[jasonlotito]

> my Mac isn't your canvas on which to ruin platform consistency.

So, you already have the solution: Safari. That is the the platform recommended, platform consistent solution you seek. It exists. With that being the case, what harm is there in other software accepting that just because Apple does it doesn't mean it's always the right solution? Even Apple can't settle on a standard font to use across all it's solutions. And using Apple as the gold standard assumes they never make or don't still have glaring UI/UX problems to overcome.

Put away your arrogance. Not all software needs to meet your exacting standards. Heck, even Apple disagrees with you!

[teacup50]

It has nothing to do with a "gold standard", or "just because Apple does it". It also has nothing to do with Safari, or using an application solely written by Apple.

On the platform, we contribute to the ecosystem by respecting the value of the whole.

It's about humility: Understanding that you're operating as part of a larger whole, and that larger whole is more valuable to your customer if it is consistent and interoperable.

The only reason to diverge from the common platform standards is if your divergence provides more value to the user in a way that doesn't detract from platform consistency. Sometimes, people come up with novel new ways to do things that genuinely fit right in to the established platform norms.

Using a non-standard[1] user interface font to achieve cross-platform consistency isn't one of those cases.

Diverging for the sake of your UX designer's ego or your "brand identity" does not provide value to the user. In fact, it's robs the user of value to the sole benefit of your product/brand concerns.

Heck, even Apple disagrees with you!

No, they really, really don't.

[1] https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/UserEx...

[jasonlotito]

> No, they really, really don't.

Yes, yes they do. They've made many changes that violate your next statement:

> The only reason to diverge from the common platform standards is if your divergence provides more value to the user...

I'm sorry if you feel that there should be only standard font used for UI elements (there isn't in Apple products), or that other users values aren't equally valuable.

> It's about humility: Understanding that you're operating as part of a larger whole, and that larger whole is more valuable to your customer if it is consistent and interoperable.

Apple is the biggest violator of this across all their platforms. If they don't do it, why should anyone else?

[teacup50]

You seem to not understand that Apple defines the platform; consistency has to start somewhere, and it's not going to emerge by committee.

Apple and 3rd-party developers extends conventions by exploring coherent and consistent extensions to the platform.

Mozilla choosing to use a font that nobody else uses, for the purposes of consistency across their browser, not the platform, has nothing to do with what benefits the rest of the ecosystem, or by extension, the users, and everything to do with what Mozilla wants.