> Fonts are _never_ scaled "linearly." Correct, but when printed on paper (using movable type for example), the width of left-aligned text set in the same font

> Fonts are _never_ scaled "linearly." Correct, but when printed on paper (using movable type for example), the width of left-aligned text set in the same font at a continuously increasing point size typically has a nice 'linear' slope on the ragged right edge. Cleartype does not have this. Cleartype changes the text width drastically between point sizes close in magnitude The author criticized freetype for having a non-linear apparent font weight as the font point size is increased linearly. The author said this was bad without much justification, while simultaneously claiming cleartype is better, despite having the same issue of font metrics being discontinuous over a continuous point size. > It makes fonts look "more correcct" on many types of displays. Are you saying it's better not to have that option available at all? Not at all. Options are great. However, saying something is objectively better when in fact there are multiple use cases for which it is better and many for which it is worse is disingenuous, and that is what the author is doing.