Mac OSX fonts
-
So my Mac arrived over the weekend, my first ever Mac, and I have a question: Will I ever get used to the fuzzy font rendering? For those of you who primarily use Macs, when you switch to Windows 7, do you think it's ugly, or do you think, "Wow, I DON'T need glasses!" Because right now, I don't see how anyone could prefer Mac's font rendering. I understand it's a different philosophy, to not worry about such physical constraints as pixels on a screen, but it only looks good at 300dpi or so which, alas, is not common on screens bigger than 4". And Microsoft's adherence to actual pixels would look just as good on such a display anyway. If you're on Windows, you can experience the joy of Apple's font rendering in Safari, as long as you don't have "Windows Standard" selected in font smoothing. (There are four other options - the same present in OSX - and none of them look good.) I have to say, of all the things I thought Windows would be better at, font rendering was not on the list.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
-
So my Mac arrived over the weekend, my first ever Mac, and I have a question: Will I ever get used to the fuzzy font rendering? For those of you who primarily use Macs, when you switch to Windows 7, do you think it's ugly, or do you think, "Wow, I DON'T need glasses!" Because right now, I don't see how anyone could prefer Mac's font rendering. I understand it's a different philosophy, to not worry about such physical constraints as pixels on a screen, but it only looks good at 300dpi or so which, alas, is not common on screens bigger than 4". And Microsoft's adherence to actual pixels would look just as good on such a display anyway. If you're on Windows, you can experience the joy of Apple's font rendering in Safari, as long as you don't have "Windows Standard" selected in font smoothing. (There are four other options - the same present in OSX - and none of them look good.) I have to say, of all the things I thought Windows would be better at, font rendering was not on the list.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
David Kentley wrote:
I have to say, of all the things I thought Windows would be better at, font rendering was not on the list.
Yeah, the grass is always greener and all that!
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com
-
David Kentley wrote:
I have to say, of all the things I thought Windows would be better at, font rendering was not on the list.
Yeah, the grass is always greener and all that!
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com
-
So my Mac arrived over the weekend, my first ever Mac, and I have a question: Will I ever get used to the fuzzy font rendering? For those of you who primarily use Macs, when you switch to Windows 7, do you think it's ugly, or do you think, "Wow, I DON'T need glasses!" Because right now, I don't see how anyone could prefer Mac's font rendering. I understand it's a different philosophy, to not worry about such physical constraints as pixels on a screen, but it only looks good at 300dpi or so which, alas, is not common on screens bigger than 4". And Microsoft's adherence to actual pixels would look just as good on such a display anyway. If you're on Windows, you can experience the joy of Apple's font rendering in Safari, as long as you don't have "Windows Standard" selected in font smoothing. (There are four other options - the same present in OSX - and none of them look good.) I have to say, of all the things I thought Windows would be better at, font rendering was not on the list.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
Sure the monitor is calibrated/focused? Cant you tune sub-pixel rendering like you can in Ubuntu and Windows?
-
Sure the monitor is calibrated/focused? Cant you tune sub-pixel rendering like you can in Ubuntu and Windows?
-
Just tested David's suggestion in Safari; He's right. The font rendering is a pain.
"My personality is not represented by my hometown."
Yes, I agree on Windows it does look a bit better than WPF, which is pretty shitty :)
-
Sure the monitor is calibrated/focused? Cant you tune sub-pixel rendering like you can in Ubuntu and Windows?
leppie wrote:
Sure the monitor is calibrated/focused?
Cant you tune sub-pixel rendering like you can in Ubuntu and Windows?It's an LCD, so not much to focus there. And yeah, sub-pixels are being rendered. Maybe it's a preference thing, but I really think the MS method is objectively better on actual displays. I agree with Jeff Atwood here[^]. Joel Spolsky (linked from there) takes the other view. *shrug*
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
-
leppie wrote:
Sure the monitor is calibrated/focused?
Cant you tune sub-pixel rendering like you can in Ubuntu and Windows?It's an LCD, so not much to focus there. And yeah, sub-pixels are being rendered. Maybe it's a preference thing, but I really think the MS method is objectively better on actual displays. I agree with Jeff Atwood here[^]. Joel Spolsky (linked from there) takes the other view. *shrug*
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
David Kentley wrote:
It's an LCD, so not much to focus there.
It could be using an analog connection? I doubt it though. But particularly* on LCD's it can cause displays to be very blurry, even more so having dual monitors. * wow can't believe I spelt that right the first go, I never get it! :)
-
So my Mac arrived over the weekend, my first ever Mac, and I have a question: Will I ever get used to the fuzzy font rendering? For those of you who primarily use Macs, when you switch to Windows 7, do you think it's ugly, or do you think, "Wow, I DON'T need glasses!" Because right now, I don't see how anyone could prefer Mac's font rendering. I understand it's a different philosophy, to not worry about such physical constraints as pixels on a screen, but it only looks good at 300dpi or so which, alas, is not common on screens bigger than 4". And Microsoft's adherence to actual pixels would look just as good on such a display anyway. If you're on Windows, you can experience the joy of Apple's font rendering in Safari, as long as you don't have "Windows Standard" selected in font smoothing. (There are four other options - the same present in OSX - and none of them look good.) I have to say, of all the things I thought Windows would be better at, font rendering was not on the list.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
The funny part is, Apple is the company responsible for computers to have a nice looking fonts... Have you used Safari on Windows? I don't know how it is right now but, it used to render everything Mac way even on Windows. To me it looks like Mac has jagged edges on the fonts, it's not anti-aliased properly (On windows you will have the problem if you don't have clear type enabled). [joke] We all know that font rendering was not important at all, all you wanted was to brag about your new Mac [/joke] :)
-
leppie wrote:
Sure the monitor is calibrated/focused?
Cant you tune sub-pixel rendering like you can in Ubuntu and Windows?It's an LCD, so not much to focus there. And yeah, sub-pixels are being rendered. Maybe it's a preference thing, but I really think the MS method is objectively better on actual displays. I agree with Jeff Atwood here[^]. Joel Spolsky (linked from there) takes the other view. *shrug*
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
I like how the first comment (posted in 2007) is so sure that higher DPI is "just a few years" away. Here we are 4 years later, and the desktop is still 96 DPI with nothing higher on the horizon. Hell, even resolutions are headed back down, what with everyone gravitating towards 1080p.
-
The funny part is, Apple is the company responsible for computers to have a nice looking fonts... Have you used Safari on Windows? I don't know how it is right now but, it used to render everything Mac way even on Windows. To me it looks like Mac has jagged edges on the fonts, it's not anti-aliased properly (On windows you will have the problem if you don't have clear type enabled). [joke] We all know that font rendering was not important at all, all you wanted was to brag about your new Mac [/joke] :)
Rutvik Dave wrote:
We all know that font rendering was not important at all, all you wanted was to brag about your new Mac
Yes, I'm proud to have spent twice as much on underpowered hardware. But it sure is pretty. Mmm, aluminum. Seriously though, I got it to dip into some iOS development, and it is the first time I've been excited about a new computer in about 10 years, carpy fonts and all. It has made me nostalgic for the days when I ran Linux as my main OS, oddly enough. I got a funny tingling sensation when I ran emacs in the bash terminal window.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
-
Rutvik Dave wrote:
We all know that font rendering was not important at all, all you wanted was to brag about your new Mac
Yes, I'm proud to have spent twice as much on underpowered hardware. But it sure is pretty. Mmm, aluminum. Seriously though, I got it to dip into some iOS development, and it is the first time I've been excited about a new computer in about 10 years, carpy fonts and all. It has made me nostalgic for the days when I ran Linux as my main OS, oddly enough. I got a funny tingling sensation when I ran emacs in the bash terminal window.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
Indeed it's the best hardware... and now the price is not that insane as it used to be. My friend has started iOS development, he is very good at programming but still he was telling me that, there is a steep learning curve... I saw some code he wrote and I was surprised how different objective C is, I was thinking it will be a meeting point between C and C++. Anyways happy coding... :)
-
David Kentley wrote:
It's an LCD, so not much to focus there.
It could be using an analog connection? I doubt it though. But particularly* on LCD's it can cause displays to be very blurry, even more so having dual monitors. * wow can't believe I spelt that right the first go, I never get it! :)
leppie wrote:
It could be using an analog connection? I doubt it though. But particularly* on LCD's it can cause displays to be very blurry, even more so having dual monitors.
Maybe on cheap LCDs at high resolutions but not otherwise. My dell 1280x1024 never had issues, and my NEC 1600x1200 panel apparently ran in analog mode over a DVI-I cable for over a year before I realized it and only by accident when I was investigating weirdness related to where the image was appearing on the panel (Bejeweled Blitz was causing about 10x the normal spazzing that windows does any time a full screen app on a display other than the leftmost changes resolution and somehow about one time in three when everything settled out the rightmost display, which was running analog, ended up dropping its image by about 20 pixels and cutting off the bottom of whatever it was displaying.)
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius
-
David Kentley wrote:
It's an LCD, so not much to focus there.
It could be using an analog connection? I doubt it though. But particularly* on LCD's it can cause displays to be very blurry, even more so having dual monitors. * wow can't believe I spelt that right the first go, I never get it! :)
leppie wrote:
It could be using an analog connection?
<Apple d-bag> You think a Mac would ship with an *analog* display output these days? </Apple d-bag> I'm surprised it even works with a non Apple display. Yes, now that I own a Mac I feel I am allowed to make fun of them as much as I've wanted to all these years.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
-
Indeed it's the best hardware... and now the price is not that insane as it used to be. My friend has started iOS development, he is very good at programming but still he was telling me that, there is a steep learning curve... I saw some code he wrote and I was surprised how different objective C is, I was thinking it will be a meeting point between C and C++. Anyways happy coding... :)
There's a reason it's called "Objective" C - because C programmers Object to it!
MVVM# - See how I did MVVM my way ___________________________________________ Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011 .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
So my Mac arrived over the weekend, my first ever Mac, and I have a question: Will I ever get used to the fuzzy font rendering? For those of you who primarily use Macs, when you switch to Windows 7, do you think it's ugly, or do you think, "Wow, I DON'T need glasses!" Because right now, I don't see how anyone could prefer Mac's font rendering. I understand it's a different philosophy, to not worry about such physical constraints as pixels on a screen, but it only looks good at 300dpi or so which, alas, is not common on screens bigger than 4". And Microsoft's adherence to actual pixels would look just as good on such a display anyway. If you're on Windows, you can experience the joy of Apple's font rendering in Safari, as long as you don't have "Windows Standard" selected in font smoothing. (There are four other options - the same present in OSX - and none of them look good.) I have to say, of all the things I thought Windows would be better at, font rendering was not on the list.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
-
So my Mac arrived over the weekend, my first ever Mac, and I have a question: Will I ever get used to the fuzzy font rendering? For those of you who primarily use Macs, when you switch to Windows 7, do you think it's ugly, or do you think, "Wow, I DON'T need glasses!" Because right now, I don't see how anyone could prefer Mac's font rendering. I understand it's a different philosophy, to not worry about such physical constraints as pixels on a screen, but it only looks good at 300dpi or so which, alas, is not common on screens bigger than 4". And Microsoft's adherence to actual pixels would look just as good on such a display anyway. If you're on Windows, you can experience the joy of Apple's font rendering in Safari, as long as you don't have "Windows Standard" selected in font smoothing. (There are four other options - the same present in OSX - and none of them look good.) I have to say, of all the things I thought Windows would be better at, font rendering was not on the list.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
I have a Mac at work and a PC at home. I've never had a problem with the Mac's fonts, and have always considered its font rendering superior. It just looks more like text and less like pixelated bitmaps of characters. The thing I love about Mac font rendering is every page looks like a Photoshop-rendered graphic. I mean look at this: http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/2215/screenshot20110817at100.png That's just a screen clip from the web page linked to above. Isn't it beautiful?
Sad but true: 4/3 of Americans have difficulty with simple fractions. There are 10 types of people in this world: those who understand binary and those who don't. {o,o}.oO( Check out my blog! ) |)””’) http://pihole.org/ -”-”-
-
So my Mac arrived over the weekend, my first ever Mac, and I have a question: Will I ever get used to the fuzzy font rendering? For those of you who primarily use Macs, when you switch to Windows 7, do you think it's ugly, or do you think, "Wow, I DON'T need glasses!" Because right now, I don't see how anyone could prefer Mac's font rendering. I understand it's a different philosophy, to not worry about such physical constraints as pixels on a screen, but it only looks good at 300dpi or so which, alas, is not common on screens bigger than 4". And Microsoft's adherence to actual pixels would look just as good on such a display anyway. If you're on Windows, you can experience the joy of Apple's font rendering in Safari, as long as you don't have "Windows Standard" selected in font smoothing. (There are four other options - the same present in OSX - and none of them look good.) I have to say, of all the things I thought Windows would be better at, font rendering was not on the list.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
I've never had an issue with font display an Macs (or should that be "Ive" - Johnny? Geddit? Oh, never mind...) Reading this page on my 27" iMac from the other side of the room (because I can) and you could slice tomatoes with it it's that sharp... Been using Macs for nearly 20 years though, so guess it's just something you get used to, but I'll be sure to check it out next time I'm on a Dozer. Danny
-
So my Mac arrived over the weekend, my first ever Mac, and I have a question: Will I ever get used to the fuzzy font rendering? For those of you who primarily use Macs, when you switch to Windows 7, do you think it's ugly, or do you think, "Wow, I DON'T need glasses!" Because right now, I don't see how anyone could prefer Mac's font rendering. I understand it's a different philosophy, to not worry about such physical constraints as pixels on a screen, but it only looks good at 300dpi or so which, alas, is not common on screens bigger than 4". And Microsoft's adherence to actual pixels would look just as good on such a display anyway. If you're on Windows, you can experience the joy of Apple's font rendering in Safari, as long as you don't have "Windows Standard" selected in font smoothing. (There are four other options - the same present in OSX - and none of them look good.) I have to say, of all the things I thought Windows would be better at, font rendering was not on the list.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
-
There's a reason it's called "Objective" C - because C programmers Object to it!
MVVM# - See how I did MVVM my way ___________________________________________ Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011 .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
Very nice! Oh and for my part, you could add C++ and C# programmers. ;)
'As programmers go, I'm fairly social. Which still means I'm a borderline sociopath by normal standards.' Jeff Atwood
