How is it that Mint in 2025 has worse font rendering than Windows from a quarter of a century ago?

Are you talking about the chromatic aberration on Cinnamon's font?

>>105845327
That, plus when viewing both at 100% the Windows side just looks way crisper and cleaner, whereas Mint looks like a blurry mess.

>>105845348
Mine has those weird artifacts around fonts, but no blurriness, even when zoomed in several times. Are you sure your blurriness doesn't come from the image interpolation applied when you saved it?

>>105845315 (OP)
you mean better font rendering. left actually looks like how the font designer intended and windows in 2025 still makes every font look like a bitmap version of itself

Oh boy, another round of anon doesn't know about subpixel rendering on LCD screens.

>>105845315 (OP)
because clem is a codelet and cant maintain cinnamon
>forks gnome from 2011
>never backports fixes
>its 2025
>gnome fixed this
>clem will fix it in 20 years

>>105845623
>it's actually the hardware fault

>>105845623
i really dont even know why i visit this board

>>105845315 (OP)
because it has worse everything, save for firefox compatibility

>>105845623
Maybe. I pulled the Cinnamon screencap from the Linux Mint website. It's a 1920x1200 image. I figure they know what they're doing.

The Windows image is from some random Wikia page.

>>105845396
I got it from the official website.
https://www.linuxmint.com/pictures/screenshots/xia/cinnamon.png

>>105845918
You'd think the subpixel rendering would operate at a layer below what their screencap tool does.

>>105845856
I feel like this is the answer, but what is the fix to backport for this?

just disable subpixel rendering lole

>>105845315 (OP)
Mint is fucking garbage. That much should be obvious from just its logo and color scheme. It's tasteless.

>>105845315 (OP)
>ubuntu fonts.

>>105845623
>>105846120
Windows has subpixel rendering. And yet it doesn't have this problem.

>>105846231
this image has no subpixel rendering you fat retard

>>105846309
Exactly. Because subpixel rendering isn't captured in a fucking screenshot. Thus disproving everyone in this thread trying to claim Mint fonts look like that because of subpixel rendering lol

>>105845315 (OP)
Because old fonts were bitmap fonts you dumbass.

>>105846322
no you fucking idiot you just screenshot an area where subpixel rendering is not involved and there are a few in windows 11, i know this because before i have used windows since the xp days and windows xp introduced cleartype (usually disabled), which by default had subpixel rendering, your screenshot depicts an area with monochrome font rendering

>105845315
>105845327
>105845348
>105845396
>105845415
>105845623
>105845856
>105845918
>105845923
>105845924
>105845931
>105845947
>105846120
>105846157
>105846163
>105846231
>105846309
>105846322
>105846606
>105846652
>subhuman freetard nigger trash NPCs still shit up the board feeding the word for word spambot copy pasta anti-linux troll threads 24/7/365
do the entire linux community a favor and FUCKING KILL YOURSELF
we don't want subhuman nigger trash like you using linux
you are not freechads like us, you are brain dead subhuman freetard nigger trash
you are beneath literal actual fucking niggers in intelligence
the entire linux community would benefit from YOU ENDING YOUR WORTHLESS FUCKING BRAINDEAD NPC LIFE
YOU ARE AN EMBARASSMENT TO THE ENTIRETY OF LINUX
KILL YOURSELF YOU SUBHUMAN FREETARD NIGGER SACK OF SHIT
WE DONT WANT YOU BRAINDEAD SUBHUMAN NIGGERS ON LINUX

>>105846606
and thats where you are wrong, even at the time there were vector fonts, but computers were mega retarded back then so they had to cripple font rendering massively

Whatever Windows does here >>105846231
Linux should do here >>105845396

>>105846606
Nice try. Windows 2000 used Tahoma font for Windows Explorer, which was a TrueType font.

>>105846652
Another nice try. Subpixel calculations happen before the screenshot tool captures the screenshot. Only collapsed pixel values are captured in the screenshot.

>>105846606
Verdana and Tahoma weren’t pixel fonts
They were TrueType fonts that were manually hinted to get the pixels come out exactly right at a bunch of popular small point sizes
Back in 2000 you could download Tahoma and Verdana freely as part of Microsoft’s web font pack but some of the TrueType hinting algorithms were patent-encumbered so Verdana would look like ass on Linux unless you had a way to enable the patent-encumbered algorithms with like a Gentoo USE flag or whatever

>>105846661
cool story bro

ITT: Minty-fresh copium

>>105846693
>"but nomad you stole this from a desktop thread"
i am the guy from the desktop thread

>>105846676
I mean touche I guess but that point still stands that the font in OP's comparison is a bitmap font.

>>105846710
It's literally Tahoma (TTF)

>>105846710
thats where >>105846721 is right and where i make my point, whatever windows operating system (can't really tell a difference between windows me and 2000) this is is using a vector font that is rendered with a massively crippled renderer
in fact, you can cripple your font renderer right now in any system of your choice, in linux it involves max hinting and no anti-aliasing and on windows all it takes is disabling cleartype

>>105846750
speaking of hinting, i think this might be why >>105845396 has artifacts, anon might need to fuck around with some hinting settings

>>105846750
So a massively crippled Windows 2000 somehow still looks better than 2025 Mint?

>105845315
>105845327
>105845348
>105845396
>105845415
>105845623
>105845856
>105845918
>105845923
>105845924
>105845931
>105845947
>105846120
>105846157
>105846163
>105846231
>105846309
>105846322
>105846606
>105846652
>105846661
>105846676
>105846685
>105846686
>105846690
>105846693
>105846694
>105846707
>105846710
>105846721
>105846750
>105846789
>105846790
>subhuman freetard nigger trash NPCs still shit up the board feeding the word for word spambot copy pasta anti-linux troll threads 24/7/365
do the entire linux community a favor and FUCKING KILL YOURSELF
we don't want subhuman nigger trash like you using linux
you are not freechads like us, you are brain dead subhuman freetard nigger trash
you are beneath literal actual fucking niggers in intelligence
the entire linux community would benefit from YOU ENDING YOUR WORTHLESS FUCKING BRAINDEAD NPC LIFE
YOU ARE AN EMBARASSMENT TO THE ENTIRETY OF LINUX
KILL YOURSELF YOU SUBHUMAN FREETARD NIGGER SACK OF SHIT
WE DONT WANT YOU BRAINDEAD SUBHUMAN NIGGERS ON LINUX

>>105846790
i say it depends on everything, the font, if it is italic, bold or both, the size of the font, the hinting, et cetera

>>105846661
>>105846811
>noooo, you can't just discuss how mint font rendering sucks balls!

>>105846819
dont bother, dude seems like a bot

>105846815
>105846819
>105846823
KILL YOURSELF YOU SUBHUMAN FREETARD NIGGER SACK OF SHIT
WE DONT WANT YOU BRAINDEAD SUBHUMAN NIGGERS ON LINUX

>>105846815
What are you even talking about? We're looking at the default font for the default GUI shell of each OS, not some random edge case.

>>105846827
>WE
Schizo confirmed, lol
Unironically take your meds

>>105845315 (OP)
Works on my machine

>>105846838
It's literally an official screenshot from the Linux Mint website, lol
We're hitting levels of copium that shouldn't even be possible

>105846850
>105846838
>105846833
KILL YOURSELF YOU SUBHUMAN FREETARD NIGGER SACK OF SHIT
WE DONT WANT YOU BRAINDEAD SUBHUMAN NIGGERS ON LINUX

>>105846838
https://www.linuxmint.com/pictures/screenshots/xia/cinnamon.png

>>105846833
i personally think its a matter of preference, to one person the former looks good, the other doesnt, as is with the latter

>>105845315 (OP)
Microsoft hired a lot of type specialists and spent a lot on good font rendering. I tend to find that FreeType renders with thicker stems and hasn't got particularly good clarity (I forget the exact terminology, but essentially you end up with a lot of this 'fringing')

iirc this is GTK3 isn't it? So it's about as good as it gets on Linux sadly, I think it regressed quite badly in GTK4 to have even worse fringing. Font rendering is complex and I suppose this is the natural end result of hobbyist work vs. the big time.

You haven't seen the internet browser font abomination.

>>105845315 (OP)
It's an asinine legal issue.
Microsoft patented the algorithms to calculate font subpixels way back, and it is therefore illegal to have nice fonts on a standard 96 DPI 1080p or lower screens outside of Windows OSes until they expire Mickey Mouse style.
Apple used to use intentionally wrong enough methods to stay compliant, but later declared 4k the minimum resolution to use Macos to get around it. Android and iOS basically did the same.
Linux still lets you use 1080p screens of course, but can only use a small number of incomplete algorithms that patents have expired on by now, otherwise Linux itself would be DMCA'd like certain emulators.
Wait until 2090-2110 or so and if you still have a 1080p screen, you'll be permitted to render fonts properly.

>>105845315 (OP)
Get your eyes checked nigger

>>105845315 (OP)
the winshit has jaggies. wtf is this lame as fuck bait.

>>105845415
Fonts are supposed to be easy to read and not strain your eyes, who gives a fuck about what designer had in mind

>>105846322
> Because subpixel rendering isn't captured in a fucking screenshot
What an absurd assertion, whilst technically possible. The system would need to be specifically designed to implement such a feature, why would anyone go to such trouble.

>weekly "I zoomed into text and it looks pixelated" thread
>>105846966
every browser rolls their own font rendering though?

Everyone ITT is a retarded gorilla nigger.

>>105847023
@grok is this true?