In Linux I have different color for the same thing than in Windows
The colors in Windows are much less saturated. Why is that? The fonts are much more crisper. I have installed msfonts in Ubuntu and it's better, but still the Windows fonts are different. Check the screenshot I have done from both systems in the same browser. The colors are much more saturated in all browsers on Linux.
Here is the difference:
Image
And here is the detail (notice the yellow and green instead of green on Linux):
Image - detail
The font on Windows is more crisp and easier to read. The Xubuntu fonts no matter if I use Droid, DeJaVu, Ubuntu etc. is painful for my eyes.
Why do I have different colors for the same things in Windows and Linux? I have tried Chrome and Firefox in both Linux (Xubuntu) and Windows and Windows versions have the colors less saturated and more darker so it's more pleasant to read. Also, the fonts are not so bold and they are much easier to read than in Linux.
I have noticed the same color issue in Ubuntu's Unity too.
If you have a little time and can do a screenshot, please, upload a portion of a Google results search (like mine) so I (and others) can see if you have different colors or the same colors as me. Thank you.
UPDATE:
As I have found out [here] and [here] the problem I am facing is probably the missing font smoothing technique called ClearType by Microsoft on Linux/Apple machines. Linux/Apple use a different approach when rendering fonts. Microsoft use ClearType technology and others use some other antialiasing technology. In short, smaller fonts looks less blurry in Windows and are harder to read on Linux/Mac. Which is useful while using a browser all the day. I simply cannot use a browser on Linux and Mac. My head starts aching and the eyestrain is really bad and my body tells my go back to Windows.
windows xfce unity color-management
asked Nov 8 '15 at 22:58
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 6 hours ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
|
show 11 more comments
The colors in Windows are much less saturated. Why is that? The fonts are much more crisper. I have installed msfonts in Ubuntu and it's better, but still the Windows fonts are different. Check the screenshot I have done from both systems in the same browser. The colors are much more saturated in all browsers on Linux.
Here is the difference:
Image
And here is the detail (notice the yellow and green instead of green on Linux):
Image - detail
The font on Windows is more crisp and easier to read. The Xubuntu fonts no matter if I use Droid, DeJaVu, Ubuntu etc. is painful for my eyes.
Why do I have different colors for the same things in Windows and Linux? I have tried Chrome and Firefox in both Linux (Xubuntu) and Windows and Windows versions have the colors less saturated and more darker so it's more pleasant to read. Also, the fonts are not so bold and they are much easier to read than in Linux.
I have noticed the same color issue in Ubuntu's Unity too.
If you have a little time and can do a screenshot, please, upload a portion of a Google results search (like mine) so I (and others) can see if you have different colors or the same colors as me. Thank you.
UPDATE:
As I have found out [here] and [here] the problem I am facing is probably the missing font smoothing technique called ClearType by Microsoft on Linux/Apple machines. Linux/Apple use a different approach when rendering fonts. Microsoft use ClearType technology and others use some other antialiasing technology. In short, smaller fonts looks less blurry in Windows and are harder to read on Linux/Mac. Which is useful while using a browser all the day. I simply cannot use a browser on Linux and Mac. My head starts aching and the eyestrain is really bad and my body tells my go back to Windows.
windows xfce unity color-management
asked Nov 8 '15 at 22:58
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 6 hours ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
To my eyes, the linux looks way less saturated than the windows. However, that's irrelevant, first of all, the only way you can actually run this test is to create a simple html page, that has the fonts strictly assigned via css, then view those pages. And the only meaningful test there is to determine if apples vs apples are the same, that is, install a standard windows font on linux, then create the test page, then view the page on chrome/firefox in windows / gnu/linux. Right now you are simply making a comment about default fonts used by firefox/chrome, which has almost no meaning.
– Lizardx
Nov 9 '15 at 1:25
@Lizardx Please, post your image of a zoomed in google search result from your DE, so , we can compare the colors. It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium. They all have the same issue in Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:49
this wiki seems to have a lot more to say on the subject than you talk about. maybe theres more to it? i looked at your pictures, and i wasn't terribly impressed with any differences, but if you see it you see it. i just find it hard to believe that Microsoft has pigeon-holed the font-market. seems more like apple's style to me.
– mikeserv
Nov 9 '15 at 10:16
The smaller font's are easier to read with ClearType then the other font rendering techniques. That's why Mac guys like the huge letter spacing and huge and bold fonts ;) I am sure you have noticed that. On the same resolution e.g. 1920x1080, the bigger fonts look better on Mac, LInux. But the smaller fonts (typical scenario while browsing the web) are easier to read (less blurry) on Windows. Microsoft has specifically done this with ClearType so the small fonts are easier to read. And I read a lot of 10px +-2px during the day, so, until I buy a 4K monitor, Linux won't be used for web browsing
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 10:23
or you could change the font size so it doesn't hurt your eyes.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 10:33
|
show 11 more comments
The colors in Windows are much less saturated. Why is that? The fonts are much more crisper. I have installed msfonts in Ubuntu and it's better, but still the Windows fonts are different. Check the screenshot I have done from both systems in the same browser. The colors are much more saturated in all browsers on Linux.
Here is the difference:
Image
And here is the detail (notice the yellow and green instead of green on Linux):
Image - detail
The font on Windows is more crisp and easier to read. The Xubuntu fonts no matter if I use Droid, DeJaVu, Ubuntu etc. is painful for my eyes.
Why do I have different colors for the same things in Windows and Linux? I have tried Chrome and Firefox in both Linux (Xubuntu) and Windows and Windows versions have the colors less saturated and more darker so it's more pleasant to read. Also, the fonts are not so bold and they are much easier to read than in Linux.
I have noticed the same color issue in Ubuntu's Unity too.
If you have a little time and can do a screenshot, please, upload a portion of a Google results search (like mine) so I (and others) can see if you have different colors or the same colors as me. Thank you.
UPDATE:
As I have found out [here] and [here] the problem I am facing is probably the missing font smoothing technique called ClearType by Microsoft on Linux/Apple machines. Linux/Apple use a different approach when rendering fonts. Microsoft use ClearType technology and others use some other antialiasing technology. In short, smaller fonts looks less blurry in Windows and are harder to read on Linux/Mac. Which is useful while using a browser all the day. I simply cannot use a browser on Linux and Mac. My head starts aching and the eyestrain is really bad and my body tells my go back to Windows.
windows xfce unity color-management
asked Nov 8 '15 at 22:58
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
The colors in Windows are much less saturated. Why is that? The fonts are much more crisper. I have installed msfonts in Ubuntu and it's better, but still the Windows fonts are different. Check the screenshot I have done from both systems in the same browser. The colors are much more saturated in all browsers on Linux.
Here is the difference:
Image
And here is the detail (notice the yellow and green instead of green on Linux):
Image - detail
The font on Windows is more crisp and easier to read. The Xubuntu fonts no matter if I use Droid, DeJaVu, Ubuntu etc. is painful for my eyes.
Why do I have different colors for the same things in Windows and Linux? I have tried Chrome and Firefox in both Linux (Xubuntu) and Windows and Windows versions have the colors less saturated and more darker so it's more pleasant to read. Also, the fonts are not so bold and they are much easier to read than in Linux.
I have noticed the same color issue in Ubuntu's Unity too.
If you have a little time and can do a screenshot, please, upload a portion of a Google results search (like mine) so I (and others) can see if you have different colors or the same colors as me. Thank you.
UPDATE:
As I have found out [here] and [here] the problem I am facing is probably the missing font smoothing technique called ClearType by Microsoft on Linux/Apple machines. Linux/Apple use a different approach when rendering fonts. Microsoft use ClearType technology and others use some other antialiasing technology. In short, smaller fonts looks less blurry in Windows and are harder to read on Linux/Mac. Which is useful while using a browser all the day. I simply cannot use a browser on Linux and Mac. My head starts aching and the eyestrain is really bad and my body tells my go back to Windows.
windows xfce unity color-management
windows xfce unity color-management
asked Nov 8 '15 at 22:58
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
asked Nov 8 '15 at 22:58
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
edited Nov 9 '15 at 9:59
John Doerthy
asked Nov 8 '15 at 22:58
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
asked Nov 8 '15 at 22:58
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
asked Nov 8 '15 at 22:58
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
586
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 6 hours ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 6 hours ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
To my eyes, the linux looks way less saturated than the windows. However, that's irrelevant, first of all, the only way you can actually run this test is to create a simple html page, that has the fonts strictly assigned via css, then view those pages. And the only meaningful test there is to determine if apples vs apples are the same, that is, install a standard windows font on linux, then create the test page, then view the page on chrome/firefox in windows / gnu/linux. Right now you are simply making a comment about default fonts used by firefox/chrome, which has almost no meaning.
– Lizardx
Nov 9 '15 at 1:25
@Lizardx Please, post your image of a zoomed in google search result from your DE, so , we can compare the colors. It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium. They all have the same issue in Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:49
this wiki seems to have a lot more to say on the subject than you talk about. maybe theres more to it? i looked at your pictures, and i wasn't terribly impressed with any differences, but if you see it you see it. i just find it hard to believe that Microsoft has pigeon-holed the font-market. seems more like apple's style to me.
– mikeserv
Nov 9 '15 at 10:16
The smaller font's are easier to read with ClearType then the other font rendering techniques. That's why Mac guys like the huge letter spacing and huge and bold fonts ;) I am sure you have noticed that. On the same resolution e.g. 1920x1080, the bigger fonts look better on Mac, LInux. But the smaller fonts (typical scenario while browsing the web) are easier to read (less blurry) on Windows. Microsoft has specifically done this with ClearType so the small fonts are easier to read. And I read a lot of 10px +-2px during the day, so, until I buy a 4K monitor, Linux won't be used for web browsing
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 10:23
or you could change the font size so it doesn't hurt your eyes.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 10:33
|
show 11 more comments
To my eyes, the linux looks way less saturated than the windows. However, that's irrelevant, first of all, the only way you can actually run this test is to create a simple html page, that has the fonts strictly assigned via css, then view those pages. And the only meaningful test there is to determine if apples vs apples are the same, that is, install a standard windows font on linux, then create the test page, then view the page on chrome/firefox in windows / gnu/linux. Right now you are simply making a comment about default fonts used by firefox/chrome, which has almost no meaning.
– Lizardx
Nov 9 '15 at 1:25
@Lizardx Please, post your image of a zoomed in google search result from your DE, so , we can compare the colors. It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium. They all have the same issue in Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:49
this wiki seems to have a lot more to say on the subject than you talk about. maybe theres more to it? i looked at your pictures, and i wasn't terribly impressed with any differences, but if you see it you see it. i just find it hard to believe that Microsoft has pigeon-holed the font-market. seems more like apple's style to me.
– mikeserv
Nov 9 '15 at 10:16
The smaller font's are easier to read with ClearType then the other font rendering techniques. That's why Mac guys like the huge letter spacing and huge and bold fonts ;) I am sure you have noticed that. On the same resolution e.g. 1920x1080, the bigger fonts look better on Mac, LInux. But the smaller fonts (typical scenario while browsing the web) are easier to read (less blurry) on Windows. Microsoft has specifically done this with ClearType so the small fonts are easier to read. And I read a lot of 10px +-2px during the day, so, until I buy a 4K monitor, Linux won't be used for web browsing
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 10:23
or you could change the font size so it doesn't hurt your eyes.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 10:33
To my eyes, the linux looks way less saturated than the windows. However, that's irrelevant, first of all, the only way you can actually run this test is to create a simple html page, that has the fonts strictly assigned via css, then view those pages. And the only meaningful test there is to determine if apples vs apples are the same, that is, install a standard windows font on linux, then create the test page, then view the page on chrome/firefox in windows / gnu/linux. Right now you are simply making a comment about default fonts used by firefox/chrome, which has almost no meaning.
– Lizardx
Nov 9 '15 at 1:25
To my eyes, the linux looks way less saturated than the windows. However, that's irrelevant, first of all, the only way you can actually run this test is to create a simple html page, that has the fonts strictly assigned via css, then view those pages. And the only meaningful test there is to determine if apples vs apples are the same, that is, install a standard windows font on linux, then create the test page, then view the page on chrome/firefox in windows / gnu/linux. Right now you are simply making a comment about default fonts used by firefox/chrome, which has almost no meaning.
– Lizardx
Nov 9 '15 at 1:25
@Lizardx Please, post your image of a zoomed in google search result from your DE, so , we can compare the colors. It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium. They all have the same issue in Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:49
@Lizardx Please, post your image of a zoomed in google search result from your DE, so , we can compare the colors. It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium. They all have the same issue in Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:49
this wiki seems to have a lot more to say on the subject than you talk about. maybe theres more to it? i looked at your pictures, and i wasn't terribly impressed with any differences, but if you see it you see it. i just find it hard to believe that Microsoft has pigeon-holed the font-market. seems more like apple's style to me.
– mikeserv
Nov 9 '15 at 10:16
this wiki seems to have a lot more to say on the subject than you talk about. maybe theres more to it? i looked at your pictures, and i wasn't terribly impressed with any differences, but if you see it you see it. i just find it hard to believe that Microsoft has pigeon-holed the font-market. seems more like apple's style to me.
– mikeserv
Nov 9 '15 at 10:16
The smaller font's are easier to read with ClearType then the other font rendering techniques. That's why Mac guys like the huge letter spacing and huge and bold fonts ;) I am sure you have noticed that. On the same resolution e.g. 1920x1080, the bigger fonts look better on Mac, LInux. But the smaller fonts (typical scenario while browsing the web) are easier to read (less blurry) on Windows. Microsoft has specifically done this with ClearType so the small fonts are easier to read. And I read a lot of 10px +-2px during the day, so, until I buy a 4K monitor, Linux won't be used for web browsing
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 10:23
The smaller font's are easier to read with ClearType then the other font rendering techniques. That's why Mac guys like the huge letter spacing and huge and bold fonts ;) I am sure you have noticed that. On the same resolution e.g. 1920x1080, the bigger fonts look better on Mac, LInux. But the smaller fonts (typical scenario while browsing the web) are easier to read (less blurry) on Windows. Microsoft has specifically done this with ClearType so the small fonts are easier to read. And I read a lot of 10px +-2px during the day, so, until I buy a 4K monitor, Linux won't be used for web browsing
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 10:23
or you could change the font size so it doesn't hurt your eyes.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 10:33
or you could change the font size so it doesn't hurt your eyes.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 10:33
|
show 11 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
In my experience, using first a 1920x1200 and (after an upgrade) a 2560x1440 monitor connected via a KVM switch to both Linux and a Windows 7 desktop machine, the Windows fonts are ghastly - fuzzy, blurry, and difficult to read.
The Linux fonts are crisp, clear, and beautiful to read. At any resolution.
1920x1200 on Windows was OK-ish but 2560x1440 is horrible, really painful to read...fortunately I don't use the win box for anything except Steam games so I don't spend much time on the Windows desktop and don't care much. AFAIAC, Windows is just a games console / launcher screen.
Maybe you need to change the default fonts that xfce uses (Settings Manager -> Appearance -> Fonts tab). I use Deja Vu Sans Book 14 on my 2560x1440 monitor, with Full Hinting, RGB subpixel order, and a custom DPI setting of 96 DPI. Apart from the font size, I didn't bother (or need to) change any of those settings when I upgraded from WUXGA to 1440p. I could probably tweak the settings further if I had to, but they're good enough.
answered Nov 9 '15 at 1:37
cascas
39.3k454101
Can you please post a screenshot of a zoomed in google result? It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium, I see the same issue in all of them on Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:46
Sorry, but I have seen this same problem with Linux on all machines. It's not something I have discovered yesterday. I have noticed that 7 years ago on my old HP laptop for the first time. Then on all machines and in every distribution of Linux. It has to be something with the X server or something. Maybe the only solution is the Dell XPS with 4k display. But it's sad that you have to have 4k monitor to have fonts that doesn't hurt your eyes.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:53
iceweasel (firefox) screenshot in taz.net.au/~cas/ulse. feel free to download and zoom it. you don't need a 4K monitor for decent fonts in linux. They're good on every resolution i've tried since the mid to late 90s (which is about when graphics resolutions started getting good enough to bother switching from text consoles to X), including XGA, WXGA, 1080p, WSXGA, WUXGA, and 1440p.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:17
1
part of the problem is that many web designers are morons and specify font-sizes in hard-coded pixels (px) rather than pt or em units. this can only possibly look good on the exact screen it was designed on. it looks lousy on any screen larger than what the designer worked with. Don't read 10px text on linux or mac or anything. Read 10pt or 12pt or 14pt text, or whatever looks good to your eyes on your monitor. i have my iceweasel and chromium and other browsers configured to force a minimum font-size of 16 pt on my 2560x1440 screen...because, as i said, many web designers are morons.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:44
1
The Stylish plugin is also good for over-riding ugly tiny-font CSS from moronic web designers. And NoSquint is good for zooming on a per-site basis.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:46
|
show 4 more comments
At the current stage of Linux development, there is no distribution/DE that is capable of delivering ClearType-like font rendering where the pixels are forced to stay in the grid. Think of it as a "mono-type-on-pixel-level" thing, where Microsoft's implementation (ClearType) allows better readability for smaller fonts.
Apple's and Linux way of rendering fonts is ignoring the pixel grid rules and there is no pixel-snapping-to-the-grid like feature. That produce very nice headers and bold text, but you will loose readability on small fonts.
So, unless there is a Linux or Mac that will do small font rendering like ClearType from Windows, I cannot use Linux or Mac for my daily web browsing. My head starts hurting and the eyestrain is significanly higher after a few minutes, if not seconds. If I go back to Windows 7 it stops.
answered Nov 9 '15 at 20:49
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f241711%2fin-linux-i-have-different-color-for-the-same-thing-than-in-windows%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
In my experience, using first a 1920x1200 and (after an upgrade) a 2560x1440 monitor connected via a KVM switch to both Linux and a Windows 7 desktop machine, the Windows fonts are ghastly - fuzzy, blurry, and difficult to read.
The Linux fonts are crisp, clear, and beautiful to read. At any resolution.
1920x1200 on Windows was OK-ish but 2560x1440 is horrible, really painful to read...fortunately I don't use the win box for anything except Steam games so I don't spend much time on the Windows desktop and don't care much. AFAIAC, Windows is just a games console / launcher screen.
Maybe you need to change the default fonts that xfce uses (Settings Manager -> Appearance -> Fonts tab). I use Deja Vu Sans Book 14 on my 2560x1440 monitor, with Full Hinting, RGB subpixel order, and a custom DPI setting of 96 DPI. Apart from the font size, I didn't bother (or need to) change any of those settings when I upgraded from WUXGA to 1440p. I could probably tweak the settings further if I had to, but they're good enough.
answered Nov 9 '15 at 1:37
cascas
39.3k454101
Can you please post a screenshot of a zoomed in google result? It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium, I see the same issue in all of them on Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:46
Sorry, but I have seen this same problem with Linux on all machines. It's not something I have discovered yesterday. I have noticed that 7 years ago on my old HP laptop for the first time. Then on all machines and in every distribution of Linux. It has to be something with the X server or something. Maybe the only solution is the Dell XPS with 4k display. But it's sad that you have to have 4k monitor to have fonts that doesn't hurt your eyes.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:53
iceweasel (firefox) screenshot in taz.net.au/~cas/ulse. feel free to download and zoom it. you don't need a 4K monitor for decent fonts in linux. They're good on every resolution i've tried since the mid to late 90s (which is about when graphics resolutions started getting good enough to bother switching from text consoles to X), including XGA, WXGA, 1080p, WSXGA, WUXGA, and 1440p.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:17
1
part of the problem is that many web designers are morons and specify font-sizes in hard-coded pixels (px) rather than pt or em units. this can only possibly look good on the exact screen it was designed on. it looks lousy on any screen larger than what the designer worked with. Don't read 10px text on linux or mac or anything. Read 10pt or 12pt or 14pt text, or whatever looks good to your eyes on your monitor. i have my iceweasel and chromium and other browsers configured to force a minimum font-size of 16 pt on my 2560x1440 screen...because, as i said, many web designers are morons.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:44
1
The Stylish plugin is also good for over-riding ugly tiny-font CSS from moronic web designers. And NoSquint is good for zooming on a per-site basis.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:46
|
show 4 more comments
In my experience, using first a 1920x1200 and (after an upgrade) a 2560x1440 monitor connected via a KVM switch to both Linux and a Windows 7 desktop machine, the Windows fonts are ghastly - fuzzy, blurry, and difficult to read.
The Linux fonts are crisp, clear, and beautiful to read. At any resolution.
1920x1200 on Windows was OK-ish but 2560x1440 is horrible, really painful to read...fortunately I don't use the win box for anything except Steam games so I don't spend much time on the Windows desktop and don't care much. AFAIAC, Windows is just a games console / launcher screen.
Maybe you need to change the default fonts that xfce uses (Settings Manager -> Appearance -> Fonts tab). I use Deja Vu Sans Book 14 on my 2560x1440 monitor, with Full Hinting, RGB subpixel order, and a custom DPI setting of 96 DPI. Apart from the font size, I didn't bother (or need to) change any of those settings when I upgraded from WUXGA to 1440p. I could probably tweak the settings further if I had to, but they're good enough.
answered Nov 9 '15 at 1:37
cascas
39.3k454101
Can you please post a screenshot of a zoomed in google result? It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium, I see the same issue in all of them on Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:46
Sorry, but I have seen this same problem with Linux on all machines. It's not something I have discovered yesterday. I have noticed that 7 years ago on my old HP laptop for the first time. Then on all machines and in every distribution of Linux. It has to be something with the X server or something. Maybe the only solution is the Dell XPS with 4k display. But it's sad that you have to have 4k monitor to have fonts that doesn't hurt your eyes.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:53
iceweasel (firefox) screenshot in taz.net.au/~cas/ulse. feel free to download and zoom it. you don't need a 4K monitor for decent fonts in linux. They're good on every resolution i've tried since the mid to late 90s (which is about when graphics resolutions started getting good enough to bother switching from text consoles to X), including XGA, WXGA, 1080p, WSXGA, WUXGA, and 1440p.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:17
1
part of the problem is that many web designers are morons and specify font-sizes in hard-coded pixels (px) rather than pt or em units. this can only possibly look good on the exact screen it was designed on. it looks lousy on any screen larger than what the designer worked with. Don't read 10px text on linux or mac or anything. Read 10pt or 12pt or 14pt text, or whatever looks good to your eyes on your monitor. i have my iceweasel and chromium and other browsers configured to force a minimum font-size of 16 pt on my 2560x1440 screen...because, as i said, many web designers are morons.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:44
1
The Stylish plugin is also good for over-riding ugly tiny-font CSS from moronic web designers. And NoSquint is good for zooming on a per-site basis.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:46
|
show 4 more comments
In my experience, using first a 1920x1200 and (after an upgrade) a 2560x1440 monitor connected via a KVM switch to both Linux and a Windows 7 desktop machine, the Windows fonts are ghastly - fuzzy, blurry, and difficult to read.
The Linux fonts are crisp, clear, and beautiful to read. At any resolution.
1920x1200 on Windows was OK-ish but 2560x1440 is horrible, really painful to read...fortunately I don't use the win box for anything except Steam games so I don't spend much time on the Windows desktop and don't care much. AFAIAC, Windows is just a games console / launcher screen.
Maybe you need to change the default fonts that xfce uses (Settings Manager -> Appearance -> Fonts tab). I use Deja Vu Sans Book 14 on my 2560x1440 monitor, with Full Hinting, RGB subpixel order, and a custom DPI setting of 96 DPI. Apart from the font size, I didn't bother (or need to) change any of those settings when I upgraded from WUXGA to 1440p. I could probably tweak the settings further if I had to, but they're good enough.
answered Nov 9 '15 at 1:37
cascas
39.3k454101
In my experience, using first a 1920x1200 and (after an upgrade) a 2560x1440 monitor connected via a KVM switch to both Linux and a Windows 7 desktop machine, the Windows fonts are ghastly - fuzzy, blurry, and difficult to read.
The Linux fonts are crisp, clear, and beautiful to read. At any resolution.
1920x1200 on Windows was OK-ish but 2560x1440 is horrible, really painful to read...fortunately I don't use the win box for anything except Steam games so I don't spend much time on the Windows desktop and don't care much. AFAIAC, Windows is just a games console / launcher screen.
Maybe you need to change the default fonts that xfce uses (Settings Manager -> Appearance -> Fonts tab). I use Deja Vu Sans Book 14 on my 2560x1440 monitor, with Full Hinting, RGB subpixel order, and a custom DPI setting of 96 DPI. Apart from the font size, I didn't bother (or need to) change any of those settings when I upgraded from WUXGA to 1440p. I could probably tweak the settings further if I had to, but they're good enough.
answered Nov 9 '15 at 1:37
cascas
39.3k454101
edited Nov 9 '15 at 10:32
answered Nov 9 '15 at 1:37
cascas
39.3k454101
answered Nov 9 '15 at 1:37
cascas
39.3k454101
answered Nov 9 '15 at 1:37
cascas
39.3k454101
39.3k454101
Can you please post a screenshot of a zoomed in google result? It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium, I see the same issue in all of them on Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:46
Sorry, but I have seen this same problem with Linux on all machines. It's not something I have discovered yesterday. I have noticed that 7 years ago on my old HP laptop for the first time. Then on all machines and in every distribution of Linux. It has to be something with the X server or something. Maybe the only solution is the Dell XPS with 4k display. But it's sad that you have to have 4k monitor to have fonts that doesn't hurt your eyes.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:53
iceweasel (firefox) screenshot in taz.net.au/~cas/ulse. feel free to download and zoom it. you don't need a 4K monitor for decent fonts in linux. They're good on every resolution i've tried since the mid to late 90s (which is about when graphics resolutions started getting good enough to bother switching from text consoles to X), including XGA, WXGA, 1080p, WSXGA, WUXGA, and 1440p.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:17
1
part of the problem is that many web designers are morons and specify font-sizes in hard-coded pixels (px) rather than pt or em units. this can only possibly look good on the exact screen it was designed on. it looks lousy on any screen larger than what the designer worked with. Don't read 10px text on linux or mac or anything. Read 10pt or 12pt or 14pt text, or whatever looks good to your eyes on your monitor. i have my iceweasel and chromium and other browsers configured to force a minimum font-size of 16 pt on my 2560x1440 screen...because, as i said, many web designers are morons.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:44
1
The Stylish plugin is also good for over-riding ugly tiny-font CSS from moronic web designers. And NoSquint is good for zooming on a per-site basis.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:46
|
show 4 more comments
Can you please post a screenshot of a zoomed in google result? It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium, I see the same issue in all of them on Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:46
Sorry, but I have seen this same problem with Linux on all machines. It's not something I have discovered yesterday. I have noticed that 7 years ago on my old HP laptop for the first time. Then on all machines and in every distribution of Linux. It has to be something with the X server or something. Maybe the only solution is the Dell XPS with 4k display. But it's sad that you have to have 4k monitor to have fonts that doesn't hurt your eyes.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:53
iceweasel (firefox) screenshot in taz.net.au/~cas/ulse. feel free to download and zoom it. you don't need a 4K monitor for decent fonts in linux. They're good on every resolution i've tried since the mid to late 90s (which is about when graphics resolutions started getting good enough to bother switching from text consoles to X), including XGA, WXGA, 1080p, WSXGA, WUXGA, and 1440p.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:17
1
part of the problem is that many web designers are morons and specify font-sizes in hard-coded pixels (px) rather than pt or em units. this can only possibly look good on the exact screen it was designed on. it looks lousy on any screen larger than what the designer worked with. Don't read 10px text on linux or mac or anything. Read 10pt or 12pt or 14pt text, or whatever looks good to your eyes on your monitor. i have my iceweasel and chromium and other browsers configured to force a minimum font-size of 16 pt on my 2560x1440 screen...because, as i said, many web designers are morons.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:44
1
The Stylish plugin is also good for over-riding ugly tiny-font CSS from moronic web designers. And NoSquint is good for zooming on a per-site basis.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:46
Can you please post a screenshot of a zoomed in google result? It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium, I see the same issue in all of them on Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:46
Can you please post a screenshot of a zoomed in google result? It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium, I see the same issue in all of them on Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:46
Sorry, but I have seen this same problem with Linux on all machines. It's not something I have discovered yesterday. I have noticed that 7 years ago on my old HP laptop for the first time. Then on all machines and in every distribution of Linux. It has to be something with the X server or something. Maybe the only solution is the Dell XPS with 4k display. But it's sad that you have to have 4k monitor to have fonts that doesn't hurt your eyes.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:53
Sorry, but I have seen this same problem with Linux on all machines. It's not something I have discovered yesterday. I have noticed that 7 years ago on my old HP laptop for the first time. Then on all machines and in every distribution of Linux. It has to be something with the X server or something. Maybe the only solution is the Dell XPS with 4k display. But it's sad that you have to have 4k monitor to have fonts that doesn't hurt your eyes.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:53
iceweasel (firefox) screenshot in taz.net.au/~cas/ulse. feel free to download and zoom it. you don't need a 4K monitor for decent fonts in linux. They're good on every resolution i've tried since the mid to late 90s (which is about when graphics resolutions started getting good enough to bother switching from text consoles to X), including XGA, WXGA, 1080p, WSXGA, WUXGA, and 1440p.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:17
iceweasel (firefox) screenshot in taz.net.au/~cas/ulse. feel free to download and zoom it. you don't need a 4K monitor for decent fonts in linux. They're good on every resolution i've tried since the mid to late 90s (which is about when graphics resolutions started getting good enough to bother switching from text consoles to X), including XGA, WXGA, 1080p, WSXGA, WUXGA, and 1440p.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:17
1
1
part of the problem is that many web designers are morons and specify font-sizes in hard-coded pixels (px) rather than pt or em units. this can only possibly look good on the exact screen it was designed on. it looks lousy on any screen larger than what the designer worked with. Don't read 10px text on linux or mac or anything. Read 10pt or 12pt or 14pt text, or whatever looks good to your eyes on your monitor. i have my iceweasel and chromium and other browsers configured to force a minimum font-size of 16 pt on my 2560x1440 screen...because, as i said, many web designers are morons.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:44
part of the problem is that many web designers are morons and specify font-sizes in hard-coded pixels (px) rather than pt or em units. this can only possibly look good on the exact screen it was designed on. it looks lousy on any screen larger than what the designer worked with. Don't read 10px text on linux or mac or anything. Read 10pt or 12pt or 14pt text, or whatever looks good to your eyes on your monitor. i have my iceweasel and chromium and other browsers configured to force a minimum font-size of 16 pt on my 2560x1440 screen...because, as i said, many web designers are morons.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:44
1
1
The Stylish plugin is also good for over-riding ugly tiny-font CSS from moronic web designers. And NoSquint is good for zooming on a per-site basis.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:46
The Stylish plugin is also good for over-riding ugly tiny-font CSS from moronic web designers. And NoSquint is good for zooming on a per-site basis.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 9:46
|
show 4 more comments
At the current stage of Linux development, there is no distribution/DE that is capable of delivering ClearType-like font rendering where the pixels are forced to stay in the grid. Think of it as a "mono-type-on-pixel-level" thing, where Microsoft's implementation (ClearType) allows better readability for smaller fonts.
Apple's and Linux way of rendering fonts is ignoring the pixel grid rules and there is no pixel-snapping-to-the-grid like feature. That produce very nice headers and bold text, but you will loose readability on small fonts.
So, unless there is a Linux or Mac that will do small font rendering like ClearType from Windows, I cannot use Linux or Mac for my daily web browsing. My head starts hurting and the eyestrain is significanly higher after a few minutes, if not seconds. If I go back to Windows 7 it stops.
answered Nov 9 '15 at 20:49
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
add a comment |
At the current stage of Linux development, there is no distribution/DE that is capable of delivering ClearType-like font rendering where the pixels are forced to stay in the grid. Think of it as a "mono-type-on-pixel-level" thing, where Microsoft's implementation (ClearType) allows better readability for smaller fonts.
Apple's and Linux way of rendering fonts is ignoring the pixel grid rules and there is no pixel-snapping-to-the-grid like feature. That produce very nice headers and bold text, but you will loose readability on small fonts.
So, unless there is a Linux or Mac that will do small font rendering like ClearType from Windows, I cannot use Linux or Mac for my daily web browsing. My head starts hurting and the eyestrain is significanly higher after a few minutes, if not seconds. If I go back to Windows 7 it stops.
answered Nov 9 '15 at 20:49
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
add a comment |
At the current stage of Linux development, there is no distribution/DE that is capable of delivering ClearType-like font rendering where the pixels are forced to stay in the grid. Think of it as a "mono-type-on-pixel-level" thing, where Microsoft's implementation (ClearType) allows better readability for smaller fonts.
Apple's and Linux way of rendering fonts is ignoring the pixel grid rules and there is no pixel-snapping-to-the-grid like feature. That produce very nice headers and bold text, but you will loose readability on small fonts.
So, unless there is a Linux or Mac that will do small font rendering like ClearType from Windows, I cannot use Linux or Mac for my daily web browsing. My head starts hurting and the eyestrain is significanly higher after a few minutes, if not seconds. If I go back to Windows 7 it stops.
answered Nov 9 '15 at 20:49
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
At the current stage of Linux development, there is no distribution/DE that is capable of delivering ClearType-like font rendering where the pixels are forced to stay in the grid. Think of it as a "mono-type-on-pixel-level" thing, where Microsoft's implementation (ClearType) allows better readability for smaller fonts.
Apple's and Linux way of rendering fonts is ignoring the pixel grid rules and there is no pixel-snapping-to-the-grid like feature. That produce very nice headers and bold text, but you will loose readability on small fonts.
So, unless there is a Linux or Mac that will do small font rendering like ClearType from Windows, I cannot use Linux or Mac for my daily web browsing. My head starts hurting and the eyestrain is significanly higher after a few minutes, if not seconds. If I go back to Windows 7 it stops.
answered Nov 9 '15 at 20:49
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
answered Nov 9 '15 at 20:49
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
answered Nov 9 '15 at 20:49
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
answered Nov 9 '15 at 20:49
John DoerthyJohn Doerthy
586
586
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f241711%2fin-linux-i-have-different-color-for-the-same-thing-than-in-windows%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
To my eyes, the linux looks way less saturated than the windows. However, that's irrelevant, first of all, the only way you can actually run this test is to create a simple html page, that has the fonts strictly assigned via css, then view those pages. And the only meaningful test there is to determine if apples vs apples are the same, that is, install a standard windows font on linux, then create the test page, then view the page on chrome/firefox in windows / gnu/linux. Right now you are simply making a comment about default fonts used by firefox/chrome, which has almost no meaning.
– Lizardx
Nov 9 '15 at 1:25
@Lizardx Please, post your image of a zoomed in google search result from your DE, so , we can compare the colors. It can be from firefox, chrome or chromium. They all have the same issue in Linux.
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 8:49
this wiki seems to have a lot more to say on the subject than you talk about. maybe theres more to it? i looked at your pictures, and i wasn't terribly impressed with any differences, but if you see it you see it. i just find it hard to believe that Microsoft has pigeon-holed the font-market. seems more like apple's style to me.
– mikeserv
Nov 9 '15 at 10:16
The smaller font's are easier to read with ClearType then the other font rendering techniques. That's why Mac guys like the huge letter spacing and huge and bold fonts ;) I am sure you have noticed that. On the same resolution e.g. 1920x1080, the bigger fonts look better on Mac, LInux. But the smaller fonts (typical scenario while browsing the web) are easier to read (less blurry) on Windows. Microsoft has specifically done this with ClearType so the small fonts are easier to read. And I read a lot of 10px +-2px during the day, so, until I buy a 4K monitor, Linux won't be used for web browsing
– John Doerthy
Nov 9 '15 at 10:23
or you could change the font size so it doesn't hurt your eyes.
– cas
Nov 9 '15 at 10:33