Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 23rd Jun 2009 21:40 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces The Engineering 7 weblog has an item about the improvements made in the ClearType font rendering technology which has been included in Windows since Windows XP. While I won't go too deeply into that post, I did figure it was a good opportunity to talk about font antialiasing in general; which type do you prefer?
Thread beginning with comment 369967
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
middleware
Member since:
2006-05-11

All you think this way is because you may too English-center. English letter is one of the most simply character shape in the world so Windows' ClearType can survive so long.

Have you ever read Chinese (especially Traditional, unsimplified Chinese) characters (especially in Italy style)? You will found ClearType's rendering is a nightmare. Moreover, Windows actually use pixel-based font shape directly for small font size, that means the character shape for some very complex Chinese character is WRONG.

Basically, preferring so-called "readability" over accuracy is a way simply not sustainable and not scalable.

Reply Parent Score: 4

joshv Member since:
2006-03-18

All you think this way is because you may too English-center. English letter is one of the most simply character shape in the world so Windows' ClearType can survive so long.


It's called the Roman, or Latin alphabet. Used for almost all European languages, not just English.

Reply Parent Score: 2

middleware Member since:
2006-05-11

Yes. Thanks for the correction. Actually I had that word in my mind but I was lazy to check it out from dictionary. So sorry blame to English but the point is still valid that there is other languages whose characters are way complicated than Latin. So the way preferring accuracy over so-called "readability" is more sustainable and scalable.

Reply Parent Score: 1