Re: Re: Question with regards to componentAlpha

On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 20:49:09 +0400, Vadim Plessky wrote:
>
>So far, Microsoft is a way behind FreeType in terms of quality for rendered 
>text.

This is an exaggeration.

>Non-AA text in Win98/Win2000 is ugly, ClearType-rendered text is blurred and 
>not easy to read.

I'm not sure what you're using for criteria.  FreeType 1.x sucked at the small 
sizes typically used on desktops; FreeType 2.x is at least able to match the 
non-AA text in Windows, but it is not measurably better.  Practically speaking, 
it CAN'T be; there just aren't enough pixels to tweak.

ClearType text is glorious on an LCD, for which it was designed.  It is not a 
net gain for a CRT, and I think that has damaged its reputation.

For AA text, I agree with you.  AA text in Windows is really a mixed bag.  I 
run it on my laptop, but it is not a clear win.  It seems to do a particularly 
bad job with thin verticals.

--
- Tim Roberts, [email protected]
  Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.