"The OSDL's Desktop Linux Working Group has published its first year-end report on the state of the overall desktop Linux ecosystem. The report provides insight into the year's key accomplishments in terms of functionality, standards, applications, distributions, market penetration, and more."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-07-01
- Well, he's an os news reader, it's pretty safe to assume that he's got some experience with computers and he's still has these problems. Last time I tried Linux was in 2002, I had the same problems... and it seems it still exists. As someone trying Linux then I couldn't care what the reasons were for this, I just wanted the fonts to work.
' don't know what you're doing wrong, but you are obviously doing something REALLY wrong '
- What's wrong with wanting readable smoothed fonts?
'The only thing I had to do was modifying .fonts.conf to substitute Helvetica for Nimbus Sans L, and Times for Times New Roman.'
- Why did you have to do this? Because it wasn't done already? Because without it you'd have crappy fonts too? Wouldn't it be better to just have font's working like under windows or macos? If it's as easy as you suggest why can't it be done automatically?
Edited 2007-01-26 21:55
Member since:2005-10-02
Either you are lying or you are a complete moron. Pick a suitable answer 
- What's wrong with wanting readable smoothed fonts?
Nothing. And you've had readable smoothed fonts in Linux for years. Ever heard of FreeType? We are in 2007 now, and not 2002. Fonts didn't look to good in Windows in 2002 compared with today (with XP as the exception in 2002).
I have nice smoothed readable fonts in Gnome and have had that since august 2004. And I have done _nothing_ to make it look good. It looks way better than in Windows (standard Windows rendering is ugly, and ClearType means extremely poor and wrong hinting, though the font rendering is very crisp).
The modification in .fonts.conf was made solely in regard to font rendering on webpages in Firefox and is not related to interface in Linux (nor Gnome) as such.
Since it's been five (5) years since you tried last time, you really ought to try again.
Member since:2006-06-24
> I'm getting tired of that lame excuse.
It's not a lame excuse, I want to be able to read what's on screen, I don't see how that is lame.
> Font rendering have been beautiful on Linux for more than 3 years.
Absolutely not true. The default settings looks reasonably ok, but the fonts are WAY too large. And on sensible sizes the fonts gets mushy and unreadable.
See this screenshot from Windows (Opera): http://img15.imgspot.com/?u=/u/07/26/07/nox1169902472.png
Compare it with this screenshot from Fedora Core 6 (Firefox): http://img15.imgspot.com/?u=/u/07/26/08/test1169902824.png
Completely honestly, do you think that is acceptable? On Ubuntu it's much worse. Larger fonts are of course very good looking, but I don't want a menu font with size 12, that's just insane.
Apart from the problem that sensible font sizes looks like crap Firefox also picks the _wrong_ sizes. Of the same font, the small version is too small compared to Windows/Mac and the large version is too large. Setting the font size obviously doesn't help since that makes the smallest even smaller or largest larger as well.
Edit: Just so you don't blame it on Firefox, I'm not bothering to put up a screenshot of Firefox under Windows since it can't be distinguished from Opera's rendering.
Edited 2007-01-27 12:13
Member since:2005-07-06
0) in Firefox press CTRL and + or - ( or use the scroll wheel )
1) Witch version of Ubuntu you got ? latest is 6.10 The Edgy Eft
2) you installed ? :
http://easyubuntu.freecontrib.org/index.html
http://www.getautomatix.com/index.html
3) you tried ? :
sudo apt-get install msttcorefonts
sudo dpkg-reconfigure fontconfig
--> Choose "Autohinter" (and enable subpixel rendering if you have a LCD monitor).
4) http://www.gnome-look.org/index.php?xcontentmode=39&PHPSESSID=d7806...
5) http://www.mozilla.org/support/firefox/options#content
6) http://www.google.com/search?q=fonts&btnG=Search+Directory&hl=en&ca...
I hope it helps , if it don't , either you are lying or you are a complete moron. Pick a suitable answer ( V2 changelog added "I hope it helps ," V1 author dylansmrjones )
Member since:2005-07-06
That's Microsoft's sub-pixel font rendering (known as ClearType) at work. More info on the technology behind it here:
http://www.grc.com/cleartype.htm
Unfortunately, they patented it. Even Apple has to resort to using "traditional" anti-aliasing in Mac OS X, which looks significantly less sharp. Meanwhile, Apple also has patents on their technology that make Linux even more limited in what it can do:
http://freetype.sourceforge.net/patents.html
However, apparently there are workarounds:
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/ubuntu/enable-smooth-fonts-on-ubuntu...
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=235526
(this one enables sub-pixel rendering)
http://www.convexhull.com/mandrake_fonts.html
The other thing I noticed about your screenshot from Fedora Core 6 is that, even though traditional anti-aliasing seems to be present, the font kerning on whatever font that is sucks. In that case, you probably just need to install a better font. (For instance Microsoft's core web fonts.) The renderer itself shouldn't be blamed for a poor choice of fonts in your distro.
But it's true, we also shouldn't have to depend on MS for our fonts. This is something that is constantly improving. For example:
http://www.bitstream.com/font_rendering/products/dev_fonts/vera.htm...
And of course it's also true we shouldn't have to hack the system as shown above just to get things like sub-pixel rendering. For that you can blame Microsoft and Apple and their patent-loving mentalities.
Member since:2006-01-02
Do you have a URL for the/a page/website, for comparison? That FC6 shot does look ugly, in fact unacceptably so. But, it's FC, which is anything but a nice desktop distro out of the box. I'd like to be able to make apples-to-apples live CD comparisons, then directing you to another distro, rather than calling you a moron.
Member since:2005-07-06
Fedora Core 6's fonts in Firefox are really broken out of the box, I don't know why. Try Epiphany, as it'll try to use the standard GNOME font selection paths.
However, in general it will be larger and mushier, because FreeType just tends towards softer, more accurate rendering (like OS X). The instance on "one pixel thick size 8 fonts" is really derived from being accustomed to Windows. GNOME and OS X actually have the same size UI font, with GNOME being 10pt at 96dpi and OS X being 13pt at 72dpi. Both are far more reasonable than the eye-strain inducing 8pt at 96dpi that Windows uses.
Member since:
2005-10-02
I'm getting tired of that lame excuse.
Font rendering have been beautiful on Linux for more than 3 years. And installing extra fonts are no issue. We have the MS corefonts, Bitstream Vera fonts (very good), Nimbus fonts (very good too) and so on.
I don't know what you're doing wrong, but you are obviously doing something REALLY wrong (or perhaps using a binary distribution with a FreeType2 compiled without patented technology). With Gnome on Gentoo I don't have to mess around with any settings at all, and fonts are beautiful. The only thing I had to do was modifying .fonts.conf to substitute Helvetica for Nimbus Sans L, and Times for Times New Roman.