Yes i have used it. And am still using it. And i was talking about what the OP was talking about. Which i think everyone missed the point. That the fonts and everything don't always match up with everything else. The point i was making is that the new OS may be nice in some respects, but it seems to be thrown together hastily. I think i agree with some posters here, who have said that Apple probably should have waited another year to polish and refine their OS and then drop it on the public. Both Apple maps and this new OS are two new things they have launched with the iphone, that can be argued probably was rushed out too early.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The new, heavier fonts create an inconsistent mess
- Thread starter kmj2318
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes i have used it. And am still using it. And i was talking about what the OP was talking about. Which i think everyone missed the point. That the fonts and everything don't always match up with everything else. The point i was making is that the new OS may be nice in some respects, but it seems to be thrown together hastily. I think i agree with some posters here, who have said that Apple probably should have waited another year to polish and refine their OS and then drop it on the public. Both Apple maps and this new OS are two new things they have launched with the iphone, that can be argued probably was rushed out too early.
If the change was from Ultra Light to something more regular (not completely sure which one exactly), perhaps a good middle-ground of sorts would be just simply Light or perhaps Thin?
http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/adobe/helvetica-neue/
http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/adobe/helvetica-neue/
The change was from Light to Regular, while leaving instances of Ultra Light unchanged. What I was showing in the weather app was how it would look if Ultra Light was bumped up one notch as well (to Thin). Using Ultra Light for large text and Light for smaller text looked consistent in thickness, however, they changed the smaller text to be thicker, yet left the larger text as thin as it was before.
So what is "Regular"? Seems like none of them are actually labeled as such. Is it Roman?
Oh yeah, Roman and Regular tend to be interchangeable. The name discrepancy seems to just depend on where you buy it from. Fortunately, the weight-width ID system notation is used to regularize font families, such as "55" for Roman/Regular, as to eliminate the ambiguity that arises from using such terms as heavy, medium, light, etc.
Honestly I hope this is one of those times where Apple chooses to ignore the complaint in the OP. Taking time to "fix" nit picky optional font settings, means they'll be spending less time working on things that actually matter. I realize that people who purchase Apple products tend to be a little more prone to OCD issues than the general public, but progress needs to be made on real issues.
Speak for yourself. the font made me go straight android, become a monk, and I hijacked a bus. A bus full of penguins.
Why do you think Apple should ignore the complaints about the new font? Apple themselves felt the change in font was necessary because they "fixed" it after beta 2. So to Apple, clearly this is something that "actually matters". And what? You think they need everyone at Apple to work on the font? Of course there are dedicated teams to these things and everyone else will be focusing on whatever issues they're supposed to be fixing.
I agree with OP
I agree with OP. Personally I liked it the way it was pre-beta 3.
I don't know why Apple changed some fonts, but, I am guessing they had complaints about readability, not that it's an issue for me because I happened to like it Ultra Light. If it is a readability issue...isn't that what the adjustable size slider is there for?
If Apple had a suggestion form I would suggest they not listen to initial complaints and go with the original design. As someone that knows a bit about design, I really liked the fonts pre-beta 3.
I agree with OP. Personally I liked it the way it was pre-beta 3.
I don't know why Apple changed some fonts, but, I am guessing they had complaints about readability, not that it's an issue for me because I happened to like it Ultra Light. If it is a readability issue...isn't that what the adjustable size slider is there for?
If Apple had a suggestion form I would suggest they not listen to initial complaints and go with the original design. As someone that knows a bit about design, I really liked the fonts pre-beta 3.
Definitely sounds like you know much, much more about this than me. I totally agree with you.
It would be interesting if they did indeed give it a whole different font, curious what Apple would decide to use.
You guys are crazy. And I don't mean the original poster, I mean everyone saying that there are more important things than this.
In this setting, we are talking about Apple products, there isn't anything more important.
This represents what makes Apple so special, the attention to detail, the striving for perfection. If this detail is off, and it is undeniably so, then others might be off too and then soon you have dozens of these "imperfections" and while you will still have a nice phone, it just won't be what makes Apple special.
Worrying about these "little things" raises the bar for everything else and makes for a better product in the end. This is why this is important.
In this setting, we are talking about Apple products, there isn't anything more important.
This represents what makes Apple so special, the attention to detail, the striving for perfection. If this detail is off, and it is undeniably so, then others might be off too and then soon you have dozens of these "imperfections" and while you will still have a nice phone, it just won't be what makes Apple special.
Worrying about these "little things" raises the bar for everything else and makes for a better product in the end. This is why this is important.
Really? It's hard to imagine people out there who might have a harder time with an obviously thinner front on a small screen? There are so many people out there using iOS that it would be silly not to be able to see that it can be an issue for some.
Just wait 20 years and see how you like thin fonts. If you are in your teens or 20s, your ability to perceive contrast (the difference between white, black, and everything in between) likely far exceeds that of most in their 40s and 50s.
If you still can't comprehend what we are saying, imagine placing a slightly foggy sheet of glass over your screen. How would you like the thin (vs. thicker) font then? That's what you can look forward to as you get older.
Last edited:
I don't even understand this Helvetica-Neue fascination. They should just use Times New Roman. That's my favourite. 
The new icons are too thin, I agree they should also be made dynamic so their thickness varies with the type. Of course that would make sense but it won't happen.
I don't know what they were thinking with the ultra-thin fonts and icons. IMHO it looks absolutely terrible -- hard to read, hard to see, lines crossing pixels borders making weird color patterning around the edges that most people can't see but that drives me nuts, etc.
Nobody would ever use an ultralight font as the main font in a book or newspaper or anything else that would see heavy use.
I don't know what they were thinking with the ultra-thin fonts and icons. IMHO it looks absolutely terrible -- hard to read, hard to see, lines crossing pixels borders making weird color patterning around the edges that most people can't see but that drives me nuts, etc.
Nobody would ever use an ultralight font as the main font in a book or newspaper or anything else that would see heavy use.
I'm in my 40s and I agree with OP. With contacts I have better than 20/20 vision, been using the same power for years, in fact, my last exam eye doc said my eyes were slightly better, but, I use very high power lenses, so that's not saying much. (But, I needed corrective lenses starting back in 2nd grade). Maybe, if there is a fogginess there, you need to see eye doc and find out if they have something to correct it. I do count myself fortunate, no color blindness, can get corrective lenses, don't need bifocals, but, I don't think age is necessarily a factor, there are people older than me don't need corrective lenses at all.
Completely agree with OP. The original text size & font choice was excellent. With the changes, everything seems ever-more cramped.
My preference is to never use ultra light except with very large exaggerated font sizes. The only place that i thought that worked well was on the clock in the lock screen, but even that should have been bumped larger a bit. The sizes that they have now are not quite as stylish, but much more readable. I think that they made the right choices so far and iOS 7 is just becoming more polished. I kind of miss the awkward quirks of the first beta, i'll miss it's goofy character, but i don't regret any of the changes so far (since the first beta, i still dislike the new icons).
Ha. Clearly you never used Aqua 1.0 on OS X.
Every UI overhaul is going to have its rough spots at first. Quite frankly I'm amazed at what they've managed to do in a mere 9 months. I wasn't expecting Ive's influence til next year.
We'll see the UI start coming into its own in iOS 8 and 9, much like how OS X's Aqua was refined over time.
As for the font goes: I think it's hard to argue that the thicker font isn't more readable. That said, it definitely doesn't look as nice, and I'd like to see an option for the thinner version.
It's not just font, but color
I think some of the initial problems with legibility was not just the font size, but also the light colors used. They changed both (darker yellows) when changing one was likely all that was needed.
I think some of the initial problems with legibility was not just the font size, but also the light colors used. They changed both (darker yellows) when changing one was likely all that was needed.