4 ms·

the guy seems overly obsessed, almost zealous, about sub-pixel aliasing, as if entirely oblivious to OLED technology, thinking that LCD panels will be the aroun

the guy seems overly obsessed, almost zealous, about sub-pixel aliasing, as if entirely oblivious to OLED technology, thinking that LCD panels will be the around forever.

ZeroGravitas 17y ago
Worse, it won't work on iPhone, iPads or any similar device with a standard LCD when rotated 3 out of 4 possible directions. The right answer is to just use text, it'll look great on all those devices and more. Yes, it'll look crappy on IE. So does everything else. Also, since it's bash Adobe month: why does the anti-aliasing in Photoshop suck so badly? Those examples are terrible.
seldo 17y ago
Yeah, it's not clear to me why one shouldn't just use text and let the OS sort this out.
- SlyShy 17y ago
  I don't think it's a huge issue, but what the point of is when you want to use a non-websafe font, then you've got to use one of these font replacement schemes. And those don't do subpixel rendering. And so you'd use this. Presumably. You certainly wouldn't use it for text that is websafe, like Georgia, because yes, the operating system can do its own subpixel rendering in that instance.
  - ZeroGravitas 17y ago
    The whole "sub-pixel rendering" is getting out of hand. Text on Apple systems look the way they do for several reasons, sub-pixel rendering might the tech-sexiest of them, but it's really only a minor benefit, almost totally meaningless at the size of header text.
- bitwize 17y ago
  Because Apple's is the only OS that gets this crucial bit right?
  - RS14 17y ago
    But it's not crucial. I'm perfectly happy with whatever text rendering my browser uses. I can read the results, and that is sufficient. Just let my browser render your text in accordance with my dictates, and don't try to interfere. You're less likely to break things that way.
    - bitwize 17y ago
      It is crucial if you spend much time staring at a screen. Bugged font rendering is distracting and hinders readability.

the guy seems overly obsessed, almost zealous, about sub-pixel aliasing, as if entirely oblivious to OLED technology, thinking that LCD panels will be the around forever.

ZeroGravitas 17y ago

Worse, it won't work on iPhone, iPads or any similar device with a standard LCD when rotated 3 out of 4 possible directions. The right answer is to just use text, it'll look great on all those devices and more. Yes, it'll look crappy on IE. So does everything else. Also, since it's bash Adobe month: why does the anti-aliasing in Photoshop suck so badly? Those examples are terrible.

seldo 17y ago

Yeah, it's not clear to me why one shouldn't just use text and let the OS sort this out.

SlyShy 17y ago
I don't think it's a huge issue, but what the point of is when you want to use a non-websafe font, then you've got to use one of these font replacement schemes. And those don't do subpixel rendering. And so you'd use this. Presumably. You certainly wouldn't use it for text that is websafe, like Georgia, because yes, the operating system can do its own subpixel rendering in that instance.
- ZeroGravitas 17y ago
  The whole "sub-pixel rendering" is getting out of hand. Text on Apple systems look the way they do for several reasons, sub-pixel rendering might the tech-sexiest of them, but it's really only a minor benefit, almost totally meaningless at the size of header text.
bitwize 17y ago
Because Apple's is the only OS that gets this crucial bit right?
- RS14 17y ago
  But it's not crucial. I'm perfectly happy with whatever text rendering my browser uses. I can read the results, and that is sufficient. Just let my browser render your text in accordance with my dictates, and don't try to interfere. You're less likely to break things that way.
  - bitwize 17y ago
    It is crucial if you spend much time staring at a screen. Bugged font rendering is distracting and hinders readability.