>MacOS has perfect font rendering
>Android has perfect font rendering
>Windows has shit font rendering
>Linux has shit font rendering
Why are Linux and Windows so shitty at font rendering, Sup Forums?
Why can't freetards and Microdick figure out how to make letters look decent?
Other urls found in this thread:
freedesktop.org
twitter.com
>jpg
>blurred pixels
>pixels don't even have the same size on different sides of picture
gr8 b8, 8/8 m8
Why can't you just turn ClearType off?
Ubuntu and derivatives have the best font rendering on the market, OSX fonts are just bold crap that kids think looks good.
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.
>Android has perfect font rendering
android IS linux FAGGOT, OHHHH BTFO BY Sup Forums GET OUT YOU SKID WOW YOU YTHINK YOU KNOW AYNTHING THISA IS G
better to leave it on and change the mode in the registry, otherwise you get no font smoothing.
This, OP is a pajeet
>no font smoothing
no, you will get simple anti-aliasing instead which is usually less blurry.
wrong, look into it.
>MacOS has perfect font rendering
Agree. But other parts of OS is really shitty.
>Android has perfect font rendering
No, it's font rendering is shit.
Bitmap fonts (Windows 2000/98) > MacOS font rendering > Windows ClearType > Shit > Pee > GNU/Linux font rendering.
Because GNUtards can't buy fonts for their GNU system. You know, it is OK to pay for stuff, that is being sold, you know? Literally nobody cares about freedom, only 2,5 retards like RMS. Other people care about 'it just werks', and this is the reason, why Linux and Windows is used so much, and you know what a spyware Windows is.
What?… Turn off cleartype and take a screenshot, with a normal-sized font (around 20px should suffice). Check the text edges, they should be anti-aliased, unless it's your browser/software setting. Not sure how it is for W10 though.
>android IS linux FAGGOT
yet every linux distro has shit fonts
This thread just reminded me how important PPI is. Sadly there are no cheap 8K monitors and nothing can scale on them properly not even the gay forbidden fruit OS
forgot pic related
You're just stupid senpai. Linux doesn't render fonts, GNU/Linux distros have different font configs, you can customize them to your needs.
>nothing can scale on them properly not even the gay forbidden fruit OS
Examples? From what I've seen it scales reasonably well on 5k, I see no reason why it wouldn't on 8k
Except you'd get a 8x pixel mode for pictures on web, but what did you expect really.
Needs 12k and 16k
Another episode of some apple retard shilling and doesn't know how font rendering works on Linux distros. Kys shit stain. You're one of the reason why Sup Forums is a consumerist shit hold.
this lmao
Depends on screen size. For 30 inch, according to , maybe it has some benefit to get it closer to 300PPI. For laptops you already have like ~670PPI at 8k, this is retardedly huge even for a small screen
I mean yeah Windows' font rendering is bad, but your comparison is literally a thin font on low resolution vs a relatively bold font on a very high resolution. Of course the low res will look like shit.
PPI doesn't matter, good font rendering will look sharp at any PPI because it adapts to the user's field of vision
Apple is just cheap and lazy and Linux is just shit
It's also unnecessary like AA in gaymes if the resolution were set higher.
>not running gentoo and patching freetype
>good font rendering will look sharp at any PPI because it adapts to the user's field of vision
objectively wrong. there's only so much good font rendering can do when you letters are limited to a 20px pixel grid. Anti-aliasing is a crutch to overcome limits of low res.
show your fonts
creep
>Bitmap fonts (Windows 2000/98) > MacOS font rendering > Windows ClearType > Shit > Pee > GNU/Linux font rendering.
I've installed old Windows fonts in Linux and use them on daily basis. Where's your god now?
>bitmap fonts on HD res
Linux with proper font rendering settings is better than anything. But I'm sorry, macOS -is- indeed better at it than Windows. I'd rather get too blurry than too jaggy, and cleartype settings don't seem to fix shit.
On decent distros with KDE it's extremely easy. Set hinting to slight, RGB and that's it, font rendering is good. Well, except openSUSE because for some reason it doesn't have good font rendering by default because it's a shit.
And Android font rendering... well, when you have a crazy fucking PPI for fonts, your font rendering can be shite and still manage to be pleasant enough on the eyes. At 300PPI I wouldn't give a shit about using Windows or macOS, but some of us are poor and use 1080p 23-25 inch displays.
>well, when you have a crazy fucking PPI for fonts, your font rendering can be shite and still manage to be pleasant enough on the eyes.
>At 300PPI I wouldn't give a shit about using Windows or macOS
this
subpixel stuff only matters as long as resolution is an issue
It's just that high resolution displays happen to be expensive. Nowadays I find a lot more pleasant to grab a tablet to read shit than I would anything besides that fucking iMac with the 5k display maybe. Hell to make it "pleasant" on 1080p on my end I have to set font size to 125% and that makes everything way too big for comfort, so it's as painful.
>GNU/Linux distros have different font configs, you can customize them to your needs.
that's why its shit. it should work out of the box.
Absolutely same here… In a perfect world we'd have comparable PPI on desktop long ago
But when I of it, maybe there's a reason books are a comfortable form for reading. Having smaller text on a handheld medium could simply be more comfortable. Reading from a monitor is much like reading a giant book fixed on a stand—who'd prefer that?
>some of us are poor and use 1080p 23-25 inch displays.
Connect Linux box to that monitor = shit fonts
Connect Windows box to that monitor = shit fonts
Connect Mac Mini to that monitor = great fonts.
Your argument is shit.
>Android has perfect font rendering
>Linux has shit font rendering
Dude
I fully admit to being a retard but why don’t things just use vector based rendering?
>vector based
…what do you even mean
Most fonts today are vector-based. The question is, how you convert vectors to pixels. That's why text rendering engines matter.
If you mean "why not just render text as vector shape", it's also not so simple. You have to keep letters sharp and readable. This isn't easy at low resolutions because letters have very thin parts that easily get blurry as fuck. That's why sans serif used to be advised for onscreen reading, it has constant stroke width that is reasonably thick and doesn't get fucked easily.
It's not about kernel, but about distro.
Can you give me an archive with fonts, because I'm too lazy.
give a free file sharing under 1 gb please
That's because (almost) all laptops and AIOs with macOS have HiDPI screens and upscale everything. Same with Android phones. Turns out you don't have to think too hard about font rendering fundamentals if you can just throw moar pixels at it.
Try turning on scaling on Windows and Linux, you'll get noticeably better results.
As for why Windows and Linux don't render fonts very well on native resolution:
Linux can't utilize all the potential because certain rendering techniques are patented by Microsoft as their ClearType technology and there's a possibility of individual distros getting sued. That being said, you as an individual can always recompile FreeType with the encumbered functions patched in.
As for Windows font rendering, no amount of patents will help if the whole codebase sucks. And it does. A lot.
>Ubuntu and derivatives have the best font rendering on the market
Ubuntu fonts are very blurry.
This isn't good font rendering right? How can I change it?
I would simply turn off ClearType (subpixel smoothing). This might look jaggier at first, but it has no "rainbows" around it and it's actually sharper. Plus, with ClearType you get weirdly thicker/thinner fonts.
>Plus, with ClearType you get weirdly thicker/thinner fonts
Unfortunately, many modern fonts aren't developed to be used without smoothing, and they look like shit.
just install mactype
>This isn't easy at low resolutions because letters have very thin parts that easily get blurry as fuck
And i am proven an retard
I somehow forgot that letters have curves
>many modern fonts aren't developed to be used without smoothing
Do you have any sources to this claim or arguments to back that up? I assume you meant "anti-aliasing" in general. ClearType is only subpixel smoothing. I meant that you shouldn't use it and switch to common anti-aliasing instead.
i just did this in windows 7 on my laptop and it's with cleartype off, the fonts look like shit
There is no "out of the box" with free software. You can go get someone else's pre-designed box, but a lot of us prefer to make the box ourselves.
>I assume you meant "anti-aliasing" in general.
Well, yes, I don't encourage font "anti-aliasing" in general.
It's not that much about curves as it is about thin lines.
It's easy when you have a solid line that is several pixels thick. But when it's thinner than 1px, you technically should render it with a grey instead of black.
…And that's how you can get shit like on picrelated. You can easily see letter strokes vary in width and they look like shit because of it.
>There is no "out of the box" with free software.
Ubangoo went out-of-the-box for me.
Poster of here, I installed MacType. Is this an improvement?
To my eyes it just looks the fonts got a bit more thicker but I'll stick with it for a while.
>I would simply turn off ClearType (subpixel smoothing).
this is a stupid idea. it will look terrible.
Yep, that's Windows for you. Cleartype is rainbowy shit that still looks bad and the only thing you can do is disable all antialiasing thus ending with jagged fonts.
Compare with Linux on pic related.
revert
mf.silef
And add this
/u/gxmcspvt#_
I am fine with it
>Linux has shit font rendering
Post a Google screenshot and then we'll do a comparison, faggot
Linux again, just for comparison.
You have to go to ClearType settings, BUT uncheck "turn on ClearType". Then you get antialiasing WITHOUT subpixel shit.
Apologies, I haven't used Windows in a long time. It works slightly differently then I remember Just booted into WIn 10 and tried it.
joges on you, man, it's linux too
forgot to add, you have to go through the whole clicking on pictures of text thing. it simply chooses optimal hinting methods. looks p. good if you do it right.
I never managed to make it look not shit.
>anime e serie
ramen de macaco
It's mandolino, not sopa
Subpixel only works on displays with extremely high DPI. ClearType is fine for most LCDs and traditional antialiasing is preferable on CRTs.
Do you seriously not have anything else to do than bicker over the fucking font rendering?
Linux and Android use literally the same font rendering engine (FreeType)...
Both macos and Android usually run on hi-DPI displays, so the fonts naturally look better.
Your image is shit as stated
Well I gave the guidelines. It took me 2 tries to get it right though. What worked for me was click on blurrier picture in the first evaluation, but after that simply click on what looks better. Maybe you could try that. This way I got very smooth fonts, maybe not on Mac level but still very nice.
FREETARDS BTFO!
It's still subpixel because you see orange-blue lines. If you like them, keep them, but again personally I'm against it.
pic related is perfect font rendering btw
I can cheat by making my fonts thicker too faggot, also phones have higher DPI than computer monitors, so the fonts are always thicker.
>Because GNUtards can't buy fonts for their GNU system.
Liberation fonts are commercial fonts that RedHat paid to have open-sourced.
Checkmate Atheists.
but android is linux too
all of those look like shit. it looks like they all are low quality jpg images of a box.
I might be wrong but I think subpixel was designed for early 2000s LCD. On these older displays, when you had #FF0000 and #0000FF lines side by side, you would have a noticeable black line between them. And vice versa, if you went with #00FFFF and #FF0000, you'd get an almost perfect white line in between pixels.
So this way, subpixel "rainbows" actually blended together—at least from my experience. The orange/cyan tint was barely noticeable.
Then LCD pixel separation got better, and this trick mostly stopped working. I still don't get why they keep subpixel smoothing now
That's why you buy a 4k monitor goyboy.
It was intended as a demo for low res. No joke, fonts look like shit when letters are 10px tall.
Fedora 27.
Stay mad and enjoy your Gaussian blurfest.
font rendering is a problem solved long time ago
comparing font rendering on a big scaled jpg is the most retarded bullshit ever: it depends fundamentally on the subpixel arrangment of your particular screen
>Then LCD pixel separation got better
What?
It's still just RGBRGBRGBRGBRGB etc.
And there is no need to "separate" the pixels.
Good. But at 1800p you have to try to look shit.
>HONOME
But I don't care about it? It doesn't impact my work at all.
>This might look jaggier at first
Because it is jaggier.
It is shit.
>but it has no "rainbows" around it
Neither does ClearType until you enlarge it.
>with ClearType you get weirdly thicker/thinner fonts.
This is true, but can be calibrated.
You could even consider customization a benefit, more power to the user.
>"waaaah macOS is better at font rendering than Linux!"
>gets shown hard evidence of better font rendering in Linux
>"waaaah font rendering doesn't matter"
It looks good in 1080p too, but since MBPs have equally high DPI, I think it's unfair to compare their font rendering to low DPI screens.
It works out of the box on distros that are supposed to work out of the box, like most *buntus and Fedora
You can't read, right? Modern distros with a recent Freetype have font rendering that best macOS, you don't even need to fumble around freetype patches and config files, just setting hinting is enough
Android is a Linux distribution, Linux is Linux ie. a kernel not a distribution
OP is poojet and doesn't know anything
>retards using scaling to prove that they have good font rendering
Wait, isn't the font rendering done in the kernel?
>linux has shit font rendering
Beside fagbooks, linux has the best font rendering of any OS
afaik no Android does subpixel rendering since pretty much every one has a high DPI
Why the fuck would font rendering be done by the kernel?