tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813856659277593071.post8362041422182043856..comments2023-05-10T17:32:28.225+02:00Comments on The Beez' speaks..: Three reasons NOT to use GnomeThe Beez'http://www.blogger.com/profile/14718864828133872589noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813856659277593071.post-34765979469164402482009-08-24T21:43:10.903+02:002009-08-24T21:43:10.903+02:00Whether Gnome, KDE, XFCE or whatever there is one ...Whether Gnome, KDE, XFCE or whatever there is one big problem across all of these desktop environments which shows no sign of being solved; namely font rendering.<br /><br />I believe there are patent issues surrounding the better sub-pixel hinting technologies since clearly Microsoft would not want their technologies being freely distributed by sandal wearing, bearded Linux junkies. <br /><br />I'm afraid Linux activists still don't get this! One of the most important considerations when using a computer is how well the text is rendered and how efficiently the limited screen space is used (we don't all have arrays of 30" monitors). <br /><br />Let's say I use Gnome on my IBM Thnikpad - which has a measly screen resolution of just 1024x768 pixels. With Windows XP and the classic theme (stripped of the blue stuff) I can get far more text on the screen and read it well from a distance. With the font rendering in the Linux OS this is not the case. Everything looks huge and ugly - if I try to downsize the fonts they become unreadable. Scrolling is slow (suggesting inefficient rendering of the fonts). <br /><br />I have seen some hacks to get font rendering similar to that available in Mac OS X. However, even this is sub-standard in my opinion. <br /><br />I don't mean to go on! However, this really is the only thing stopping me using GNU/Linux as a DESKTOP operating system. Fine on severs etc or for frame buffer shell. No thanks for desktop use!physics_guy88https://www.blogger.com/profile/06858645062551894074noreply@blogger.com