From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 2 06:16:36 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24E721065749 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2010 06:16:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (gate6.infracaninophile.co.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:151:1::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C4F78FC17 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2010 06:16:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from seedling.black-earth.co.uk (seedling.black-earth.co.uk [81.187.76.163]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o526GK0P039369 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 2 Jun 2010 07:16:27 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Message-ID: <4C05F734.1060404@infracaninophile.co.uk> Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 07:16:20 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman Organization: Infracaninophile User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bernt Hansson References: <20100529211104.GA55411@thought.org> <4C020BDA.9070508@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20100530075135.GA9594@thought.org> <4C05CE51.3090406@bah.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <4C05CE51.3090406@bah.homeip.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.1 at lucid-nonsense.infracaninophile.co.uk X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.0 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_ALL,SPF_FAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on lucid-nonsense.infracaninophile.co.uk Cc: Gary Kline , FreeBSD Mailing List Subject: Re: fonts qstns. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 06:16:36 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/06/2010 04:21:53, Bernt Hansson wrote: > 2010-05-30 09:51, Gary Kline skrev: >> >> according to one fellow, the top display shows only 72dpi; >> that is why sans serif [like arial] render better than, say, >> times. does this still hold? > > No it does not. My display has 96 DPI and it is 12-15 years old and > 35 Kg. Even that is pretty coarse nowadays. This Mac does 1920x1200 on a display approximately 370x230mm. Which is 132dpi. Even so, you still need special fonts to display clearly on screen: unless the hinting is done very carefully, letter spacing will appear to vary arbitrarily on anything below about 200dpi. Sans-serif similarly works well when there are fewer pixels per glyph. However, once you start printing, it's a different story. Even a really cheap laser printer will do 600dpi nowadays, and most are better than that. Cheers, Matthew - -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate JID: matthew@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkwF9zQACgkQ8Mjk52CukIy/3ACfSgRkJ5VfABKE3EIZ/AUO4Cvk ZeAAnRIvywcMuLmWpirGSmpaLi0Q8Eh/ =ue8E -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----