Is This the Smallest Legible Font? Try Reading It

[wolfseeker2828]

[citation][nom]__-_-_-__[/nom]I refuse to read that stupid text even with a font size 10000[/citation]

did you really just call the Declaration of Independence a "stupid text"?
/facepalm

 

[AuonH]

[citation][nom]porksmuggler[/nom]from Slashdot, doesn't seem to be the smallest legible font...http/angband.pl/font/tinyfont.html[/citation]

It seems it is bested on both size (the linked example has about 1/2 a line more text) and legibility...

Really this isn't news....

 

[steelbox]

[citation][nom]PathfinderNetworks[/nom]Coming soon to a EULA near you... lol[/citation]

And on those propaganda with light speed rules coming on the bottom of the screen...

 

[digiex]

"No sex causes bad eyes"

 

[cookoy]

those fonts are perfect for the disclaimer text of EULAs. wish another professor would come up with better eyeglasses lens technology so folks like me to use.

 

[Railgun1369]

Tighter pixel density is the answer. Let's see a 24" monitor with the same density as the new iPhone (as an example).

 

[RealityClash]

I cant even read this on my HTC Wildfire which is QVGA res. what is the point in text this small...

 

[jsc]

Strangely enough, it is more legible on my Samsung netbook than my 17" HP laptop.

 

[Guest]

The only people that would wan't to use this font are LAWYERS. Read the fine print folks...it's in the contract!

 

[theuerkorn]

Wow, it's actually more legible in small form than magnified. Whatever one needs this for, as resolution goes up. It would have been great years ago when we were stuck with low resolution screens. Imagine this on a Retina display. Ouch!

 

[theuerkorn]

[citation][nom]railgun1369[/nom]Tighter pixel density is the answer. Let's see a 24" monitor with the same density as the new iPhone (as an example).[/citation]
Nowhere close. The typical desktop monitor is 96 dpi (even the 24 inch Samsung I'm using right now). The Retina display is 326 dpi. But you may have meant resolution (total pixels)

 

[nforce4max]

I can read it on my cheap CRT no problem.

 

[iiontihy]

The image on the original site is easier to read than the one on Tom's - probably re-compression artifacts messing with sub-pixel smoothing?

 

[delazaren]

[citation][nom]porksmuggler[/nom]from Slashdot, doesn't seem to be the smallest legible font...http/angband.pl/font/tinyfont.html[/citation]

....and it is much clearer, the font from 2004 is a winner....

 

[Parrdacc]

To read it is doable but not recommended.

 

[thebigt42]

[citation][nom]compton[/nom]Yes I can. Why anyone would want to is another matter. Yay progress.[/citation]
You and people like you are the problem

 

[lamorpa]

How can every single person commenting here be so utterly dense. The problem's input constraints are: 1) A 320 x 240 display, 2) The greatest amount of readable text. It is no more relevant to suggest a larger display and/or less text than it is suggest that a magic fairy read the words and whisper them in your ear. The constraints are stated in the headline. At least read that before commenting.

 

[cj_online]

"..becomes necessary for ONE people." huh?

 

[gmarsack]

Nothing beats a good old bitmap style font. As some said, too much AA on this font, which is unnecessary. It's readable, but why...

 

[Guest]

I can read it on my iphone 4 perfectly. but my eyes would last as long as a quad core without a heatsink!