|
|
10.5: Allow a lower text smoothing minimum
Yay! Greasy looking antialiased text that makes me think I need glasses. I need a HIGHER setting, like 200000 point which below nothing is anti-aliased.
Anti-alias vs. bitmap for the millionth time
Is this going to go on forever? Some users want bitmaps, no matter how ugly or how little they look like the type design. I have been telling people for several years to stop looking at the pixels, back up and see the image. This is the future of computer displays. But I guess people don't change.
As soon as I got OS X I was impressed that I could actually read 5-point type on the screen. Sub-pixel antialiasing also helps with sharpness on LCD displays. We've already got double-resolution handheld devices, and the iPhone has the most dpi yet. I suppose people will stop complaining about antialiasing only when our displays are all 200+ dpi and you can't see it any more.
Anti-alias vs. bitmap for the millionth time
Is this going to go on forever? Some users want bitmaps, no matter how ugly or how little they look like the type design. I have been telling people for several years to stop looking at the pixels, back up and see the image. This is the future of computer displays. But I guess people don't change.
Maybe people have different needs for type than you do. I can promise you that when programming or writing text files (LaTex, Python, objective C, etc) anti-aliasing adds to eye strain and slows the readability of the information. Sure, I can back up, so I can no loner see the functions I'm working on, then it's perfectly fine. I have the highest resolution macbook pro, and eyes that still work well. For me, non-aliased is the way to go unless I'm doing page layout, but that's infrequent. I've paid for a crisp LCD display and I want crisp text, not fuzzy grey edges. I've played with levels of anti-aliasing, RGB order, I've played with the disaster that is MS cleartype. It's all universally worse than not having it for my needs. You'll find a lot of people who do not like aliased text, especially when trying to read text in a text editor. I'm all for having the ability to have anti-aliased text, but I'm even more for the ability to turn that crap off. Sheldon
Anti-alias vs. bitmap for the millionth time
Maybe people have different needs for type than you do. I can promise you that when programming or writing text files (LaTex, Python, objective C, etc) anti-aliasing adds to eye strain and slows the readability of the information. That's not my experience at all. I stare at code in my text editor all day, 5 days a week, and I vastly prefer anti-aliasing for all my text. I also run a hi-res 17-inch MacBook Pro and have never felt the edges of the text to be blurry or hard on my eyes. Too the contrary, I find non-anti-aliased text to be weak, anemic, and flimsy, and it strains my eyes. Many of the developers I work with feel the same way. So what does this tell you? You had it right in your first sentence: "people have different needs for type". So you can't categorically say that non-anti-aliased text is universally preferred for working with plain text and code. It's simply not true and offers a rather narrow view of reality.
Anti-alias vs. bitmap for the millionth time
Quite funny that despite whatever you set in there, few system fonts (at least Geeza Pro and Lucida Grande) are still rendered with AA.
10.5: Allow a lower text smoothing minimum
where 'integer' is the point beneath which you do not want text anti-aliased.
I suppose this will only work in Cocoa apps though. |
SearchFrom our Sponsor...Latest Mountain Lion HintsWhat's New:HintsNo new hintsComments last 2 daysLinks last 2 weeksNo recent new linksWhat's New in the Forums?
Hints by TopicNews from Macworld
From Our Sponsors |
|
Copyright © 2014 IDG Consumer & SMB (Privacy Policy) Contact Us All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. |
Visit other IDG sites: |
|
|
|
Created this page in 0.14 seconds |
|