[rassedgesse]

Options -> Content -> Default Font, but you probably already know that and it only changes the default font (not "everything").

Segoe UI

[CFstantony]

Someone needs to make a "can I force non-serf to the front?" copycat.

[GlictStiply]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Someone needs to make a "can I force non-serf to the front?" copycat. 'We would need Serb for that


I wish we had a proper Court Jester again. Pekka and Asher just aren't pulling their weight.

[V8V8V8]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Too bad you don't use Opera. You can change "everything". What are you, a communist?

[Wdlglivi]

There is no difference in serif and sans serif fonts in terms of readability.

[S.T.D.]

It's all quite silly. There have been a lot of studies on serif vs sans serif in terms of things that matter (reading speed, comprehension, etc) and there is no difference.

[Pharmadryg]

Originally posted by mactbone
Yes there is. At smaller font sizes it's easier to read serif fonts because your eyes follow the dangly parts. Sans-serif fonts look better at larger sizes. Pyke, R.L. (1926). Report on the Legibility of Print. Medical Research Council: Special Report. Series No. 10. UK.

Poulton, E.C. (1972). Size, style, and vertical spacing in the legibility of small typefaces. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56(2), 156-161.

Reynolds, L. (1979). Legibility studies: Their relevance to present-day documentation methods. Journal of Documentation, 35(4), 307-340.

disagree with you.

[Poowssnople]

http://www.cs.indiana.edu/classes/a106/about.fonts.html
One thing to keep in mind when choosing to serif or not to serif: studies have shown that serifed fonts are generally easier to read than sans-serif fonts. The effect is most pronounced at smaller font sizes, so body text is typically in a serifed font http://www.hqlogos.com/logo-design-i...item.asp?id=99
The philosophy behind this is that the serif fonts guide the reader into an understanding of the piece as a whole. Words are not to be objectified by breaking them down into soldiered rows of individual letters. They are meant to be digested holistically, and serifs are the connectors that slow the reader down just long enough for greater comprehension.

Studies show that reading comprehension is greater when serif fonts are used. However, studies with children may be more indicative of the truth of the matter: children in the early reading stages showed no benefit either way. People are better at reading what they are used to reading. http://hubel.sfasu.edu/courseinfo/SL99/typography.html
In summary, the following data were discussed (better refers to an increase in reading speed or legibility):

for normal luminance and normal size, serif is better than sans serif
for normal luminance and smaller size, sans serif is better than serif
for low luminance, sans serif is better than serif.
serifs may cause a crowding effect
for smaller size, PW may cause a crowding effect
FW serif is better than PW serif.
for medium to large size, PW is better than FW
for smaller size, FW is better than PW.
sans serif has a lower acuity level than serif
PW must be 15% larger than FW to share equal acuity levels Serif is more aesthetically pleasing if nothing else from all accounts. I find it surprising that people with low vision should read sans-serif fonts - apparently the serifs clutter more than they help.