Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 23rd Jun 2009 21:40 UTC
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 370024
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-11-29
RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai
by dylansmrjones on Wed 24th Jun 2009 10:51
in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai"
Member since:2005-10-02
True. Natively I speak the Danish tongue.
My monitor? It's dirty, that's what it is. Cheap and dirty - and quite nasty. But easy and fast - you can't expect too much for $99.
It's some cheap ASUS lcd-something and true to its nature, it claims that it's splendid and I should try to push its buttons. Which usually results in all kinds of weird color cycling. Some sort of rage, perhaps?
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-10-02
I can also "totally" see it (sowwy, have to go to the loo and throw up after that teen-language), in its maximized state. If you look at "Spirit of Summer" the second i in "Spirit" is fuzzy compared with the first i. The first part of the u (that'll be the leftmost stem) in "Summer" is also fuzzy, and the last half of the first m and the first half of the second m is also fuzzy.
That said it might be related to my cheap, slutty and crappy LCD-monitor, where everything is somewhat fuzzy, no matter what I do. It is better than no monitor, but also worse than my former (and butt old and recently deceased) CRT-monitor.
If it looks good on your monitor, don't change anything. I strongly prefer OS X-rendering over "ClearType".