The new "New" icon

[Paul B]

Just noticed the new "New" icon in posts.

I have to say it's a huge improvement on the old one <thumbsup>

How does it fit within the overall width of the site though?
Quite curious to see how it works as it sort of "wraps" around the edge.

It looks really good though.

 

[Floris]

Ah that sucks Seeing things blurry is known to me, I 'have' to be close to the screen to not make it blurry.

 

[CyberAP]

It really depends upon your display and what you are used to. When I first moved to Mac from Windows, I hated Mac font rendering when compared to Windows' ClearType.

It took me a couple of weeks before my eyes adjusted, and now it's ClearType that looks bad to me.

If you have an LCD display, turn on ClearType and stick with it for a few days. You will soon come to rely upon it I'm sure.

I used to read text with ClearType when I first meet WinXP. But after 2 or 3 months these blue and red sub-pixels became very annoying to my eyes so I never used ClearType after that. I like classic smoothening method which is used on CRT displays but browsers don't support text anti-aliasing in Windows, only Safari with it's 'Mac anti-aliasing'.

 

[Grover]

...but browsers don't support text anti-aliasing in Windows, only Safari with it's 'Mac anti-aliasing'.

What do you mean by this? When I use Cleartype on XP, the fonts on websites also are anti-aliased. Obviously you mean something else?

 

[CyberAP]

What do you mean by this? When I use Cleartype on XP, the fonts on websites also are anti-aliased. Obviously you mean something else?

At this moment I have anti-alisaing enabled but without ClearType. In Safari with Mac anti-aliasing every font is smoothened but in other browsers with Windows AA for example Arial font doesn't look anti-aliased. And it looks like on your screenshot with New button.

 

[Kier]

A pity I can not compare OSX to Windows right next to each other now, so I could see the difference.

XP with ClearType on the left, OS X 10.6 on the right:

 

[dutchbb]

The difference between MS en Apple in anti-aliasing is that MS doesn't care about the shape of the font, they want sharpness and sacrifice the detailed differences that get lost that way. Apple on the other hand has always made it a priority to show fonts on screen the same way they show on paper. Might have to do with the fact that the Mac was (and to some degree still is) known as the computer for the graphic designer.

I never liked the MS way, text looks way too sharp and thin, it just isn't rendered well. The screens above shows exactly what I'm talking about. How can anyone find the MS way is looking better?

 

[Kier]

How can anyone find the MS way is looking better?

In some ways, the MS way is better for viewing on-screen, as the fonts are hinted for the pixel grid, giving a generally sharper and less-blurry rendering than the Mac approach. However, the preference is largely in the eye of the beholder. I used to hate Mac font rendering, now I much prefer it.

Let's just all agree that both systems are better than the dismal visual apocalypse that is Linux desktop font rendering...

 

[Kier]

And here is Windows 7 vs OS X 10.6:

 

[CyberAP]

ClearType in Win7 is customizable so you can adjust settings for yourself.

 

[dutchbb]

In some ways, the MS way is better for viewing on-screen, as the fonts are hinted for the pixel grid, giving a generally sharper and less-blurry rendering than the Mac approach. However, the preference is largely in the eye of the beholder. I used to hate Mac font rendering, now I much prefer it.

Let's just all agree that both systems are better than the dismal visual apocalypse that is Linux desktop font rendering...

I remember using just Windows some years ago, and yes in all honesty I liked the sharpness at that time, then they then introduced their ClearType and I didn't like it at all. Two years later I started using OS X and I immediately thought it looked much better than both Windows systems regarding anti-aliasing. I guess you have a point; it depends on what you like at a certain point in time.