+Steve B Subscriber² Posted July 30, 2015 Subscriber² Share Posted July 30, 2015 I upgraded my windows PC (I normally use Mac) to Windows 10. On the desktop and start menu, the font looks normal. However, once you get into the settings screen and such, the font rendering is HORRIBLE. Extremely rough edges, even with ClearType tweaked. I'm a little taken aback by how bad it looks. Does anyone know what the deal is with that? I mean, it looks like someone designed it without a steady hand. I'm a little confused. Any input is appreciated. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+virtorio MVC Posted July 30, 2015 MVC Share Posted July 30, 2015 I don't know what font smoothing technique they're using in universal apps, but it looks awful (to me) on any non Hi-DPI monitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo1911 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 People have complained about it to Microsoft since Windows 8.0 betas. But does Microsoft even listen to our feedback on little things? I absolutely hate the way text looks on Windows Modern crapified apps or on any of those places which use Modern APIs like settings app. The same text looks so smooth on OS X. I don't know how Apple manages it but Microsoft is too snobby to acknowledge. The Cupcake Generator and Torolol 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
remixedcat Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Wish they kept the font face selection tool they had in windows 7. They scrapped it in 8 and it's a terrible idea segoeui looks horrible on both my TVs so I have to use a 3rd party hack to change to candara or actor font becuase its the font that renders the best on my TVs. Did MS even test it on more then just 1080P displays and not 4K or 720P displays? On my TCL Roku TV segoe looks awful. I have an RCA LCD TV and the default font is unreadable when it's lower than size 20! While I switch to candara or cambria and I can easily read em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted July 30, 2015 Veteran Share Posted July 30, 2015 I don't know what font smoothing technique they're using in universal apps, but it looks awful (to me) on any non Hi-DPI monitor. Greyscale, which is fairly normal. What's changed is the hinting, they're doing it correctly now, and it's radically different to the older broken way they used to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo1911 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Greyscale, which is fairly normal. What's changed is the hinting, they're doing it correctly now, and it's radically different to the older broken way they used to do it. They may be doing it radically different. They may also be doing it correctly. But it still looks horribly aliased or jagged on non 4K monitors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted July 30, 2015 Veteran Share Posted July 30, 2015 Yeah, that's the downside of it. Upside of course is that it allows for completely free form scaling to any resolution/density, something the old rendering method simply can't do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
margrave Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 What I find annoying is you can't change the font. You can change size, bold, or italic, but they've removed the ability to change what the system font is set to! I love customization. This is just annoying, and I can't see a reason why they removed it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie33 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I thought it was just my laptop looking bad....I don't know why 10 looks so much worse than 8.1; I never had a problem with the fonts in 8.1. I've even updated my video drivers to the latest from Intel and Nvidia, but that made no difference whatsoever. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Steve B Subscriber² Posted July 30, 2015 Author Subscriber² Share Posted July 30, 2015 Wish they kept the font face selection tool they had in windows 7. They scrapped it in 8 and it's a terrible idea segoeui looks horrible on both my TVs so I have to use a 3rd party hack to change to candara or actor font becuase its the font that renders the best on my TVs. Did MS even test it on more then just 1080P displays and not 4K or 720P displays? On my TCL Roku TV segoe looks awful. I have an RCA LCD TV and the default font is unreadable when it's lower than size 20! While I switch to candara or cambria and I can easily read em. What hack did you use? I'm interested in any possible way to change that damned font. I'm mindblown that Microsoft thought this would be ok. Not everyone has a 4K monitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Steve B Subscriber² Posted July 30, 2015 Author Subscriber² Share Posted July 30, 2015 Is that font designed for 4K monitors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
remixedcat Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 it's called displayset and here's a direct download link to the zip file: http://agnxnetworks.net/c2/displayset.zip just extract and run no need for installation FiB3R 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnet Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 For me its the opposite. I like the smooth clear font of the modern apps. The font in the start menu looks bad and outdated in comparison. I'm not seeing any rough edges in the settings app. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted August 1, 2015 Veteran Share Posted August 1, 2015 Is that font designed for 4K monitors? No, it's not designed for any one use, that's partly the issue. It was only ever needed because the old Windows font rendering API couldn't handle proper outline rendering or scaling, new ones don't have those limitations so it's a single font for screen and print output. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Steve B Subscriber² Posted August 2, 2015 Author Subscriber² Share Posted August 2, 2015 I'm just trying to figure out the best way to make the fonts in the modern ui apps look smooth. It's horrid. I'm wondering if using Stardocks's WindowsBlinds would be of any help by allowing me to change the theme in some way and change the font. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdie Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 I'm just trying to figure out the best way to make the fonts in the modern ui apps look smooth. It's horrid. I'm wondering if using Stardocks's WindowsBlinds would be of any help by allowing me to change the theme in some way and change the font. Currently there's no way to fix this because Win32 apps use ClearType v2 which was developed for normal TFT displays, while Metro apps use grayish MacOS like antialiasing meant for high DPI screens. People have been asking to enable ClearType in modern apps for years, but Microsoft doesn't give a flying ####. There are two ways out of this: 1) hoping that Microsoft will come to its senses and brings back Cleartype in Windows 11, or 2) you can fix this right now by buying a 4K monitor under 32". Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlantico Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 (edited) Currently there's no way to fix this because Win32 apps use ClearType v2 which was developed for normal TFT displays, while Metro apps use grayish MacOS like antialiasing meant for high DPI screens. People have been asking to enable ClearType in modern apps for years, but Microsoft doesn't give a flying ####. There are two ways out of this: 1) hoping that Microsoft will come to its senses and brings back Cleartype in Windows 11, or 2) you can fix this right now by buying a 4K monitor under 32". Cheers! No. Modern apps don't use anything like the Mac font rendering. If only. ClearType is complete crap and I've long since replaced it with MacType, which takes care of all Win32 apps, but Modern apps have the most pathetic aliasing I have ever seen. In fact, I don't see any aliasing, just jaggies. This is on a 1440p monitor in Windows 10. ClearType is and was always ugly and quite pathetic, but I prefer even that over whatever crap they're using in Modern apps. Good grief. Actual Mac anti-aliasing works great both on normal DPI and high DPI screens. Windows Modern AA just doesn't work at all and I roll my eyes at people who defend it and claim it is "working", when it really isn't. Example (enlarge to see details) > Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdie Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Actual MacOS fonts antialiasing is the worst thing I've ever seen in my life so I kinda don't understand what you're talking about. 99% of people around me who've seen MacOS screenshots are appalled by its fonts rendering. I will take ClearType v1/v2 (XP/Windows Vista and above) any time of the day. If you think this blurry grayish ### (MacOS X 10.10, very much like in Modern Windows apps) is better than this neat and tidy text (Windows 8 with ClearType v2), then I simply have no further questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pong Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 The fonts in Windows have always been one of it's worst qualities in my opinion - although I didn't mind them after a bit of tweaking with the ClearType Tuner, so I'm sad to see they're actually worse in 10. I really wish that Microsoft would go for something like the default rendering in Gnome on Linux, it's somewhere between OS X and Windows and I think it hits the nail on the head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adrynalyne Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 The fonts in Windows have always been one of it's worst qualities in my opinion - although I didn't mind them after a bit of tweaking with the ClearType Tuner, so I'm sad to see they're actually worse in 10. I really wish that Microsoft would go for something like the default rendering in Gnome on Linux, it's somewhere between OS X and Windows and I think it hits the nail on the head. See, to me that looks terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 I think it looks fine, personally. One of the nice things about GNOME is you can set the levels, too: subpixel or RGB, the hinting level, etc. I do think OS X has the best font rendering, but I've never been that bothered by Windows, either. Whether ClearType or w/e 10 is using, it's always looked fine to me. Although it is a bit on the thin side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adrynalyne Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) No. Modern apps don't use anything like the Mac font rendering. If only. ClearType is complete crap and I've long since replaced it with MacType, which takes care of all Win32 apps, but Modern apps have the most pathetic aliasing I have ever seen. In fact, I don't see any aliasing, just jaggies. This is on a 1440p monitor in Windows 10. ClearType is and was always ugly and quite pathetic, but I prefer even that over whatever crap they're using in Modern apps. Good grief. Actual Mac anti-aliasing works great both on normal DPI and high DPI screens. Windows Modern AA just doesn't work at all and I roll my eyes at people who defend it and claim it is "working", when it really isn't. Example (enlarge to see details) > Mine definitely does not look as bad as yours (imo). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted August 3, 2015 Veteran Share Posted August 3, 2015 Currently there's no way to fix this because Win32 apps use ClearType v2 which was developed for normal TFT displays, while Metro apps use grayish MacOS like antialiasing meant for high DPI screens. People have been asking to enable ClearType in modern apps for years, but Microsoft doesn't give a flying ####. There are two ways out of this: 1) hoping that Microsoft will come to its senses and brings back Cleartype in Windows 11, or 2) you can fix this right now by buying a 4K monitor under 32". Cheers! Metro apps use greyscale because they're originally designed for tablets that offered screen rotation, and ClearType only works well with that in specific circumstances (Since it follows the sub pixel order) Terminology is being mixed up here, both Windows and OS X use sub-pixel AA (MS just calls that ClearType), what differs is the hinting and "sub-pixel positioning". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torolol Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 according to Steve Gibon, Clear Type (sub-pixel thingy) are actually an ancient technology. https://www.grc.com/ctwho.htm The Distant Origins of Sub-Pixel Font Rendering Microsoft's November 1998 Comdex announcement of it's "breakthrough" new display technology, dubbed 'ClearType' was regarded by many as the most important event of the show. I COMPLETELY AGREE that incorporating this technology into Microsoft's Windows operating environments will be an absolute win for its LCD display panel users. But Microsoft was apparently unaware that twenty-two years ago Apple II programmers were using these techniques — rooted in Apple technology patents — to improve the effective resolution of their video displays. [...] Personal Computing History: Revisited or Revisionist? I can well understand Microsoft's excitement over their apparently independent rediscovery of these techniques, but we should not lose sight of the fact that this is very well explored technological territory. Microsoft must have forgotten that twenty-two years ago the famous Apple II personal computer employed and patented exactly this sort of solution for its high-resolution graphics display. Their sub-pixel addressing was used to double the effective horizontal resolution of the Apple II video display. The Apple II's highest resolution mode was 280 pixels horizontally by 192 vertically. However, this was really the 'sub-pixel' resolution. (Similar to the example above where an 800 pixel wide LCD is really 2400 sub-pixels wide.) The Apple II's display generated two sub-pixels per pixel. On an LCD display every third sub-pixel is Red, Green, or Blue and all three must be turned on to get white. On the Apple II, every other sub-pixel was green or purple and they both needed to be turned on in order to get white. If sub-pixel technology had not been in common use on the Apple II, a diagonal white line could only have been drawn using 'whole' white pixels composed of paired green and purple sub-pixels. (As shown here.) But thanks to Apple's built-in sub-pixel technology, white pixels were often composed from each half of adjacent whole pixels to yield a much smoother result.As we saw above, this is exactly what today's sub-pixel rendering technology achieves with modern-day LCD panels. We know that Microsoft understood this back then, since page 170 of their own "Microsoft BASIC Interpreter Reference Manual", copyright 1980, states: Note that because of the way in which home TV's work, a high resolution dot plotted with HCOLOR=3 (white) or HCOLOR=7 (white) will be white only if both (x,y) and (x+1,y) are plotted. If only (x,y) is plotted, the dot will be blue when x is even and green when x is odd. Click here to see the actual page. Microsoft made a typo in their manual, since they meant 'purple' rather than 'blue'. But they are clearly saying that adjacent sub-pixels must be turned on in order to get white, otherwise a color will result. This is exactly the case for LCD panels where white pixels are composed of all three (R-G-B) sub-pixels. The Apple II utilized two (Green/Purple) sub-pixels as shown above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yusuf M. Veteran Posted August 3, 2015 Veteran Share Posted August 3, 2015 Actual MacOS fonts antialiasing is the worst thing I've ever seen in my life so I kinda don't understand what you're talking about. 99% of people around me who've seen MacOS screenshots are appalled by its fonts rendering. I will take ClearType v1/v2 (XP/Windows Vista and above) any time of the day. If you think this blurry grayish ### (MacOS X 10.10, very much like in Modern Windows apps) is better than this neat and tidy text (Windows 8 with ClearType v2), then I simply have no further questions. And that's your opinion. You can't say that one is objectively better than the other. It's down to preference. Personally, I think text looks a little better in Mac OS X but it strains my eyes more than text in Windows. For that reason, I prefer ClearType. Mine definitely does not look as bad as yours (imo). It looks better. What resolution are you using? I'm guessing 2560x1440. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts