That is a fair point. In fact, I like both styles. Let the Ubuntu font modernize if that is the way things should go. I can always revert to the older style if I choose to. The new one may grow on me anyway, as many Ubuntu changes have.
Edit: In fact, my initial judgment may have simply been a negative gut reaction from having the font I’ve been using for years be altered. While the older style was quite nice, I think I could adjust to the newer style over time. It does look pleasant, and it seems to fit the Yaru “open and airy” light theme well. The only criticism I would give is to consider “i”'s and “j”'s. The spacing between the dot and the rest of the character may be too small. It almost blends together at a glance.
A good example is if you open up nautilus/Files and look at the sidebar where you see Videos. On my 1440p 27" screen, it almost looks like Vldeos if I’m not looking directly at it. That may just be my interpretation though and I’d like to hear the experience of others.
(I had to create a second post, because new users are forbidden to embed more than one image.)
Ubuntu Mono Regular 12 (v0.83) vs Ubuntu Mono ‘NEW’ Medium 11 (v0.863) Note: the new Medium variant is bolder than the old Regular variant. See the GIF image below.
The new Medium variant (v0.863) is too bold for my tastes. It won’t be able to ‘replace’ the old Regular variant.
I confuse гора and ropa quite often. It’s so embarrassing to walk into a store and try to buy a mountain – or worse, go to a mountain and try to buy some clothes.
Seriously though, I’m often annoyed by the similarity of г and r and р and p. We’ve got more pixels, let’s use them to disambiguate what we’re reading.
The new Ubuntu font may have problem when handling Chinese punctuation, such as enumeration comma(、) and full stop(。). I have report a bug on launchpad.
Hi, my sign up and first post here for this Ubuntu font “update”.
Is there still any chance for this new Ubuntu font with different weight then the past get its own font name and leave the classic Ubuntu font alone? Imagine all the documents and artwork files in the past that refer to the Ubuntu font, get changed by this “update” unexpectedly.
fonts-ubuntu-classic is NOT a proper solution. It is a local downgrade of the font package to the old version. Files created in the past / in unupgraded 22.04 LTS computers / in new computers installed with this “classic” package will look wrong in new computers without this package installed. Similarly the same bug is going to occur for people who create files in new computer then send to people running an older OS or with the “classic” package.
We don’t have font version requirement embedded in .odt, nor in .xcf, nor in any other rich text / art file formats. We don’t have font version requirement declaration available in HTML/CSS either. Font versions are supposed to be visually compatible to human eyes.
Files created in the past / in unupgraded 22.04 LTS computers / in new computers installed with this “classic” package will look wrong in new computers without this package installed. Similarly the same bug is going to occur for people who create files in new computer then send to people running an older OS or with the “classic” package.
Well, this is kind of just an instance of what is essentially the history of software… Stuff that worked in the past many times won’t work in more recent set ups without active maintenance. (Not being a web developer guy, I can tell that the same HTML document will start to look different as browser updates go by.)
I don’t think that a third package fonts-ubuntu-2 will be introduced to revert fonts-ubuntu-classic to fonts-ubuntu because it further adds complication to the matter.
For “local downgrade”, I mean the “classic” package is overwriting the font files with the old version, not re-introducing the old font alongside the new font. The two packages don’t coexist. They remove each other.
For HTML documents look different with times go on, yes, the last time I witness such change is the introduction of text-decoration-skip-ink, defaulting all underlines to skip dangling strokes by default. But they allow one to use text-decoration-skip-ink: none to get back the old behaviour, with the instruction right within the document, not solely relying on the browser setting.
Put into the context of the Ubuntu font. We don’t need a third package for the current issue. We only need the font files provided by fonts-ubuntu and fonts-ubuntu-classic to be different in their font names. We can even let the font name in fonts-ubuntu-classic be taking the “new” name if that’s the biggest compromise Canonical is willing to take.
Only after the old font and new font coexist properly in a computer, then there can be a proper procedure for documents to get their “active maintenance”.
Edit: The current font-ubuntu-classic package fails to achieve a simple scenario where user account A wants to see the UI interface with the old font while user account B wants to see the UI interface with the new font.
