The deeper reasons
June 13, 2007The (very buggy) beta release of Safari on Windows has ignited a very interesting discussion: what font renderer does a better job, Microsoft’s ClearType or the method Apple uses?
The deeper reasons as put forward by Joel Spolsky put aside, I think there may simply be a more simple explanation for why the fonts are as they are on both platforms: the overall look. Microsoft tends to use crisper and sharper icons and widgets, with clear lines, whereas Apple uses softer lines, fuzziness, and actual textures.
In the Microsoft design, sharper looking fonts simply fit better, and the same goes for fuzzier fonts having a better place in OS X. While I like OS X’s fonts when using OS X, they look extremely crappy and out of place on my Vista box (when running Safari). I’m sure the same would be the case for Windows’ fonts on OS X.
Quick question, I’m using a standard Ubuntu install with the Gnome desktop. My font rendering is set up with the “Best Shapes” option. Which OS is it equivalent to? I haven’t seen any mention of it’s rendering method.
Comment by John S. — June 14, 2007 @ 12:17 am