No need to get flustered about it, it is the plain truth.
Getting your head in the sand won't solve this problem.
It is sad that win7 had this working out of the box for years now but no linux distro can.
So let's fix this once and for all.
Now share your settings if you are self-aware enough to have noticed this issue and managed to fix it.
Other urls found in this thread:
>Now share your settings if you are self-aware enough to have noticed this issue and managed to fix it.
This is the least subtle and most pathetic way of crying for fucking help because you're incapable of googling shit I've seen in quite a while.
Good job OP, you should feel really fucking bad.
I disagree OP, I am flustered about it but being mad at "Linux" for this makes no sense. Linux is a kernel, it doesn't render fonts. The font rendering component is called Freetype. The reason why it isn't comparable to windows font rendering is directly because of microsoft.
>A survey from June 2007 shows no less than nine patents from Microsoft that cover ClearType.
>The patents cover the whole process of generating and displaying sub-pixel images.
>People have proposed alternatives to the ClearType color filtering method. [...] Unfortunately, the FreeType team doesn't share this enthusiasm. The reason is precisely the very vague patent claims described previously. There is a non-negligible (even if small) chance that these claims also cover the SubLCD technique. The situation would probably be different if we could invalidate the broader patent claims, but this is not the case currently.
bitmap fonts - shit ever seen
Linux actually has bitmap fonts built in.
>Linux font rendering suck
Mine looks good to me.
> patents
I hope open source starts routing around this US specific insanity more often, by moving projects abroads. Everything is patented in the USA anyhow.
That is what Freetype does, if you read that page there is an implementation of subpixel rendering included, but it is not enabled by default on any distro because they would get sued.
>"Leave my safe space right now!"
>"you can't make me aware of this I have mental work arounds"
So you are saying this problem will never have a solution? No wonder linux desktops never managed to reach mainstream. Feels like a bad excuse all together to me. Did the freetype guys even managed to produce good font rendering in the first place?
>Begging for help
Sad
Try actually reading the page, there is already a solution in place, but it is not legal to enable it by default until the patents expire. You are trying to deflect from the real problem here, which is microsoft (and apple too until 2010). No one is making excuses, if you want to blame someone for Freetype having font rendering which is not as good as it could be, then it is directly microsoft's fault.
>You can override these limitations by activating option FT_CONFIG_OPTION_SUBPIXEL_RENDERING in FreeType's ftoption.h configuration file, but you should do that at your own risk.
Do they mean at your own LEGAL risk?
Things like this is what makes me miss old Ubuntu so much, it's the only Linux distro with excellent font rendering OOTB; new releases that forgoes Unity looks as meh as the other distros.
No, FreeType is so shit a mere font rendering engine can overload your CPU and blow up your computer.
Yes.
i think op needs to enable full hinting in his DE's settings. This what gets you those sharp, and horribly deformed fonts.
Linux is a kernel. It does not render fonts.
Looks pretty good to me fampai
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
`1234567890~!@#$%^&*()_+-=[]\;',./{}|:"?
>quck
qek
meant for
I am a retard
I trolled many font autist that couldn't identify OS by font rendering but still opinionated about 'muh superior font rendering' retard like you. This is the plain truth.
Ubuntu does it right.
this is on win7
look at and weep with your blurry shit.
Dark theme looks like ass how do you guys use this?
/thread
>I am a retard
yes, yes you are.
Absolutely disgusting kerning. Linuxfags confirmed for having no taste.
>
>>I am a retard
>yes, yes you are.
And judging from this thread I'm not alone
you did not even read the thread properly retard.
Ubuntu fonts are simply superior to it's competition Windows (cleartype is broken and MS doesn't give a shit) and MacOS (hurr bold fonts are good font rendering durr)
Sorry poojeets and soys, I work full time in front of a screen and I wouldn't tolerate working with Windows for this very reason.
I honestly dont understand how can you say that its bad. Wikipedia is perfectly readable on 60% zoom.
looks fine to me
>he still believes anything the eternal POO says
Who are you quoting? And who is the 'eternal POO'? Also what did he say?
jumped
Looks like blurry dogshit. You are probably using infantality.
You don't know any better that's all.
Put my image in full screen and look at how crisp it looks and how blurry and eye straining your look in comparison.
Yours still looks like shit.
you both use the same subpixeling, only difference is that your font is thicker
open it in fullscreen in its own tab before you compare ...
Oh, my bad.
Yeah it doesn't look as bad but it still isn't as good as mine.
keep in mind it is after compression so it'll never be perfect.
Works for me.
(FreeType, slight hint, lcd-light filter)
[Fonts are] the #1 reason why Linux hasn’t seen any significant adoption on the desktop/laptop yet. Robert Scoble
looks blurry as shit
Paзpeшитe пpepвaть Bac. To, чтo вы нaзывaeтe Linux - пo фaктy GNU/Linux, или кaк я нeдaвнo нaчaл нaзывaть, GNU+Linux. Linux - этo нe oпepaциoннaя cиcтeмa, a cкopee cвoбoдный кoмпoнeнт cиcтeмы GNU, кoтopaя cocтoит из GNU Corelibs, кoнcoльных yтилит и дpyгих кpитичecких кoмпoнeнтoв, кoтopыe дeлaют GNU oпepaциoннoй cиcтeмoй coглacнo POSIX.
Бoльшинcтвo пoльзoвaтeлeй иcпoльзyют мoдифициpoвaннyю cиcтeмy GNU нe ocoзнoвaя этoгo. Mнoгиe нaзывaют этo "Linux", пoтoмy чтo нe ocзнaют чтo этo GNU, paзpaбoтaннaя paзpaбoтчикaми GNU. Дa, тaм ecть Linux, нo этo вceгo лишь чacть тoгo, чтo oни иcпoльзyют.
Linux этo ядpo, пpoгpaммa, кoтopaя pacпpeдeляeт pecypcы кoмпьютepa мeждy дpyгими пpoгpaммaми. Ядpo - вaжнaя чacть OC, нo ядpo - этo нe OC, oнo мoжeт фyнкциoниpoвaть тoлькo в OC. Linux oбычнo иcпoльзyют c кoмпoнeнтaми cиcтeмы GNU, пo cyти GNU c дoбaвлeным ядpoм Linux, кopoчe, GNU/Linux. A вce, чтo нaзывaeтcя "Linux" - этo пo-фaктy диcтpбьютивы Linux.
Better or worse?
>there is an implementation of subpixel rendering included, but it is not enabled by default on any distro because they would get sued.
Wait, I thought Ubuntu had that enabled by default, I'm pretty sure you can choose between that and grey scale in the anti-aliasing option in font settings, am I wrong?
I see little difference between mine and yours, but that may be because I have an amva panel and fonts are really sharper and darker compared to most monitors I had to deal with. Still we would have to force identical fonts in the browser because if you look closely some letters are different, mainly italics. Cya tommorow
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNOME OS. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNOME system made useful by the GNOME corelibs, GNOME Shell, and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNOME system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNOME which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNOME OS, developed by The GNOME Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNOME operating system: the whole system is basically GNOME with Linux added, or GNOME OS. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNOME OS.
macos is blurry sludge but okay-ish
winders is various degrees of rainbow-colored saw blade
linux is all in all ok, but distros tend to come with shitty looking fonts
t. graphic designer who works on winders
Stock Fedora.
disabling cleartype on 4K on windows is beautiful, best font experience IMO. i wish linux would step up its font game, one of the worst parts of the desktop experience. not sure if its the rendering or the fonts themselves though.
Are you fucking high?
Linux is several orders of magnitude better at font rendering than Windows. This becomes obvious with moonrunes.
I didn't fix it because I don't give a rats ass about font rendering or fonts in general. There's hardly a topic more mind numbing boring.
The fuck is this, OP?
You don't even give an example of Linux in your post. And now everyone is proving you wrong.
I wonder how much of a sperg fit Jow Forumsnumales threw about Wikipedia just calling it Linux.
You won't convince him. Anyone who has taken the Redmond Pill is immune to reality.
>[Fonts are] the #1 reason why Linux hasn’t seen any significant adoption on the desktop/laptop yet. Robert Scoble
An incel muslim cuck that has an autist son, is he >our guy?
Yes, patent suits can be filed against users (this has happened quite a lot in the past back when certain word processor features were patented a decade ago).
Well, to be fair, Ubuntu has a history of not caring about getting sued (they ship ZFS).
Android does it right
>Linux font rendering suck.
What about smart phones?
it's because almost no one distributes fontconfig rules even tho:
fonts are available
freetype is alright