Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 30th Oct 2007 20:50 UTC, submitted by diegocg
KDE "The KDE Community is happy to release the fourth Beta for KDE 4.0. This Beta aimed at further polishing of the KDE codebase and we would love to start receiving feedback from testers. As KDE has largely has been in bugfix mode, this latest Beta aims to encourage testers to have a look at it to help us find and solve the remaining problems and bugs. Besides the stabilization of the codebase, some minor features have been added, including but not limited to much work on Plasma, the KDE 4 desktop shell. Sebastian Kugler notes: 'The improvements have been huge, and plasma is much closer to what it needs to be before the release. I am confident we will be able to finish it and present a very usable plasma to our userbase with KDE 4.0. We will then be able to extend on that and present truly innovative desktop interfaces throughout the KDE 4 lifecycle.'"
Thread beginning with comment 281976
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: UI Look
by Tweek on Wed 31st Oct 2007 03:25 UTC in reply to "UI Look"
Tweek
Member since:
2006-01-12

Personally I prefer linux fonts over mac OSX.
They look unpolished, they look like they were an after thought. like something was swapped out right at the end.

I also run a pretty customized but extremely simple scheme for fonts on my system. Nothing ever above 12, the bit stream verdana, sizes 8-12 for absolutely everything. Simple elegant. not blurry.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: UI Look
by tyrione on Wed 31st Oct 2007 05:34 in reply to "RE: UI Look"
tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

Personally, Freetype is admittedly behind OS X's font system, but that's to be expected.

I don't give a rusty f*** whether the AA of on-screen fonts aren't satisfactory (they look right in either platform when configured correctly), but what I do give a rusty f*** about is stuff like XeTeX allowing me to leverage OpenType or TrueType fonts so I can produce publish quality manuscripts, journal articles, novels, etc.

I care that my PDFs are press quality. Whether someone's Xorg config and fontconfig setups are different than the next person's doesn't matter to me.

If I've got them configured correctly Freetype 2.3 gets better with every release and so does OS X's font system.

If you think OS X's fonts are blurry and low quality then you don't understand the Print Industry.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: UI Look
by andrewg on Wed 31st Oct 2007 06:43 in reply to "RE[2]: UI Look"
andrewg Member since:
2005-07-06

If you think OS X's fonts are blurry and low quality then you don't understand the Print Industry.

I don't work in the print industry and I would guess that most people using Mac's don't work in the print industry. I would also guess that most people in Apples Mac target market don't work in the print industry.

Having got that out the way I really hate fonts on the Mac. And I used Tiger for over a year. The font's don't look clean and crisp. If the print industry likes fonts on the Mac thats fine just don't tell us that because the print industry likes blurry fonts that we have to want them. Apple pandering to a minority without caring about the majority of its users is typical Apple.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: UI Look
by Soulbender on Wed 31st Oct 2007 12:52 in reply to "RE[2]: UI Look"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

If you think OS X's fonts are blurry and low quality then you don't understand the Print Industry.


Maybe he's like the majority of the worlds population and don't give a damn about the print industry but cares about how the fonts look on his screen. You know, the fonts he actually reads every single day when using his computer.

Reply Parent Score: 7