Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 28th Jun 2007 21:39 UTC
Original OSNews Interviews Today we feature a very interesting interview with David Turner, one of the main Freetype developers, discussing the project's past and future. These days, David continues his work in Freetype even after having been hired by Google.
Thread beginning with comment 251772
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I can't understand!
by rx182 on Sat 30th Jun 2007 00:24 UTC
Member since:

I do agree with most of you: ClearType beats Linux and OSX fonts renderers.

But ClearType is no good compared to the standard Windows fonts renderer.

Take a look:

I don't understand why people prefer ClearType over standard. ClearType produces fuzzy output. I'm using a 400$ LCD monitor and I can see the artifacts introduced by sub-pixel rendering.

Why do people like fuzzy fonts? What's wrong with the good old fonts? Help me understand...

Reply Score: 3

RE: I can't understand!
by Eugenia on Sat 30th Jun 2007 00:27 in reply to "I can't understand!"
Eugenia Member since:

I much prefer ClearType too. Easier on the eyes, because what you call "fuzziness" actually helps interpret the characters faster.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: I can't understand!
by hechacker1 on Sat 30th Jun 2007 06:29 in reply to "I can't understand!"
hechacker1 Member since:

I used to say the same thing.

"Standard" windows fonts without hinting only look good because the fonts are precisely lined up with the pixels. This effect is achievable in Linux too.

Hinting: (Old freetype)
No Hinting:

Unfortunately, it also means the font has to be of high quality in the first place. MS Windows truetype fonts qualify, but good luck with various linux fonts (except for DejaVu). Its funny how the first fonts I always download in linux are MS fonts. (I know they are not strictly for linux either)

The pictures in the Xorg + Font wiki came from my laptop:

Since then however my font settings (and Freetype) has changed. Updated pictures are due.

Once you switch to cleartype, you'll never go back. Another thing: Cleartype fonts look best on a DVI (or digital connection) LCD. VGA doesn't do them justice (for the lack of sub-pixel precision). In fact, VGA just makes almost any LCD monitor blurry (comparatively).

You have to remember that cleartype contrast settings are also changeable:

Personally, I cannot get used to Mac OS "fuzzy" fonts even though they are technically the most correct.

Moral of the story? With enough time on any one font system, my eyes will adapt. Each time I "prefer" my current fonts and can't imagine switching.

Reply Parent Score: 1