Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Monofur vs Iosevka, the Slant community recommends Iosevka for most people. In the question“What are the best programming fonts?” Iosevka is ranked 6th while Monofur is ranked 35th. The most important reason people chose Iosevka is:
Iosevka is very clear and legible on all displays and in all sizes.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro It's simple, beautiful, and stylish
Pro Great for your eyes
Monofur is very legible. Even after staring at it for hours, your eyes won't get tired.
Pro Letterforms are highly distinct
The font is very legible due to the distinguished characters it contains.
Pro Readable
Iosevka is very clear and legible on all displays and in all sizes.
Pro Narrow
Narrow character width uses horizontal screen space more efficiently.
Pro Large number of weights
This font comes in seven different weights, ranging from thin and extra-light to heavy.
Pro Great customizability
There is full customization of styles and variants in Iosevka.
Pro Support for Cyrillic and Greek letters
Iosevka is quite flexible in that it supports Cyrillic and Greek letters.
Pro Free and open source
Iosevka is free and open source.
Pro Powerline support
Includes characters for supporting Powerline/Airline for terminals and terminal editors.
Pro Ligature characters look great
Few fonts have a good ligation feature. Ligature characters (such as æ or the German ß) are supported in Iosevka and look just as you'd expect them to.
Pro Several styles available
Many of the common styles are available, including Sans Serif and Slab Serif with normal, bold, italic, and bold italic styles.
Pro IPA Support
IPA is a system containing the sounds of spoken language and includes speech qualities such as intonation.
Pro Easy on user's eyes
Due to it being readable on all types of displays, Iosevka isn't hard on the user's eyes.
Pro Well-maintained
The developer is active and responds to user questions and issues.
Pro Good CJK compatibility
Iosevka integrates CJK characters well, those being characters of the Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and occasionally Vietnamese languages.
Pro Also variant with tiny serifs available ("Slab")
For better reading longer texts.
Cons
Con Lacks bold+italic
Monofur has a regular italic and bold typeface, but it lacks bold+italic. Syntax-capable editors can better display code based on function/class/context/markup work when at least 4 families are available to display.
Con Only characters from the Western charset work in many Windows apps
The font includes all characters for all European languages; however, in most programs using Unicode (such as WordPad or MS Word), only languages using Western charset can use this font. These include English, German, French, Spanish, and Norwegian.
Trying to use any languages like Czech, Hungarian (Central European), Bulgarian, Russian (Cyrillic), or Greek will make the font switch back to default font like Arial or Calibri, even though Monofur itself includes characters for those languages.
Authors didn't bother fixing the non-working Baltic / Central European / Greek / Cyrillic / Turkish character set for those years.
Con Too narrow
Con Must do a custom build to get all ligatures
Con Fewer ligatures than other fonts
Iosevka has a nice ligation set, but it doesn't have as many ligatures as fonts like Hasklig, Monoid, or Pragmata Pro.
