4 ms·
I don't know...turn on subpixel with slight hinting, disable autohinter, enable lcdfilter and the result is pretty damn good. For monospace truetype fonts I use
by coleifer 8y ago
I don't know...turn on subpixel with slight hinting, disable autohinter, enable lcdfilter and the result is pretty damn good. For monospace truetype fonts I use grayscale instead of subpixel, which I think is cleaner in the terminal... unless of course I'm using a bitmapped font. It took me quite a while to get it looking good, but ultimately I guess it's a matter of taste. Do you want to preserve the look of the font? Do you want to smash it into the grid? Do you want colors on the fringes? With Linux I can choose.
- elros 8y ago> Do you want to preserve the look of the font? Do you want to smash it into the grid? Do you want colors on the fringes? With Linux I can choose. I have no idea. I want it to look good. With macOS I don't have to choose.
- badsectoracula 8y agoThe idea is that "look good" is subjective, case in point: you apparently think the font rendering on macOS looks good, whereas the author of the linked article thinks that font rendering on macOS looks bad and instead likes the font rendering on Windows 7.
- snazz 8y agoI am of the same opinion as the author of the article. Mac fonts look blurry compared to ClearType. I usually use bitmapped fonts in Emacs and xterm, however, to sidestep the issue altogether. Fontconfig is always an option if needed. On the other hand, I really can’t tell the difference on an HiDPI display, even though I don’t use one (or want one, for that matter). Whatever the defaults are in Firefox on OpenBSD look superb on my monitor.