If you had read the article, you would know the answer to this question.
Calibri is a font designed to be easier to read on screens, which is where documents are primarily read in 2025. Switching to using Calibri as the default was a meaningful change that provided improved accessibility at literally no cost to anyone.
Switching back to Times New Roman, a serif font that is provably more difficult to read on screens is yet another act of performative cruelty by this administration who seemingly operates with "the cruelty is the point" as one of its core tenets.
You made a low effort post, and I pointed out how if you had put in the effort to read the article prior to commenting you would have gotten the answer to your question.
Would you like me to be more patronizing to you and say, "The article clearly states which of the font changes was the performative one and which was meaningful."?
But sure, buddy, run off to hide behind a site rule the moment you get called out for a low effort post you made that is breaking at least two rules itself:
- Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
- Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.
> Is screen readability the only value to consider?
Whether it is "the only value to consider" or not is beside the point, and you know it. The Trump Administration's only value they considered is "Biden did it, so we're going to undo it." They considered nothing else. You know. I know it. Everyone knows it. Why do we know it? Because they have made it abundantly clear that they have no idea what "DEI" actually is, so they just slap that label on anything the previous administration did, put out an order rolling it back, and use it as a wedge issue.
If he was actually worried about whether a san-serif typeface was worse for printed documents, he could have simply ordered that all printed documents must use TNR or any of the other better options that exist. But he isn't. He's simply concerned with killing "DEI," where "DEI" just means whatever they decide it means today.
> In 2010... the majority of video playback devices were already smartphones
I find this extremely difficult to believe. In 2010 the only widely used smartphone would have been the iPhone. The Motorola Droid was the first widely marketed Android device in the US and was only launched in late 2009.
The full context, to avoid confusion: "because no major browser supported it back then and the majority of video playback devices were already smartphones (without vp8 decoding capabilities)"
No major browsers didn't support VP8 back then, and among the remaining devices (other appliances than PCs with those Browsers) the majority of video playback devices were already smartphones (not supporting VP8 in 2010).
I've been using em-dashes for at least two decades now.. At least I have in Word, where it's been autocorrecting regular dashes to em-dashes since at least Word 2007.
Why is that? Do you speak from real-world experience?
Not trying to push back. We're planning to use it for some new projects we have coming up on our team of .NET devs who can't seem to grok Angular or React and the entire ecosystem of tooling required, so I'm looking for reasons we shouldn't use it aside from Blazor being rather unpopular compared to Angular/React/other JS libs
As grandparent said, Blazor optimized for fast delivery. For public products you will have places where you should care about interactivity a lot. Their solution is interop with JS. You may try WASM but it’s definitely slow for UI.
WASM good for complicated tools, but you better probably with other language if you looking for next Figma.
Hybrid approach which is default have two issues.
- round trip to the server. That’s not nice for interactivity and responsiveness.
- hybrid hydration model is needlessly complicated. And again it will not fully solve your problem when you need to go extra mile.
Overall cold start for WASM require large payload, for Hybrid you need Websockets for updates. That sucks outside of cities or on junkie mobile. Not for public product.
Working with Blazor from Net Core 2.2
For internal tooling, or B2B where you don’t care that much is very efficient.
Any recommendation of good alternatives to Telerik? We've been using it for years, but I'm open to considering alternatives even though it doesn't cost me anything to pay for the license.
Depends on what layer of Telerik [0]. Honestly of late since I'm extra rusty on frontend I just get Copilot with Claude to help generate UI widgets since that's allowed.
Before that, years ago, I just YOLOed with WebSharper and built composition helpers to make 'spartan but correct' UIs that could be prettied up with bootstrap if needed.
That said, alas, Bolero (what replaced WebSharper) is F# specific rather than also supporting C#.
I mostly bring those up because they have various libraries out there to work with different JS bits.
We use Telerik components at my current job. They're a solid library, IMO. I'm sure there's better out there, but we've been using them for nearly 15 years at this point and I feel like we get decent value for the money, and their developers get to draw a salary.
Nonsense. The constitution holds that both individuals have an equal right to acquire the same money. People value different things. The constitution does not demand that people have an equal platform. This is like a preacher complaining that his freedom of religion isn't being respected because his congregation isn't large enough. Grow up
This is an absolutely insane take. By your comment, everyone who has a net worth of less than a billion dollars should just sit down, shut up, and let the rich people talk.
We should all have the equal right and ability to have our voice heard ESPECIALLY when it comes to political speech. Allowing billionaires and massive corporations the right to use their wealth to drown out the voices of the absolute vast majority of the population is already destroying the public discourse in this country, and it will likely be looked at by historians in 100+ years as one of the biggest issues that led to the downfall of the United States of America.
Unless we're willing to expend resources on the level we did in the 60s then it is absolutely unreasonable. Computers instead of slide rules doesn't matter at all.
I'll repeat what I said above because this is an oft-repeated fallacy:
We don't expect each new nuclear warhead to cost as much as the Manhattan Project did relative to the national budget. Likewise, after 60 years of technological development beyond what we had in the 60s, there is no reason to expect a modern day lunar mission to cost the same relatively.
> there is no reason to expect a modern day lunar mission to cost the same relatively
By some rough math, the cost of the Artemis program as a fraction of national budget is on the order of 1/10 that of Apollo in its day (comparing entire program costs to national budgets in representative years). So no, I'm not sure anyone would expect (or accept) that, and indeed it does not seem to be the case. It would be even cheaper if Congress had not mandated that SLS be built from repurposed STS parts (and later that Artemis fly on SLS), and if Congress and the executive branch had generally maintained a realistic and consistent vision for the program since work on it began (arguably with Constellation in the 2000s).
Calibri is a font designed to be easier to read on screens, which is where documents are primarily read in 2025. Switching to using Calibri as the default was a meaningful change that provided improved accessibility at literally no cost to anyone.
Switching back to Times New Roman, a serif font that is provably more difficult to read on screens is yet another act of performative cruelty by this administration who seemingly operates with "the cruelty is the point" as one of its core tenets.