Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The sad state of font rendering on Linux (2018)

pandasauce.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 104 posts

Re: The sad state of font rendering on Linux (2018)

#71

Post by hnuser123456 »

perching_aix wrote: post #69
nomel wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My first (and last) 1920x1080 monitor was 50lb CRT I picked up on the side of the road, in 2003. I haven't owned a smartphone with a screen resolution that low, in over 10 years. I think it's an amazing feat of marketing, by display companies, that people still put up with such low resolutions.

A Full HD CRT from the roadside in 2003? As if this was just a thing people had happen to them? Is this some elaborate joke I'm missing? > I haven't owned a smartphone with a screen resolution that low Smartphone in italics, because smartphones are known for their low pixel densities, right? What? Did you own a smartphone at all in the past 10 years? Just double checking. > I think it's an amazing feat of marketing,…

CRT resolution was moreso limited by GPUs than the monitor itself. They don't have fixed pixels like LCD/OLED.

Re: The sad state of font rendering on Linux (2018)

#72

Post by zzo38computer »

I prefer to use non-Unicode bitmap fonts on Linux. It works fine in programs that support them; unfortunately many programs don't support them in all contexts (in some cases, bitmap fonts work in some places but not others). When I write my own programs, I try to ensure that non-Unicode bitmap fonts work.

Re: The sad state of font rendering on Linux (2018)

#73

Post by perching_aix »

scblock wrote: post #7

Windows has the worst font rendering of all modern operating systems. Wanting anything like Windows font rendering is insane. Windows 10 makes it near impossible to properly turn off subpixel hinting without also turning off all anti-aliasing, which on a QD-OLED screen makes for horrific color fringing. Windows 11 is better, but still pretty weak. Linux is roughly as good as Mac OS, both of which are miles better tha…

[flagged]

Re: The sad state of font rendering on Linux (2018)

#74

Post by carlosjobim »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #61
carlosjobim wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do yourself a favour and go out and purchase a high pixel screen. I don't understand why people who spend a good part of their days in front of a computer (or employ others to do it), but refuse to get quality hardware. Is it worth destroying your eyes, posture, and joints to save this money? Not to speak of just the personal pleasure of using good hardware. Restaurants spend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars…

I’m currently running a 4K 32” monitor. What exact monitor do you recommend I buy for my Windows desktop?

Then why are you saying you want a high pixel screen, if you already have it?

Re: The sad state of font rendering on Linux (2018)

#75

Post by perching_aix »

carlosjobim wrote: post #55
forrestthewoods wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in favor of high pixel density screens I wish I could download an OS update that gave me a high pixel screen! But, uhhh, that’s not how it works.

Do yourself a favour and go out and purchase a high pixel screen. I don't understand why people who spend a good part of their days in front of a computer (or employ others to do it), but refuse to get quality hardware. Is it worth destroying your eyes, posture, and joints to save this money? Not to speak of just the personal pleasure of using good hardware. Restaurants spend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars…

> Is it worth destroying your eyes, posture, and joints to save this money?

Not high enough pixel density causes which one of these again?

> Why doesn't IT people take inspiration from them and get a bit better equipment.

Are we talking about the same field where people are having a competition about who can build the most overpriced and obnoxious sounding keyboards imaginable?

Re: The sad state of font rendering on Linux (2018)

#76

Post by [deleted] »

exe34 wrote: post #42
not_a_bot_4sho wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose this is a subjective area. I would rank Windows on top, Mac as a close second, and Linux ... well, I love Linux for reasons other than UI.

Yeah I don't understand this difference of opinion here - Linux looks fine to me, Mac looks pretty and Windows looks like it's been driven over a few times.

[deleted]

Re: The sad state of font rendering on Linux (2018)

#77

Post by lp0_on_fire »

perching_aix wrote: post #73
scblock wrote: post #7

Windows has the worst font rendering of all modern operating systems. Wanting anything like Windows font rendering is insane. Windows 10 makes it near impossible to properly turn off subpixel hinting without also turning off all anti-aliasing, which on a QD-OLED screen makes for horrific color fringing. Windows 11 is better, but still pretty weak. Linux is roughly as good as Mac OS, both of which are miles better tha…

[flagged]

> The only way for me not to accuse you of just straight up lying is to just wrap my thoughts into the cushion of subjectivity.

This was unnecessary.

Re: The sad state of font rendering on Linux (2018)

#78

Post by perching_aix »

lp0_on_fire wrote: post #77
perching_aix wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> The only way for me not to accuse you of just straight up lying is to just wrap my thoughts into the cushion of subjectivity. This was unnecessary.

I really don't mean it as an insult, it legitimately just comes off like people are lying. The difference in experience is really just that stark that I honestly cannot fathom these claims actually being truthful, certainly not in the absolute sense they are presented. So, subjectivity remains.

Re: The sad state of font rendering on Linux (2018)

#79

Post by perching_aix »

hnuser123456 wrote: post #71
perching_aix wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Full HD CRT from the roadside in 2003? As if this was just a thing people had happen to them? Is this some elaborate joke I'm missing? > I haven't owned a smartphone with a screen resolution that low Smartphone in italics, because smartphones are known for their low pixel densities, right? What? Did you own a smartphone at all in the past 10 years? Just double checking. > I think it's an amazing feat of marketing,…

CRT resolution was moreso limited by GPUs than the monitor itself. They don't have fixed pixels like LCD/OLED.

They still had very real limitations in terms of the signal they accepted, and color CRTs specifically had discrete color patches forming discrete, fixed number of triads.

Re: The sad state of font rendering on Linux (2018)

#80

Post by [deleted] »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #61
carlosjobim wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do yourself a favour and go out and purchase a high pixel screen. I don't understand why people who spend a good part of their days in front of a computer (or employ others to do it), but refuse to get quality hardware. Is it worth destroying your eyes, posture, and joints to save this money? Not to speak of just the personal pleasure of using good hardware. Restaurants spend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars…

I’m currently running a 4K 32” monitor. What exact monitor do you recommend I buy for my Windows desktop?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN