Just to add my 5c to the thread.. I remember in the msdos5.0 age where everybody was using a 80x25 text console to run programs and graphical mode was just for games..
Many text editors used a blue background. This is: wordperfect/wordstar/edit.com .. I remember my teacher arguing this as something medically prooft that white or black on blue is better than b/w or w/b. Another point in this topic is that many ebook readers (iBooks) allow to change the background color to 'sepia'. Which is good for long readings, as the contrast is lower than b/w. I think that for long readings you use to be in a fixed position and your eyes get more tired if there's more bright on the screen. Also crt and lcd/tft screens have differet brightness effects. Tft are less damaging to eyes than crt.. So i think discussion about colors on text moved to only stethical and personal issue because its no longer dramatic as it was in the crt era. --pancake On 12/06/2011, at 12:20, Connor Lane Smith <c...@lubutu.com> wrote: > On 12 June 2011 10:53, Nicolai Waniek <roc...@rochus.net> wrote: >> Quite the opposite, that they could not detect any difference. > > So uh, not *quite* the opposite. > > I'm willing to believe people have a higher reading speed with > black-on-white, though I suspect this is in part because that's how we > read the vast majority of the time. However, especially when I'm > tired, I can *feel* my eyes strain against the brightness (and if you > lower the brightness you get an unreadable grey-on-grey). We may be > good at reading black-on-white, but perhaps not black-on-fluorescent. > > It's possible I'm an outlier, being almost blind in one eye, but I > doubt that has much of an effect in this case. > > Thanks, > cls >
