fonts: the big problem on linux
 

hi all,

Please dont understand me badly, i am a great fan and user of Linux. But the great problem on Xorg/XFree, are the quality of the fonts. The definition and anti-aliasing of then its so terrible. When this problem will be fixed?

Check out:

FF+Linux

IE+Win

I've always found this howto to be a good guide to getting better looking fonts. To be honest, I like the fonts on my Slackware boxen better than I like the fonts on XP.

First off, this is primarily a matter of personal preference. Personally, I think the FF+Linux example is much BETTER looking than the IE+Win. The IE+Win has non-antialiased jaggy fonts! Ugly!

Second, and this is what's more important--you have the OPTION of making Linux render fonts in the way that Windows does. You're not alone in prefering the jagged way Windows displays fonts. Tweaking things to make Linux render fonts exactly the way Windows does is possible, and this forum has a huge thread on how to do it: Making non-antialiased fonts look nice

In contrast, in Windows you do NOT have the option to make fonts look anti-aliased the way that Linux/Mac does it. Windows XP has a feature called "Cleartype", which is a sort of limited anti-aliasing, but it only anti-aliases in the horizontal direction and involves some color fringing. It's not really the same thing as anti-aliasing; it's meant for LCD displays using "sub-pixel rendering". In Linux, sub-pixel rendering is an option which can be used in addition to true anti-aliasing.

At any rate, with Linux, you have the choice of rendering fonts either way (as well as having other font rendering options). With Windows, you don't have the choice.

That guide won't help the original poster. From the looks of his FF+Linux screenshot, his Linux setup is already configured with anti-aliased fonts and full hinting out-of-box. He's one of the people who prefers the look of Windows's jagged non-antialiased fonts.

(Personally, I don't understand it. How could anyone prefer that jagged look? But I know he's hardly alone in this.)

You like, but maybe the newbie-win-users dont.I think you do not understand the main problem. Even if i read this entire howto or whatever, i cant succeeded to get 80% of M$ fonts render.This is very distressing, because i believe in Linux and GNU philosophy.

You're right, I don't understand the main point. I thought you wanted help making your fonts look better.

I find that if I run gnome, the fonts generally look cr*p if I dont use a nvidia driver. BBut with KDE when im using thr nv driver or vesa, the fonts looks great. Ok some occasions on the net they dont lookk to good, for example the fonts on LQ look rubbish as they do on the ubuntuforums site.

But on everything else they look great.

You have to do a little fiddling with your xorg and make sure you get the best possible refresh rate. On mine I use the standard Bitstream Vera Sans font for everything and it look perfext, not jaggered at all, they dont look too good small, but whop uses small fonts anyway, I never have anything below size 9.

Forgot to mention if you are using kde theres a small thing you need to add to your xorg.conf file that improves the video size as well as the fonts.

Edit /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 or /etc/X11/Xorg.conf (if you switched to Xorg) Add to the Monitor section: DisplaySize 325 260 if you are using 1280x1024 resolution or DisplaySize 260 195 for 1024x768. For other resolution calculate the numbers using this formula:
Screensize multiplied by 25.4 and divided by 100 (eg: 1024 x 25.4/100 = 260 and 768 x 25.4/100 = 195)

thx for your help...DisplaySize improved a little beat the quality.