonstration of IA64 before the "real" Itanium II processor appears?
Bullshit.. But a really creative reintrepetation.
This comparison is flawed because Phoenix or Minotaur aren't successors to Mozilla or Mozilla Mail.
Wow, there's one of my dead genres! :-D
I knew it would pop up somewhere, hehe