[HN Gopher] Google releases its new Google Sans Flex font as ope...
___________________________________________________________________
Google releases its new Google Sans Flex font as open source
Author : CharlesW
Score : 156 points
Date : 2025-12-12 18:07 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.omgubuntu.co.uk)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.omgubuntu.co.uk)
| numbers wrote:
| seems like a good step towards making a variable font that allows
| all forms of text b/c Apple already has SF (fka San Francisco)
| which has many variants.
| hu3 wrote:
| yep. specially since Apple font license is quite restrictive:
|
| > Apple restricts the usage of the typeface by others. It is
| licensed to registered third-party developers only for the
| design and development of applications for Apple's platforms.
| Only SF Pro, SF Compact, SF Mono, SF Arabic, SF Hebrew and New
| York variants are available for download on Developer website
| and they are the only SF variants allowed to be used by
| developers.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_(sans-serif_type...
| alberth wrote:
| If you like variable fonts, no font is better at giving fine
| tune control than Roboto Flex (also by Google).
|
| Has 12-axis of variables (whereas most only have 1 or 2)
|
| https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Roboto+Flex/tester
| xnx wrote:
| I hadn't noticed they added more font variable controls to Google
| Fonts: https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Google+Sans+Flex/tester
| Gualdrapo wrote:
| And it's quite cool (and uncommon, in my experience with
| variable fonts) they're adding a control for roundness
| ericmcer wrote:
| Oh man, I already spend way too much time stressing about size
| & weight. This is enough toggles to let you really spend hours
| trying to get it perfect!
| lucb1e wrote:
| Thin weights are eyecandy, but don't forget to also
| decontrast the color! Nothing screams "made by a designer"
| like thin grey prose that, if you're lucky and they hired a
| professional, sits precisely at the minimum of the WCAG
| contrast legibility standard
| xigoi wrote:
| You need to make sure people can't read the actual content
| so that they'll focus on the ads.
| alterom wrote:
| That's the kind of Flex I'm happy to see from corporations like
| Google.
| tigranbs wrote:
| Ahh, this is great! Finally, I can use the `font-stretch` CSS
| property to make some text components more expressive.
| lucb1e wrote:
| Where possible, I've stopped picking fonts that don't distinguish
| lowercase l and uppercase I. Words virtually always have
| redundancy (or context in the sentence) and it's fine in 98% of
| cases, but too often someone sends a token, password, name, or
| other string where you need to copy it out to another application
| to see it and just... why? Why bother?
|
| I/O test for Sans Flex: https://snipboard.io/wXCQq5.jpg
|
| It passes the O0 distinction but not the Il one
|
| Example of a font that passes, Ubuntu:
| https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Ubuntu?preview.text=10%20I...
| (custom license but looks similar to GPL in that you can do what
| you want besides relicensing it as proprietary or removing
| credits)
|
| Another one, Nunito Sans, using the Open Font License:
| https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Nunito+Sans?preview.text=1...
|
| IBM Plex Sans is another Open Font License option:
| https://fonts.google.com/specimen/IBM+Plex+Sans?preview.text...
| (it has an unusual capital Q style though)
| munchler wrote:
| That's a lowercase "L" vs. uppercase "I" for those of you as
| confused as I was.
| quantummagic wrote:
| He inspired me to uninstall Bitstream-Vera-Sans fonts from my
| system so that his post was no longer a prime example of the
| problem.
| tln wrote:
| Thanks, the "1" does look different. The font does have font-
| variant-numeric: slashed-zero
| cloudflare728 wrote:
| Why would someone spend years developing a front where you
| can't tell the difference between Il or 0O? Doesn't it hurt
| their ego at personal level?
| virtue3 wrote:
| they probably deem it as not important. "Context is all you
| need to tell the difference, keep the font clean"
| adrian_b wrote:
| Context solves this ambiguity in texts recording a human
| language, but in computer or smartphone applications it
| is extremely frequent to not have a context that allows
| disambiguation.
|
| Ambiguous characters may have been acceptable in
| typefaces designed before 1990, but they are certainly
| not acceptable for any more recent design, unless the
| typeface is designed for a very specific and limited
| purpose, e.g. for a single advertising poster, and they
| will never be used for rendering arbitrary texts.
| Hupriene wrote:
| To be fair the designer who created the font would
| probably agree that for use cases like passwords or
| serial numbers etc. you should use a different font.
| That's the nice thing about having different fonts
| around. You can choose which one you want to use.
| adrian_b wrote:
| That is a solution applicable for a document or GUI
| created by yourself, where you can define various styles
| with associated fonts and use them appropriately.
|
| However, I see the worst offenders on various Web pages
| (frequently for various URLs) where I do not control the
| typeface, unless I instruct the browser to ignore the
| style sheet of the rendered Web page and use my own fonts
| instead, which can be tedious or create other problems in
| the rendered page.
| jorvi wrote:
| Almost no fonts do this by default and instead offer it as
| context alternate, but I feel a font should always use a dashed
| or preferably dotted zero. Zero being slightly skinnier than
| capital O is not enough for rapid visual clarity.
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| I believe this font does
|
| https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Atkinson+Hyperlegible
| davoneus wrote:
| As does their recently published: Atkinson Hyperlegible
| Next. https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Atkinson+Hyperlegib
| le+Next
| parkersweb wrote:
| Many fonts have a disambiguation option. Inter by default
| doesn't pass the I test - but it can be enabled.
|
| Google Flex Sans supports font-feature-settings: "zero" - but
| doesn't seem to support lower-case l, upper-case I
| disambiguation.
| apt-apt-apt-apt wrote:
| One would think that this would be a fundamental principle in
| font design, distinguishing letters from each other.
| samoyy wrote:
| It's just not a common enough feature of handwriting, I
| assume.
| amoshebb wrote:
| Yes, but even with my worst handwriting, in situations
| where I and l matters, I can always choose to do an
| especially I I or particularly l l even if most are
| indistinguishable which a font can not do
| wongarsu wrote:
| Is it not? The style of block letters I learned (in 90s
| Germany) has the capital I as a straight line, the digit 1
| as a straight line with an angular downward hook at the
| top, and the lowercase l as a line with a smooth 45-90deg
| right hook at the bottom. I always perceived that style as
| quite common in handwriting, just uncommon in print (just
| like close to nobody does the fancy a in handwriting but
| it's common in print)
|
| And of course in cursive I and l look nothing alike, no
| matter which cursive you write
| GaryBluto wrote:
| > I've stopped picking fonts that don't distinguish lowercase l
| and uppercase I.
|
| Serif fonts solved this problem generations ago.
| adrian_b wrote:
| Yes, but the way in which they have solved this is partially
| the reason why many sans-serif fonts suck from this point of
| view.
|
| Serifs have appeared as a feature of the Latin letters of the
| inscriptions in stone of the Roman Empire, which are the
| model for the present capital letters.
|
| On the other hand, the model for the present small letters
| are the letters of the manuscripts of the Carolingian Empire,
| written with pen (i.e. goose feather) on parchment.
|
| The small letters originally did not have serifs. The small
| "l" letter had a right hook at its lower end, which
| distinguished it easily from an "I".
|
| Serifs were added to the small letters, in imitation of the
| capital letters, only in the first books that were printed
| with "Antiqua" letters, in Italy, after the invention of
| printing.
|
| The addition of a serif at the low end of "l" has lead to the
| removal of the right hook that it had previously. When sans-
| serif fonts were created in the 19th century, they have
| removed the serifs from the letters, so by removing the
| differently-shaped serifs from "I" and "l" they have become
| hard or impossible to distinguish.
|
| The wiser typeface designers have realized that this is wrong
| and they have restored to small "l" the low right hook that
| it had at its origin in the Caroline script, distinguishing
| it from capital "I" even in a sans-serif font.
|
| Unfortunately, too many sans-serif fonts have continued to
| perpetuate the mistake of removing the serifs from small "l"
| without restoring its original low right hook.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| It's comments like these that make me love HN. Thank you.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| I had a manager who preferred monospaced font, it definitely
| made it easier in a lot of cases. I also notice a number of
| them make i l and I and 1 distinct enough.
| adrian_b wrote:
| Except for ancient typefaces like Courier, which predate
| their use in computers, most monospaced fonts that have been
| created during the last 40 years have been intended for use
| by programmers or in command-line interfaces.
|
| Therefore having non-ambiguous characters has been an
| explicit design requirement for them, at least since the
| Apple Monaco font.
| 3eb7988a1663 wrote:
| Not only must the il1 O0 series be distinguishable, but they
| need to stand on their own. If I only see one in isolation, can
| I know if that it must be a capital O and not a zero?
| radley wrote:
| If the font doesn't support ligatures, it might as well be
| generated by AI.
| Marazan wrote:
| monofur - my monospaced programming font of choice for decades
| now has an almost psychotic dedication to glyph disambiguation,
| every character is exceedingly distinct.
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| Lately I've become a fan of:
|
| https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Atkinson+Hyperlegible
|
| Mainly for its attention to detail. It's careful to make it
| obvious when it matters. For example, O and 0, lower case L and
| 1, and others.
| worble wrote:
| Hello fellow Ubuntu font lover.
|
| I have this set as my OS default and also forced for all
| webpages, I just find it so clear and easy to read. On the
| occasion that I have to browse the web without it, I don't
| struggle per-say, but I definitely find that I have to read
| slower, and find myself rereading words more often.
| dialogbox wrote:
| I also agree with you on the O0 I'll distinctions importance.
| So as google open-source it, someone can improved it freely.
| mytdi wrote:
| I wonder why the Ubuntu and the IBM Plex Sans fonts use a
| different style "a" for italic vs non-italic. I like the Ubuntu
| font and have used it in the past.
| elevaet wrote:
| Are there any great variable and open serif web fonts around?
| 16bitvoid wrote:
| I don't really like serif fonts, but the two that immediately
| come to mind are Noto Serif and IBM Plex Serif. Both are open
| source. I know Noto Serif is variable, but not sure about IBM
| Plex.
| levocardia wrote:
| Both Plex variants are really wonderful fonts
| jszymborski wrote:
| Inter is pretty great.
| CharlesW wrote:
| Lots! Start with the Google Fonts browser. This link should
| take you directly to a variable + serif list, and from there
| you can drill down into sub-styles, focus more on those with
| more axis, more styles, etc.:
| https://fonts.google.com/?categoryFilters=Technology:%2FTech...
| vincent-manis wrote:
| I am very fond of Merriweather (which I recently saw on a list
| of over-used fonts, for those who believe that you should use a
| different obscure and, hopefully, hard to read font in every
| document). It pairs nicely with Merriweather Sans, Cascadia
| Code, and for math Libertinus Modern, though I do have to tweak
| ex-heights to match.
| copperx wrote:
| Great, but is it free of DEI? can it be used in official
| documents?
| Svoka wrote:
| It seems it is actively anti-DEI:
| https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Google+Sans+Flex?preview.t...
| jrpelkonen wrote:
| The round variant looks like a fatty lacking warrior ethos.
| Unsuitable for Department of War. /s
| hbn wrote:
| I assume this is a shot at the White House but announcing an
| "anti-racist font" is totally up Google's alley
|
| I know I've seen Mozilla proudly pat themselves on the back in
| their announcement of anti-racist Firefox themes
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| Google has been "anti-woke" since January or so. See the
| shutdown of groups for disabled employee, Dept of War
| "Manifest Destiny" contract, etc
| Svoka wrote:
| I am a simple person. Not a designer. But for all fonts I type
| 'iIlL0Oo' and if I can't tell what is what I skip it.
|
| This font fails hard.
| eahm wrote:
| 1 too: https://fonts.google.com/?preview.text=i1IlL0Oo
|
| IMO Ubuntu Mono and Ubuntu Sans Mono are two of the best fonts
| ever made, comparable to Consolas, which I think it's still the
| best Monospaced font... talking about monospaced fonts.
|
| Funny enough I think Reddit Mono is a very good monospaced font
| too.
|
| And Hack: https://dafont.com/hack.font?text=i1IlL0Oo
| mosura wrote:
| Now we all have high density screens serifs are going to make a
| comeback, if for no other reason than that new sans-serif fonts
| have developed this distinctly childish aura. This is not in the
| same league as Frutiger or Univers.
| hbn wrote:
| Maybe a good excuse to get back into playing around with Coldtype
| again
|
| https://coldtype.goodhertz.com/introduction.html
| torbengee wrote:
| I've tried so many fonts in my coding life, but I think I've
| finally found my forever font: JetBrains Mono. Crisp, all
| characters distinguishable, slightly larger lowercase for better
| reading ...
|
| I recently compared it once more to others -
| https://www.programmingfonts.org/ makes it easy to narrow down to
| your favourites one by one ... JetBrains Mono still wins. :)
| amelius wrote:
| My favorite coding font: Iosevka Term.
|
| https://github.com/be5invis/Iosevka
|
| It takes a day or so to get used to the condensed form factor,
| but after that you can enjoy much more horizontal space in your
| terminal windows.
|
| There is one downside: all the other fonts will look bulky :)
| pdimitar wrote:
| I like that family of fonts but ultimately couldn't live with
| how tall they are. I want to have 50-60 lines of code on my
| screen. With it I had 35-40.
| amelius wrote:
| From another point of view, the font is just as tall as
| other fonts, just less wide. So I suspect you are (maybe
| unconsciously) making an unfair comparison by scaling one
| font more than the other.
|
| You can see an apples-to-apples comparison here:
|
| https://www.programmingfonts.org/#iosevka
|
| (and then put and hold your finger on the last line of text
| and select another font)
| pdimitar wrote:
| Yes, you are correct. When I shrunk it to have the same
| amount of lines as Ubuntu Mono, it was uncomfortably
| small.
|
| But you are inspiring me to give it another go. Thanks.
|
| They are beautiful fonts and are often updated, too.
| Clearly a lot care goes into their crafting.
| ashton314 wrote:
| I hear you: I don't like how skinny the letterforms are.
| There's an "extended" variant that I find much more
| pleasing. I put together a customization you can see here:
| https://codeberg.org/ashton314/iosevka-output (there's a
| nice screenshot on that page).
|
| You can probably get the proportions you want if you find a
| way to tweak the line spacing (also possible by adjusting
| the `leading` option in `private-build-plans.toml` and
| rebuilding).
| 0xfab1 wrote:
| It's also what I've settled into, after using Consolas, Fira
| Code, and Inconsolata.
| adrian_b wrote:
| I also prefer JetBrains Mono, after using a very large number
| of other programming typefaces in the past.
|
| While there are a few other programming fonts with a very
| similar quality, for myself JetBrains Mono has a distinctive
| advantage: it includes a much greater character set than any
| other good programming font that I have ever tested (DejaVu
| Sans Mono also has a big character set, but it is definitely
| uglier), for instance it has a lot of mathematical symbols that
| I need.
| 3eb7988a1663 wrote:
| There is also CodingFont if you want to do a tournament
| selection to find your preference.
|
| https://www.codingfont.com/
| YesBox wrote:
| heh, Im using this font in my game. Picking fonts is hard, and
| I feel like I've just dipped my toe in the water so far. Im not
| 100% satisfied with the non-monospace font I use (Adobe Source
| Sans), but I have more important things to focus on right now
| spankalee wrote:
| Google Sans isn't a coding font though.
| freedomben wrote:
| I don't love this new font as others have already pointed out,
| there's not enough distinction between some letters[1].
|
| However, the general movement toward redistributable and license-
| friendly fonts is wonderful and I'm very happy to see it
| continue. As someone who has had to deal with font licensing hell
| in the past, having these available is a huge improvement. Even
| just setting up my personal linux systems and having actually
| usable fonts available is a massive improvement, before even
| getting into trying to build apps/websites/etc. Many thanks to
| Google and any others who are releasing these!
|
| [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46247559 [2]:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46247693
| adrian_b wrote:
| I agree with you, but this font is less notable for its glyph
| design than for the fact that you can obtain many variations of
| it by choosing suitable parameter values (hence the "Flex"
| name).
|
| This is a feature that few, if any, open source typefaces
| possess.
|
| Being open source, the same techniques can be reused in the
| design of another parametrized font, with less ambiguous
| glyphs.
| hathawsh wrote:
| > as well as an axis for rounded terminals (as in terminals in
| letters, not command-line apps).
|
| Now I want to see a rounded terminal (as in command-line apps,
| not terminals in letters.) Would I type in a circle? Sounds cool.
| kridsdale1 wrote:
| The earliest CRT terminals were round.
| wasting_time wrote:
| Perhaps they are trying to improve the Gemini performance on
| https://clocks.brianmoore.com/ .
| adrian_b wrote:
| Letters with rounded terminals are especially popular for
| public signage in a few Asian countries, e.g. Japan and Korea.
|
| That is why Microsoft Windows has included such a rounded font
| for the Korean script: Gulim. On Windows, if you want to render
| a text with Latin letters with rounded ends, you can use Gulim
| for the normal text, coupled with Arial Round for the bold
| text.
|
| On MacOS, there was a Hiragino Maru Gothic rounded font for
| Japanese (where also the Latin letters are rounded). I no
| longer use Apple computers, so I do not know whether the
| Hiragino fonts have remained the fonts provided for Japanese.
| tasuki wrote:
| Not particularly imaginative/interesting? I don't see how it's
| better than say Roboto. And I'm not even that huge a fan of
| Roboto...
| tolerance wrote:
| I understand that there are many good reasons _not_ to want to
| use fonts where the lowercase L and uppercase I are
| indistinguishable.
|
| But am I the only one who actually _prefers_ both to be
| relatively identical? Or at least the lowercase L _must not_ have
| any quiggles or crooks? I like em both north-south. 12:30.
|
| I think typically the I will be a little thicker than the i for
| regular (text? roman?) weights and below.
| aucisson_masque wrote:
| Does it matter ?
|
| No really, I'm not trying to be edgy. Does the font we're using
| to read a document matters??
|
| Last time I checked, scientist agreed that the best for an
| average user is the font you're used to. Serif, sans serif,..
| didn't matter. Just keep using the one you always used.
|
| So I don't get why every so often, Google work on a new font.
| Pick one and stick to it, user don't care.
|
| Or am I missing something ?
|
| BTW, personnel opinion but the only fonts i found to really look
| better than anything else were apple fonts. They don't make
| things easier to read but they just look so nice whereas Google
| always feel meh.
| tomcatfish wrote:
| Yes, it matters, and big companies can do fantastic things by
| designing extremely expansive fonts which make it easy to
| include users speaking plenty of languages that we developers
| don't even know about.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-12-12 23:00 UTC)