comp.sys.mac.advocacy

In article ,
Mayor of R'lyeh wrote:

[snip]

> >It uses OS X's font rendering, which favors letterform accuracy over
> >snapping everything into the screen's pixel grid.
>
> Somehow other browsers are able to do this grid snapping and render
> fonts non-fuzzy. Apple might want to look into that. Fuzzy isn't good
> no matter what behind the scenes technical reasons you can come up
> with.

You don't quite seem to understand. Apple deliberately chooses to render
fonts this way, because it more accurately preserves letterforms. IOW,
character shapes are more similar to what font designers intended, and
more similar to the way they appear when rendered on higher resolution
devices. This also tends to result in more pleasing text density.

As you might imagine, typography and graphic design folks greatly prefer
the Apple method. There is no right answer here. The good news is, when
higher DPI screens show up, you can get both accurate letterforms and
excellent sharpness. (See the nearest iPhone.)

> >> There's no obvious way to add search engines to the search window. I
> >> do like the look of it. It shows Safari's KDE roots. KDE is my
> >> favorite GUI.
> >
> >Err... huh? None of Safari's GUI shell code is derived from KDE.
>
> It still looks very KDE-ish.
>
> > The UI
> >in the Windows version of Safari is basically the Unified window
> >appearance from Leopard, with in-window menus and a couple of other
> >visual tweaks to better match Windows standards.
>
> I guess we know where Apple got its ideas for Leopard's look then.

Leopard's Unified window look developed incrementally as a result of
trends that have been ongoing as new versions of OS X have been
released. And I'm looking at some KDE screenshots and not particularly
seeing much similarity.

> >> >> >Sure, there are specific markets where the Mac doesn't have
> >> >> >compelling (or even any) offerings. But most people aren't in those
> >> >> >markets. And there are other markets where the Mac is far and away
> >> >> >the best choice.
> >> >>
> >> >> Behind the RDF anyway.
> >> >
> >> >Video production,
> >>
> >> All of the professionals offering testimonials on Adobe's website
> >> would disagree with you.
> >> http://www.adobe.com/products/aftereffects/customers/
> >
> >I'm in the industry, so I have a fair idea of what the lay of the land
> >looks like.
>
> You've been to what? 1%, 5% of actual studios?

I'm in the industry, Mayor. I participate in online industry discussion
groups, subscribe to industry mailing lists, attend industry
conferences, read industry trade publications, and talk to a lot of
people. My business cards say I'm a "digital workflow" guy. Really,
Mayor, don't try to tell me I don't know what tools people are using.

As I said, Windows isn't totally absent. In some segments of the market,
like 3D, it's even dominant. But overall, one sees a lot more Macs than
Windows machines in the video production world.

[snip]

--
"More than two decades later, it is hard to imagine the Revolutionary War coming
out any other way."
--George W. Bush in Martinsburg, W. Va., July 4, 2007