Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 12th Mar 2012 23:16 UTC
Windows Okay, so this one actually bothers me quite a deal in the Windows 8 consumer preview: the fonts in Metro look fuzzy - they look like fonts on Mac OS X. Because of the Mac OS X resemblance, I had assumed that Metro switched to a shape-accurate rendering method, like Mac OS X uses, but as it turns out, it's a little less exotic than that.
Thread beginning with comment 510380
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

Both Algorithms are ClearType.

There is an interview with the creator of ClearType, he claims the differences are because Apple didn't implement it correctly.

http://www.thisdeveloperslife.com/post/2-0-5-typo

Apple got ClearType patent as part of the Apple-Microsoft cross licensing deal.

Edited 2012-03-13 09:31 UTC

Reply Score: 3

orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

Odd because Apple's implementation is arguably superior in it's results. Either that or Apple's fonts just look better to begin with, at least to my sensibilities.

Reply Parent Score: 1

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Like the Joel on Software article, I am a Windows guy and I actually think the Apple fonts look fuzzy ... I think it is more what you are used to looking at.

Thought I have used ClearType tuner. In XP I don't think some of the fonts were supposed to be use With only cleartype enabled ... Consolas doesn't render correctly without cleartype.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolas

and

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2005/08/consolas-and-cleartype.htm...

Edited 2012-03-13 11:15 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

Carewolf Member since:
2005-09-08

No, Apple's solution is worse in every meaningful way. It only looks better if your squint or have a very high-DPI screen. Fortunately though Apple are moving to very-high DPI screens, where they are no longer handicapped by their poor font-rendering.

Edited 2012-03-16 19:06 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I would like to point out that greyscale rendering is not ClearType.

Greyscale rendering was "font smoothing" option in XP.

Cleartype is about using the 3 subpixels in any TFT display to triple the effective DPI of your monitor.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Cleartype is about using the 3 subpixels in any TFT display to triple the effective DPI of your monitor.

Tripling the DPI is a bit of a bold statement. First, it only works in one direction. Second, it only works when displaying black on white or vice versa. And then, with the rise of OLED and the technological issues associated with emitting blue light, PenTile arrangements start to become popular, effectively negating the advantages of subpixel rendering...

Edited 2012-03-13 18:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

I would like to point out that greyscale rendering is not ClearType.

Greyscale rendering was "font smoothing" option in XP.

Cleartype is about using the 3 subpixels in any TFT display to triple the effective DPI of your monitor.


Yes, and the reason that they're doing grayscale rendering of text is that there's a tremendous amount of horizontal panning going on here for the Start screen. ClearType depends upon very precise alignment of subpixels. You can't just pan the content left or right without redoing the ClearType rendering. But that will reduce the efficiency of panning animation. So, clearly, MS opted for performance/efficiency versus optimal quality; and, in my opinion, that was the right call. The Start screen was designed to be active and dynamic, not to have a static layout.

Reply Parent Score: 3