4 ms·
> Windows' font rendering (I can only speak for up to Windows 7) is still quite nasty, especially at larger font sizes. The lack of vertical antialiasing ruins
by wfunction 13y ago
> Windows' font rendering (I can only speak for up to Windows 7) is still quite nasty, especially at larger font sizes. The lack of vertical antialiasing ruins it for these cases.
Weird, I would consider that Windows has the best font rendering. Do you have any example photos you'd like to show?
A comment below [1] has some pictures, do you really find Windows's rendering to be bad?
1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5644228 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5644228
- shardling 13y agoI remember reading that people get very used/comfortable to Mac vs. Windows style of font rendering, and tend to perceive the other as inferior.
- stephen_g 13y agoI used to like Windows' font rendering (when they introduced ClearType), but after having to Mac OS X about five years ago and using an iPhone and iPad for a couple of years I'm so used to Apple's font rendering that Windows looks really ugly to me... Quite subjective though. Perhaps it's partially due to the fact that Mac laptops and iDevices have higher quality displays than typical Windows machines?
- wisty 13y agoYes, this classic flame war. There used to be a Windows vs OSX font rendering flame war every week on HN, in the good old days. OSX uses antialiasing, which means the fonts have a nice shape, but they are fuzzy, blurry, and to some users headache-inducing. Windows reshapes the fonts so they fit perfectly in the pixel grid, but the shape is not what will be printed, and it looks ugly to some users. Because people like what they are used to, and because Apple vs Microsoft is already a flame war, no-one can really agree.