Why is the font rendering on Windows so bad? Aren't the Apple patents expire?
Which is which?
Where's the incentive, the Windows userbase are normie plebs.
>>54887335
Switch to Ubuntu (Or a Ubuntu based distro). Ubuntu's font rendering looks just as good as OSX to me.
>>54887391
It's literally the same thing.
>>54887335
for me windows is actually better than *nix systems because of video driver support. Mac is for mentally challenged individuals and ships only on specific overpriced hardware they get to test on.
>>54887478
>for me windows is actually better than *nix systems because of video driver support.
the fuck are you talking about
>>54887402
>It's literally the same thing
Or you talking about the font rendering between Ubuntu and OSX or Ubuntu and Windows?
>>54887494
i have the same issue as him. i have an amd gpu and the open-source driver support is shit and doesn't work properly. the closed-source propietary stuff on linux kinda works but not nearly as good as it does on windows. so yeah, linux just isn't a good choice for me and probably not for that other guy either.
shame, cus i'd love to switch to linux
>>54887506
Ubuntu and OSX have the same font rendering
>>54887494
I'm talking about ubuntu displaying mild artifacts on the screen while windows not displaying them.
It's probably specific to my hardware but it's very real.
Font rendering can be changed on both systems.
>>54887391
holy fuck
>>54887515
I actively dislike that font rendering.
Feels... I dunno. Plastic?
>>54887335
Use mactype. Build from 2013 still works on windows 10.
Normies are not complaining about cleartype being shitty, so MS are not trying to fix it.
>not using mactype
>>54887391
Even better with System San Francisco font from Apple and infinality. It's literally OSX's font
>>54887635
Works with windows 10?
Shit, I didn't know that. I'll have to get it now.
>>54887628
don't forget that they're not using the same font
>>54887638
>not using extra software with kerning and compatibility issues
>>54887705
Yes. Right now I'm using it. Search for MacTypeInstaller_2013_1231_0 it's the latest one.
>>54887515
Holy shit you're retarded.
Ubuntu uses freetype, OSX doesn't.
They can't be the same you idiot.
>>54887705
Partially. It won't work with modern web browsers well and any application that's Windows 10 or 8.1 exclusive won't be affected.
>>54887752
with some tweaks they can
>>54887705
>>54887733
just remember you sometimes need to add exceptions for various things that it breaks
>>54887752
Apple uses FreeType in OS X.
>>54887770
Uh, it works fine with Firefox, unless it somehow loses that ability in W10?
>>54887790
Yes but next to "Apple Advanced Typography".
>>54887335
ClearType is great and customizable.
>>54887692
I gave the San Francisco fonts a try. They actually look pretty interesting. Messes up the fonts of the terminal though when I choose one to be a mono font.
>>54887335
Yet another reason to purchase the new Apple MacBook Pro with Retina Display.
>>54888041
I don't see why. All Unix-like systems can have the same font rendering.
>>54888057
All unix systems can have the same everything, but then why are they so different and why doesn't one offer all?
>>54887893
Where do you get the fonts? They look pretty cool.
>>54888116
https://github.com/supermarin/YosemiteSanFranciscoFont
Make sure to search for "SFNS" in whatever font manager you use after placing the fonts in the font folder.
>>54887892
Yeah, it allows you to turn it off completely. That's the only sensible setting
>>54888163
Thanks based anonalongadingdong
There is no point talking about font rendering until 500 ppi displays become common.
>>54887730
i kern ur mum
There is a free program for Windows that's called MacType and it's free unlike everything for OSX that costs an arm and a leg.
>>54887335
It's largely a matter of personal preference, but when it comes to small fonts (<= 16 or so pixels) on 1:1 pixel ratio displays, Windows' ClearType is way superior. Apple's blurry antialiasing and glyph thickening literally make me fucking cry.
As for Linux, let's be honest: without carefully hand-crafted infinality and fonts.conf settings, the default rednering of pretty much any distro looks like absolute fucking shit with pixel snapping all over the place, uneven stem thickening/darkening, fucked up kerning and visible color artifacts resulting from failed attempts at subpixel antialiasing.
>>54888307
Shit you must be dirty cheap I never paid a cent for my OSX
C'mon man $2 for your leg I really need it
>>54888181
The only time when I'm truly bothered with font rendering is when there is none. Such as Edge browser where you can't even use ClearType. ClearType is meh on low dpi screens and on vertical LCDs but it is imo a large improvement over no font rendering or standard anti aliasing. With higher screen resolutions and DPIs this matters less and less.
>>54887778
e.g. virtualbox
>>54888535
> no font rendering
I don't think you understand what the word "rendering" means.
>>54887351
left is apple. I know because I try to coloursample fonts on webpages sometimes and dont know which freaking colour to pick
>>54888666
also, here is proof
>scond time get satanic digits today, is this an omen?
>>54887351
>>54888666
there is only one example in the OP
left is the actual, full pixels
middle is the same thing as displayed on an LCD
right is the intended result of subpixel rendering
>>54888535
>no font rendering
so when you see a blank page?
They just use small font size. 9pt looks like shit. And Segoe UI is bad on any other size.
Changing the font size with Windows settings does not affect the entire system, a lot of stuff is hardcoded. Also, you cannot replace Segoe UI completely, it is also hardcoded on most things, so registry tweaks will just make it worse because you will end up combining a bunch of different fonts in your UI.
OS X has been always using 10+ font size for most of UI elements, and most of Linux distros are coming with 10 or 11 font size by default.
That 1-2pt difference really matter and can make your interface either look good or disgusting.
Font rendering on windows is totally fine. In fact in many cases it's much better than mac, see pic.
it's not bad, but windows font rendering has to work on devices with lower resolution screens, and smaller text. because of this, it more aggressively snaps text to the pixel grid, whereas apple's font rendering prioritizes accuracy over pixel grid snapping (which is blurrier but it doesn't matter if you have a high res display)
OP's image is actually showing an older font rendering API (certainly not Direct2D) which only hints horizontally and not vertically
>>54889900
muh smooth fonts, can't you afford retina mac
>>54889900
>reading squiggles and lines as a language
>>54891472
anon...
>>54887391
can't play all the games I can on windows
>>54889900
Yep. I like linux and all, but font rendering is a serious sticking point for me. Windows fonts are way fucking crisper on low dpi displays.
Why does /g/ get absolutely buttblasted when you give a shit about tech aesthetics and yet simultaneously whines and blogs all day about something as trivial as font rendering?
>>54892565
There is nothing trivial about font rendering. Most people spend their time on their computer reading text, it is one of the single most important parts of the system.
>>54892605
Maybe in 1995 when everything was shit.
>>54888666
Just use inspect element desu
