Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Cutive Mono vs Google Noto Sans Mono, the Slant community recommends Google Noto Sans Mono for most people. In the question“What are the best programming fonts?” Google Noto Sans Mono is ranked 102nd while Cutive Mono is ranked 114th. The most important reason people chose Google Noto Sans Mono is:
Unicode uses 16 bits per character, meaning that it can represent more than 65,000 unique characters.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Open source
As it is open source, Cutive Mono is freely available to anyone.
Pro Great legibility
Cutive Mono contains thin, light, readable glyphs.
Pro Excellent support for Unicode characters
Unicode uses 16 bits per character, meaning that it can represent more than 65,000 unique characters.
Cons
Con 1 and lower case L is confusing
Lower case L somewhat looks similar to numeral 1. This can cause confusion.
Con Zero is difficult to identify
As it's not dotted or slashed, "0" is more difficult to distinguish.
Con Non-monospace ligature replacements for 'fl', 'fi', 'ffl', 'ffi'
By default, the substrings 'fl', 'fi', 'ffl', and 'ffi' are each crammed into one character width, making it not a truly monospace font. For example, the word 'flag' is rendered as three characters wide.
Con Letters capital 'i' and lowercase 'L' are too similar
The only difference is almost unnoticable.
Con Difficult to distinguish between a period and acomma as well as a colon and a semi-colon
Comma has very small tail, making it difficult to distinguish from a period (full stop). Same applies to colon and semi-colon.
