Sorry for this (Was: Re: [OT] Why does X need so much CPU power?)
I'm really sorry for having started this one. I'll try to keep out of this
discussion after this one and maybe we can let it die in peace ;-)
On Tuesday 02 September 2003 22:15, Erik Steffl wrote:
> > - QT seems to have some serious issues (google for "kde konsole fonts").
>
> that's possible but is it X problem? I checked few email that google
> found, seems like kde bug. not a reason to throw X out.
What I found was that QT has problems with anything but a screen resolution of
100DPI (the DPI setting is one thing I really like about the whole thing).
> > - Mozilla looks like something unspeakable unless you get it running
> > with FreeType. And then there's a lot of guesswork to do with the min,
> > max and gain settings until it's looking good. At least it looks better
> > than anything else I've seen so far.
>
> on solaris the netscape looked ugly. on debian mozilla looks great.
>
> BTW it's IE (or is it windows?) that has very strange font settings
> and then lot of stuff is too small in mozilla (netscape). don't remember
> the issue. but yes, you can set the minimum size of fonts to get rid of
> this fonts-too-small problem. but again, this is not an X issue but
> application issue and it's being sorted out.
The minimum font size was not what I'm talking about. You can fine-tune
antialiasing in Mozilla with several parameters per font class to produce
better results for your personal taste and system. With the default settings,
some parts of characters were antialiased to almost white pixels so that it
was all very hard to read.
> > There is no central font management. For some time now, X seems to
> > support
>
> what do you mean? you have font server (standalone or just use X
> server). how much more central can you get? BTW AFAIK there's no way to
> have standalone fontserver for windows.
>
> > truetype fonts and antialiasing, but for some strange reason nobody
> > either knows how or wants to use it.
>
> I've been using true type fonts since forever, it got much simpler over
> time (it used to be that you had to install special font server, now
> it's more or less out of the box)
If every application would use the font server, there would be no problem for
me to get enraged about. It's just the fact that you have a configuration for
the fontserver which does pretty much anything that needs to be done. Then
along comes QT and wants to be told (1) whether to use the font server or not
(2) antialias or not (3) what font sizes to exclude from antialiasing (4)
what to do about hinting. 2-4 can be configured at font server level, so why
bother at all (apart from per-user settings which may or may not be
implemented in the FS)?!? I don't know about GTK, but I don't think there's
much difference. The big killer application is Mozilla which then wants to
use its own stuff via FreeType2 and - at least at the time I set it up -
*needs a separate font index to do so*.
Now you could argue that this is done to increase portability, but then it
would just show the authors' combined reluctance to stick their heads
together and write an adapter layer.
--
Got Backup?
Reply to: