Slashdot Mirror
Anti-Aliased Fonts For GNOME
McVeigh revels in this posting at Gnotices site which reads: "GDKFXT transparently adds anti-aliased font support to GTK+-1.2. Once you have installed it, you can run any (well, nearly any) existing GTK+ binary and see anti-aliased fonts in the GTK widgets. You don't need to recompile GTK+ or your application.'" He adds "I'm running it now -- it it looks great!!"
I never used gmc (or mc, for that matter), I've only tried Nautilus to see how it works, and the same goes for every other filemanager I've tried under Linux. In Linux, I prefer using shellcommands rather that dragn'drop. It's not becuse Linux filemanagers are bad - they aren't.
The weird thing is that under Win or NT, I have little problems with using their filemanager, and under MacOS, I'd feel lost without having directory windows everywhere. When I tried a program that gave me the same interface on Linux, I lost all patience within five minutes.
I think it's something about how you think about your system. I see Linux differently than I see MacOS (or Windows...), so my preferred work habits are different too. I saw the same thing happen with a friend who's a long time Mac developer when he started using Linux. After a while, he went more and more to using a shell instead of a filemanager (though he still mixes those uses after almost a year).
/Janne
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
This isn't meant as a troll but does it greatly increases mem and processor usage so everything runs slowly i had that problem w/ gnome and anti aliasing fonts on a 500mHz w/ 128 ram so what use is it for average users not everyone has a 1.2 athlon w/ 512 ram... yea its good to offer but is it fast???
This must be Thursday, I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
I've seen at least 3 post claiming that for medium resolution fonts (~10..16 pts) AA sucks. Instead of replying to all of them, I'll post this one comment:
AA can, if overdone make medium sized fonts seem blury and hard to read. In the end, this is not a weakness in the idea of AA but in the implementation. For a good implementation of AA check out BeOS, medium sized fonts are (where) only slightly AA:ed, producing smooth but sharp-looking fonts. I belive this is done by using a single grayscale, and using a bias towards b/w. For very pretty but almost completely unreadable AA-fonts, check out MacOS.
Try out fish, the friendly interactive shell.
It's really funny(strange funny), I really like the way anti-aliased fonts look, just so much smoother and make the desktop so very pretty. For years I stared at anti-aliased fonts in windows, then I switched to Linux and didn't have them anymore, which I thought sucked but now I like it better simply because anti-aliased fonts make my eyes hurt. I had no idea what it was before, but, now I know what makes my eyes hurt more than anything while sitting at a computer.
Anyone else dislike anti-aliased fonts for this reason. Granted, some fonts just look absolutely horrible if they're not anti-aliased, but good fonts don't need it.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
Well, just because it's okay for you don't mean its okay for everyone. Some people are just more sensitive to things than others. I think that AA fonts (good implementations, at least) look noticibly better than non-AA ones.
For a great implementation of AA fonts, check out QNX's RtP. The Font Fusion powered Photon has the most god-damn gorgeous fonts in the entire universe. Download RtP just to take an eyeful of the fonts!
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Ahh, you want NeWS. That's been done and was torpedoed by X years ago. It was a PostScript desktop with native PostScript rendering. Major UNIX workstation vendors had it as standard on their desktop, folks like SGI and IBM pushed it but in the end they caved in to the prevailing trend and moved over to X. If X had lost that little war then we'd all have embedded PostScript rendering in EVERYTHING on the desktop. Now you want to wind the clock back. You have to lie in the bed all those old fuddy duddy IT managers made for you. The only way to get even now is to inflict some misery on future generations.
Granted the remote support in X supercedes anything MS has done in the past and is still more flexible than terminal services, but I wasn't talking about that. Also, the remote display support in X is one of its core features, not something that is enabled with a cryptic line in a config file.
/.ers will try really hard not to like it, but I'm just trying to be objective...Does anybody remember how to do that?
I don't think that it has anything to do with the number of people working on the technology. How many people invented Google? The Apple? TCP/IP? HTML? In some situations having a large number of developers is a good thing; writing the large number of device drivers for linux, for example. I don't think it is the same in this case, though.
IBM and HP riding in X? That's quite funny.
I've worked a lot with many versions of Windows, Solaris nee SunOS and Linux. Cutting through the individual display technologies, all I can say is that the fonts in XP look way better than anything I have ever seen before. Every colleague who has seen XP running (including many MacOS designers) have literally dropped their jaw. It's the first thing that they mention when they see the desktop.
Wait and see for yourself. I know the majority of
Invoicing, Time Tracking, Reporting
Can someone *please* come up with a spec for overhauling font management in X? Overhauling X in general? Just steal display PDF from Apple/Adobe?
Xrender is an extension to the X protocol implemented in XFree86 that is resposible for the anti-aliasing in Qt/KDE. It supports Porter/Duff operations for image composition (true alpha blending) and elements found in DisplayPDF (paths, transformations, etc...). A good introduction to Xrender ideas and why the current X protocol was "blundered" are here. I especially like the part:
That pretty much sums up the hackery that is the X Window System.
Define "serious publishing apps".
At university, LaTeX is the serious publishing app in my department. Different strokes for different folks. CMYK support in GIMP is a huge deal. I don't envy any of the poor souls who are navigating all the patents on that.
But since we're speaking of publishing, a much larger problem than "lousy print support (you *can* do CMYK under Linux, but it's all done through ghostscript or gimp-print using printer-specific drivers, thus 'lousy' and not 'no')" is "no decent drawing program". We've got the photoshop, but not the Illustrator or Painter clone. I know about killustrator (or whatever it's called now), sketch, etc. but they are *much* further behind than GIMP. let's not even start on PageMaker and the rest.
X has supported server side extensions for a very long time. XRender is getting more and more usage daily. Why don't you get a better window manager and a newer copy of X?
Anti-aliasing is cheap in hardware these days, unlike when X was designed. But you have to look at the original philosophy of the design: network transparency. But I also question the philosophy that the display server knows better what to anti-alias than the client. How much overhead will client-specific messages about "do not AA this. do AA that" take up? Compared to VNC, X protocol is a speed daemon. I like it that way.
I'm not trying to be a jerk, just pointing out some things.
-l
Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
Where do we start? How do we get our X server's properly configured? How about all the rest of our configuration files, from fstab, to exports, to modules.conf conf.modules, and sysconfig. Everything under /etc has a different format.
... you could even have a daemon watching the files to decide if they've changed for those who go ahead and edit the old format.)
/etc to avoid conflicting with the legacy (excuse the term) application configuration files.
We start by defining a common format, in XML, and use filters to convert between the old and the new formats for these files until the libraries are written to read/write the new formats from the applications that need them (backwards compatible filters would probably be a GOOD THING for a while, just to keep a version of these files around
The need for this is for simplification of configuration. A simple GUI (ala window's regedit) could be written to configure. I'm not suggesting that we should use a flatfile database like the windows registry. Not in the least. Just that every application should store its data in the same format and use the same configuration editor to tweak the guts and that the configuration should be stored in a common location under
Of course, this could be extended to user configuration for programs as well so that all configuration data ends up in one location under $HOME. This sure would be a nice way to backup one's configuration without jumping through hoops.
Am I reinventing the wheel? Is anyone doing working towards doing something like this?
:wq
Nobody controls the meaning of the term free, but nobody would disagree that a license being on the Free Software License list is a sufficient, but not necessary condition of being a Free license.
.sig: Copyright is government-sanctioned theft from the commons of thought. An idea cannot be stolen by being copied, since every user of the idea still has it. An idea can only be stolen by being locked up, so that some people cannot use the idea. Maybe I should change it to be "Intellectual Property Is Theft", but I don't like that term, for obvious reasons. (Also, trademarks, so long as they are not abused, are not theft, since duplicating them can diminish reputation)
Even Microsoft would call the X11-like license which PfaEdit is released under a Free license.
What more could you want?
Now, about my
Become a FSF associate member before the low #s are used