4 ms·
This is an issue with any software that tries to maintain backwards compatibility, not Linux. Windows has: - Many years worth of different control panels. - L
by stebalien 3y ago
This is an issue with any software that tries to maintain backwards compatibility, not Linux. Windows has:
- Many years worth of different control panels.
- Little consistency with respect to toolkits in general.
- Fractional scaling issues in applications using older toolkits (e.g., open up the policy editor and notice the blurry fonts). Microsoft is actually giving up here and has been experimenting with ML-based scaling for old applications (an approach I expect we'll eventually see in Linux as well).
Apple handles this by breaking compatibility every so often, forcing old software out of the picture.
- alwayslikethis 3y agoI notice that even the blurry scaling on Windows looks better than what we have on Linux. It seems that they have some special algorithm for that. Anyone who knows how it is implemented can chime in here?
- marwis 3y agoIt's definitely better than bilinear and bicubic. Looks like Lanczos but with some optimization for ClearType.
- Eduard 3y agoWindow's backward compatibility is way better though. There are plenty of GNOME extensions and applications that just don't work anymore under modern GNOME Wayland. Example: all the redshift applications and extensions for lowering the screen brightness.
- xcdzvyn 3y agoIt's seemed a little odd to me, particularly given Linus' attitude of "never break userspace", that so many high-profile projects decide to break backwards compatibility almost for the sake of it (particularly GTK/GNOME).