>
I may change (or not) the default fontPlease do. Computer Modern is awful; its optical sizing is all wrong, far too thin and with too much stroke thickness variation. On some common system and rendering configurations, it’s genuinely not far off illegible at common sizes. Its shapes were designed for printers that (a) had much higher resolution than most screens do, and (b) exhibited at least a moderate degree of glyph dilation (e.g. ink bleed). These days, it’s OK in print (still too thin, since printers are more precise in this way than they used to, which essentially makes everything a bit thinner than it used to be; but not too troublesomely), but really bad on screen for many renderers.
Vaguely similar story on Courier New, which was badly digitised in a way that made it far thinner than it should be (due to not taking into account extra weight added by the typewriter’s ink ribbon), and so Windows includes all kinds of hacks to make it somewhat less intolerable (radical changes in hinting, and special-casing in ClearType), but half of those hacks don’t work any more (or work inconsistently) due to how things are done these days.
Before anyone jumps on me saying they love Computer Modern and it looks fine to them: I’m focusing on the objective parts. On some screens with some software, it looks tolerable, despite clearly not matching most fonts’ ideas of what a regular weight should be. But on more configurations, it’s dreadful. I’m not talking about the rigid shapes and weird curly bits and such, which I also incidentally dislike, because that’s more subjective. But the weight stuff and the extreme stroke thickness variation stuff, that’s objective.