Is this actually true? I'm curious if anybody has sources for this and if it's a common UX practice. I tend to use wider windows than traditional 8:9 half-screens and this max-width practice drives me nuts.
I can't be the only one who feels this way. I have yet to buy a book where 90% of each page is blank and there's just a tiny column of words down the middle of the page.
Long lines of text force you to move your eyes and/or head side to side every time you go from one line to the next.
I mean seriously, a 27" diagonal monitor is 24"x17". Do you routinely read on 12"x17" paper with near zero margin?
At the very least, I feel like responsive options to toggle some of the various max-width CSS settings as an opt-in feature is worthwhile at least for reading-heavy sites like getpocket.com and news websites. I end up toggling these in Firefox / Chrome debugger and wish I could install extensions to apply custom code automatically but my employer does not allow this.
I think the 80 characters-per-line for code was a holdover from when IBM punch cards had 80 CPL, but I could be wrong there. I know American typewriters had about 80 CPL, so from a typography perspective maybe that's why 80 is the accessibility sweet-spot? If it's the ballpark equivalent to what we'd see on an 8.5x11 sheet of paper?
As far as I can tell, the people who say this are citing each other. And can't wait to reply when you say you find it unpleasant that it's actually scientifically ideal.