I haven’t seen any instructions recently, but from a recently-ish install of FreeBSD 11 I remember it took even less steps, e.g., no need to set up a package repository, there is a graphical wifi selector.
One concern I’ve had with OpenBSD is that the community as a whole has a pattern of making bad (EDIT: graphic) design decisions in the presentation of information. This article is no exception.
Is there a particular reason why this seems to affect OpenBSD the most out of any given unix-like?
I think he means the garish fonts (Comic Sans MS) and colours chosen by people who associate themselves with OpenBSD thoughtlines. I believe this is intentional, to prevent people from judging the content by appearance, but rather instead content. Also, you can then proceed to filter out people who only cared about the appearance.
Hmm, I suppose I can see why they think it’s a good idea, if this is really the reasoning. Suffice to say I completely disagree, at least with the degree to which they make their content illegible.
I mean, taking this page for example, it would be trivial to make this page less of an eyestrain: remove the body and link background colors, set the page width to ~800px, and the margins to auto. Voila: an actually readable website that doesn’t rely on pretty visuals to seem credible.
I suppose I just don’t understand why filtering out people who care about appearance is so important that they shoot themselves in the foot…or the eye, as it were.
Its funny to note, Simon Peyton Jones uses comic sans for all his presentations too. His reasoning:
This is a very funny question, why I use Comic Sans. So. All my talks use Comic Sans, and I frequently see little remarks, “Simon Peyton Jones, great talk about Haskell, but why did he use Comic Sans?” But nobody’s ever been able to tell me what’s wrong with it. I think it’s a nice, legible font, I like it. So until someone explains to me — I understand that it’s meant to be naff, but I don’t care about naff stuff, it’s meant to be able to read it. So if you’ve got some rational reasons why I should not, then I’ll listen to them. But just being unfashionable, I don’t care.
I’m not sure I’d agree it’s especially legible, if you include implied aspects of communication. I don’t care if it’s “bad” or “unfashionable”, but it does explicitly look like a kind of jokey, “fun” font, that implies you’re doing something lighthearted or jokey. Which is why it’s named Comic! That’s not necessarily always out of place in tech content— you could use it an xkcd-style cartoony introduction to a topic, or on the cover of a “For Dummies” style book. But the first few times I saw it in a completely unjokey “serious” presentation, it threw me off and made the entire talk difficult for me to follow, because throughout the talk I thought the jokes were going over my head and I was distracted trying to figure out what they were.
I’ve now seen it enough times that it doesn’t really distract me anymore, but only because I pattern-match “ah ok it’s a not a ‘real’ use of Comic Sans intended to be actually comic, it’s just that hipstery style that’s using it as an anti-fashion statement”.
In this case, SPJ has been using Comic Sans so long I doubt you can call it hipstery. And none of your arguments amount to anything beyond distaste for the font.
Its named Comic Sans as its intended to be reminiscent of comic book style fonts not to be a joke. n.b.
http://www.comicbookfonts.com
I’ve read some studies that say Comic Sans is better for retention and possibly better for dyslexic people. And given some people actually like the font, I’ve also never seen a good argument against it other than “I don’t like it personally” or “its bad design” or “comic sans is a joke” or “comic sans use isn’t serious”.
If you believe reader attention is a valuable resource, then tools that help you conserve that resource are likewise valuable. Typography is one of those tools.
Good typography can help your reader devote less attention to the mechanics of reading and more attention to your message. Conversely, bad typography can distract your reader and undermine your message.”
If others didn’t matter, why were they sharing or discussing it with them on non-project forums to begin with? Best to not half-ass an attempt to tell others about something great if it was worth an attempt to begin with.
You will need to be more specific with your criticisms. From what I’ve seen they are pretty careful about avoiding fads and favor simplicity.
The installer is barebones but is easy to automate and even manual openbsd installs are faster than linux ones.
The init/daemon system is slow, but simple and easy to understand.
They took a long time to add a binary patch system, but the one they added is extremely simple to use.
They are conservative in packages they include in the base, but the base system is very secure and it makes it easier to support for the 12 month window.
They use CVS because they didn’t see a point in breaking an existing workflow and git is GPL code.
… The list really goes on and on.
I don’t really see that many bad choices, just optimizing for different metrics.
Ah, haha, I think i missed the “presentation of information” part. Probably because the first sentence put me in a defensive frame of mind. Thanks for clarifying.
Whereas MorphOS has just a handful doing thd whole thing. Its UX on desktop and part of site are beautiful. Works well enough for small, OS project. Probably other companies’ spending priorities rather than staff numbers are causing problems. ;)
Quite a bit simpler than the equivalent instructions for FreeBSD I’ve seen floating around.
I haven’t seen any instructions recently, but from a recently-ish install of FreeBSD 11 I remember it took even less steps, e.g., no need to set up a package repository, there is a graphical wifi selector.
For comparison, the FreeBSD guide I’m talking about.
Leave no feature unused!
One concern I’ve had with OpenBSD is that the community as a whole has a pattern of making bad (EDIT: graphic) design decisions in the presentation of information. This article is no exception.
Is there a particular reason why this seems to affect OpenBSD the most out of any given unix-like?
Wat.
I think he means the garish fonts (Comic Sans MS) and colours chosen by people who associate themselves with OpenBSD thoughtlines. I believe this is intentional, to prevent people from judging the content by appearance, but rather instead content. Also, you can then proceed to filter out people who only cared about the appearance.
For me the only person coming to mind within the OpenBSD community who has modern web design skills is @jcs.
Hmm, I suppose I can see why they think it’s a good idea, if this is really the reasoning. Suffice to say I completely disagree, at least with the degree to which they make their content illegible.
I mean, taking this page for example, it would be trivial to make this page less of an eyestrain: remove the body and link background colors, set the page width to ~800px, and the margins to auto. Voila: an actually readable website that doesn’t rely on pretty visuals to seem credible.
I suppose I just don’t understand why filtering out people who care about appearance is so important that they shoot themselves in the foot…or the eye, as it were.
Comic Sans is actually an accessible font choice - it’s one of the easiest for dyslexic people to read.
But I agree this website definitely is more garish than normal. Compare with the slides on pledge, which are straightforward and legible.
Its funny to note, Simon Peyton Jones uses comic sans for all his presentations too. His reasoning:
This is a very funny question, why I use Comic Sans. So. All my talks use Comic Sans, and I frequently see little remarks, “Simon Peyton Jones, great talk about Haskell, but why did he use Comic Sans?” But nobody’s ever been able to tell me what’s wrong with it. I think it’s a nice, legible font, I like it. So until someone explains to me — I understand that it’s meant to be naff, but I don’t care about naff stuff, it’s meant to be able to read it. So if you’ve got some rational reasons why I should not, then I’ll listen to them. But just being unfashionable, I don’t care.
I can’t say I disagree with the viewpoint.
I’m not sure I’d agree it’s especially legible, if you include implied aspects of communication. I don’t care if it’s “bad” or “unfashionable”, but it does explicitly look like a kind of jokey, “fun” font, that implies you’re doing something lighthearted or jokey. Which is why it’s named Comic! That’s not necessarily always out of place in tech content— you could use it an xkcd-style cartoony introduction to a topic, or on the cover of a “For Dummies” style book. But the first few times I saw it in a completely unjokey “serious” presentation, it threw me off and made the entire talk difficult for me to follow, because throughout the talk I thought the jokes were going over my head and I was distracted trying to figure out what they were.
I’ve now seen it enough times that it doesn’t really distract me anymore, but only because I pattern-match “ah ok it’s a not a ‘real’ use of Comic Sans intended to be actually comic, it’s just that hipstery style that’s using it as an anti-fashion statement”.
In this case, SPJ has been using Comic Sans so long I doubt you can call it hipstery. And none of your arguments amount to anything beyond distaste for the font.
Its named Comic Sans as its intended to be reminiscent of comic book style fonts not to be a joke. n.b. http://www.comicbookfonts.com
I’ve read some studies that say Comic Sans is better for retention and possibly better for dyslexic people. And given some people actually like the font, I’ve also never seen a good argument against it other than “I don’t like it personally” or “its bad design” or “comic sans is a joke” or “comic sans use isn’t serious”.
This powerpoint isn’t particularly hard to read, and i’m not sure why you would be treating the content as a joke were you watching the presentation: www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~pszgmh/appsem-slides/peytonjones.ppt
That’s a nice presentation, thanks for linking!
source: http://practicaltypography.com/why-does-typography-matter.html
If you are interested in the subject, read the full book: http://practicaltypography.com/
Also check Why You Hate Comic Sans
“I can spend the rest of my life trying to appease other people or, I can do the the things that make me happy” – Trump, probably
If others didn’t matter, why were they sharing or discussing it with them on non-project forums to begin with? Best to not half-ass an attempt to tell others about something great if it was worth an attempt to begin with.
You will need to be more specific with your criticisms. From what I’ve seen they are pretty careful about avoiding fads and favor simplicity.
I don’t really see that many bad choices, just optimizing for different metrics.
@calvin above hit on what I’m trying to say. I mean graphic design, not technical.
Ah, haha, I think i missed the “presentation of information” part. Probably because the first sentence put me in a defensive frame of mind. Thanks for clarifying.
Could you elaborate on this? I wasn’t aware that that was the setup.
I’m not sure what’s to elaborate. The project uses cvs this year because the project used cvs last year.
Well, GOOG and MSFT and FB and AAPL all have hundreds of people making beautiful pictures.
And their software is buggy and they are evil.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Your comment reminded me of this recent story: http://www.osnews.com/story/29811/Which_tech_giant_would_you_drop_
Whereas MorphOS has just a handful doing thd whole thing. Its UX on desktop and part of site are beautiful. Works well enough for small, OS project. Probably other companies’ spending priorities rather than staff numbers are causing problems. ;)
elementaryos is an example of a group of volunteers that have a pretty decent aesthetic sense.
No don’t do this! Enable WPA2 on your AP instead.