Don wrote:

> I think I figured it out too. The font is why its hard to read.

  I'd say it is the *capitals* that make it hard to read.  Specifically,
the ratio of black to white (curiously enough, the ratio of green to
black on an old VDU, so it's actually the ratio of "mark" to "space"
rather than colour).

  I am tempted to consider that where the imprint is faint (as it often
was on mechanical typeheads, and reasons for this are limited impact
force and the subtle desire to conserve ink) capitals may have been a
little more legible than otherwise, but I suggest that the real reason
is the need to readily identify the line and word structure in order to
read at any speed and reliability.

> Many fonts are word processor type.  I think they assume that the caps
> will be used sparingly, and dont put enough space between them when
> they are in a long string.

  It's called *efficiency*.  Double spacing wastes paper *and* makes
reading proportionately slower.  True!  On the other hand, paragraphs
enhance legibility by providing visual references to reading focus.

  All caps on a teletype *needs* to be widely line-spaced and you will
note, usually was.  On a VDU with only a few dots between lines it is
quite illegible.

> In the old days, we didnt have fonts (except for one simple one) so we
> didnt have the problem.

  Oh, I don't know about that!  You *may* recall that the difference
between text modes in CGA, EGA and VGA standards on the PC was the
number of dots spacing between lines; CGA was dreadful even in mixed
case, EGA good and VGA great even prior to Windoze.  Actually, the
Monospace in which I see my work here is even wider-spaced, so it is
excellent for reading text.

>Till now, I just followed suit to keep from being austracized,

  And what's **WRONG** with being "Austracised" might I ask?  HMMM??

--
  Cheers,
        Paul B.