Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

Anders · 2008-06-23 22:27:01

Screenshots: http://andersman.org/~anders/fonts/

I have always had issues with ugly fonts in Linux, and I have absolutely no idea why. I posted a thread about it on Reddit, which you can see here: http://www.reddit.com/info/6on53/comments/

I'm copying the post I posted there:

I use Arch Linux with freetype2 2.3.6, Microsoft fonts. For some reason some of these fonts look weird, even though Arch Linux developers enable the patented bytecode stuff when building. I really don't know what to do, and it's pretty annoying.
The first terminal screenshot isn't so bad, but I think the Windows text looks better. The second is with Consolas, and that looks really awful.

Any help would be GREATLY appreciated, thanks! I tried searching these forums but I didn't really find anything, but then again I didn't really try so hard.

heleos · 2008-06-23 22:31:11

Did you also check the wiki?

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Xor … figuration

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Fonts

Anders · 2008-06-23 22:42:48

Yeah, but it was quite some time ago. Perhaps there's something new there now, I will check. Thanks.

Anders · 2008-06-23 22:56:21

I installed the -cleartype packages, however while things are a bit smoother, it doesn't actually resolve any of the issues I had (especially with Consolas).

freakcode · 2008-06-24 01:30:28

First, Microsoft fonts will never look exactly like they look on Windows. Freetype is very different from Window's Cleartype, and Windows fonts are made to use with that rendering engine.

Aside that... check your DPI, aliasing, and hinting options. I guess Windows fonts will look nice at 74DPI or 98DPI. Then, play around with aliasing and hinting. Those settings affect font quality *a lot*. If you use Gnome, those can be easily adjusted on the Appearance panel.

Anders · 2008-06-24 01:49:43

Did all of that, but this isn't about cleartype. This is about the shape of the glyphs being wrong.

zenj · 2008-06-24 10:42:09

This font issue put me off using linux for quite some time, but eventually found a solution that suited me. Just follow the instructions on the following website www.sharpfonts.com

Wittfella · 2008-06-24 11:08:05

Hello, I had the same problem, tried all the microsoft, bitstream fonts etc and fooled around with the sub-pixel rendering blah blah but they still always looked messed up.

I finally found that the DPI setting was the key. As soon as I explicitly set the DPI in xorg.conf all the fonts began to look good. Using 72 or 96 or whatever, as long as its set the fonts look like they're supposed to.

I set the DPI in the monitor section of xorg.conf with (for example):

DisplaySize       269    202

which is 96 dpi for 1024x768 resolution (i think...can't remember). The wiki explains how to calc the numbers for whatever resolution/dpi you want.

Cheers,
Wittfella

brebs · 2008-06-24 12:46:38

It's rather easier to use:

Option "DPI" "96 x 96"

There's tons of info on fonts available.

Wittfella · 2008-06-27 10:56:31

brebs wrote:

It's rather easier to use: Option "DPI" "96 x 96"

I did try this, but for some reason it did not work for me. I also tried using

startx --dpi 96

which I saw mentioned everywhere, but it also did nothing. The DisplaySize method was the only thing that seemed to actually changed the DPI.

Anders · 2008-06-27 11:21:12

Well I've assumed for a long time that just changing the GNOME DPI setting would pretty much do the same thing.

brebs · 2008-06-27 11:21:53

Then take a look at /var/log/Xorg.0.log

klixon · 2008-06-27 11:31:52

Wittfella wrote:

brebs wrote:
It's rather easier to use: Option "DPI" "96 x 96"
I did try this, but for some reason it did not work for me. I also tried using
startx --dpi 96
which I saw mentioned everywhere, but it also did nothing. The DisplaySize method was the only thing that seemed to actually changed the DPI.

i think that should be

 startx -- -dpi 96

Wittfella · 2008-06-27 11:49:42

Thanks klixon, works a treat

Hohoho · 2008-06-27 11:59:52

I found that fonts look good with BCI disabled, using the native autohinter, except for bold fonts.
So I have this in my ~/.fonts.conf

    <!-- Autohinting-->
    <match target="font" >
        <edit mode="assign" name="autohint" >
            <bool>true</bool>
        </edit>
    </match>

    <!-- Autohinting for bold fonts-->
    <match target="font" >
        <test compare="more" name="weight" >
            <const>medium</const>
        </test>
        <edit mode="assign" name="autohint" >
            <bool>false</bool>
        </edit>
    </match>

Makes dark text on light background look clean and bright text on dark background look good too (using Tahoma for example).
For terminals I mainly use terminus, which is a bitmap font, so it ain't anti-aliased.

Anders · 2008-06-27 13:06:17

I will try that, thanks.

Anders · 2008-06-29 08:04:55

Just wanted to add that setting the DPI in xorg.conf isn't enough, everything still looks the same. I used the NVIDIA way of doing it (Option "DPI" "96 x 96").

It doesn't really matter, but I'd really like to use Consolas. But it's way too bold right now, not very nice on the eyes. Looks 100 times better in Windows. Which isn't very surprising.

esters · 2008-06-29 08:26:05

http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=46523

This solved the issues I had on my pc (Currently I'm using -ubuntu packages from archlinuxfr repository)

Last edited by esters (2008-06-29 10:23:23)

Arch Linux

#1 2008-06-23 22:27:01

Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#2 2008-06-23 22:31:11

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#3 2008-06-23 22:42:48

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#4 2008-06-23 22:56:21

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#5 2008-06-24 01:30:28

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#6 2008-06-24 01:49:43

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#7 2008-06-24 10:42:09

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#8 2008-06-24 11:08:05

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#9 2008-06-24 12:46:38

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#10 2008-06-27 10:56:31

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#11 2008-06-27 11:21:12

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#12 2008-06-27 11:21:53

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#13 2008-06-27 11:31:52

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#14 2008-06-27 11:49:42

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#15 2008-06-27 11:59:52

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#16 2008-06-27 13:06:17

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#17 2008-06-29 08:04:55

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

#18 2008-06-29 08:26:05

Re: Ugly Microsoft fonts, why?

Board footer