zlacker

>>neilpa+(OP)
> Berkeley Mono wears a UNIX T-shirt and aspires to be etched on control panels in black synthetic lacquer. It is Adrian Frutiger visits Bell Labs. It is Gene Kranz's command. It operates with calibrated precision and has a datasheet.

It costs $75 for an individual license, not really in the spirit of UNIX

>>humani+2i
Yeah, every time a typeface is shared on here it is met with some opposition since most cost money for individuals/personal use. I understand it's hard to take the time to design a nice typeface and that the creators should be compensated for their work, but sadly it means fonts like these are practically limited to commercial use. I wonder if there's a better way to turn a profit on typefaces - there's been a handful of really interesting ones posted on HN I've wanted to try.

>>jamesh+uj
There is a ton of entitlement nowadays, that's for sure.

One should be grateful to those who do release their hard work to the public domain or under a FOSS license, rather than being resentful toward those who don't.

People absolutely deserve to be compensated for their work, if they so choose, and they are absolutely permitted to release their work under any license they want.

>>Turing+Xl
I think the problem is more that the costs feel exorbitant with respect to both the perceived effort and utility. 75$ is half a year of Netflix - a product clearly born of extensive multi-disciplinary effort - which can't but feel excessive given that the marginal utility of a font is just so low.

I guess I could summarize as saying that an expensive[0] font just isn't, or more strongly, can't be interesting.[1]

[0]More than a cup of coffee, or so. [1]For personal use, marginal benefits scale differently on e.g. a billboard