why is rendering fonts on macOS such shit pic rel

File: 1480925961452.png (68KB, 420x909px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 420x909px

>>61071647
>mac
Found your problem.

>>61071647
What's wrong with it?
That's perfectly readable.

>>61071710
Torvalds is faggot anyway

>>61071647
Mac's font rendering is overhyped by retards and shills. In reality, MacOS's font rendering is complete shit with everything rendered in bold.

>>61071833
$0.50 have deposited to your iTunes account.

File: grHkY8p.gif (2MB, 750x750px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 750x750px

>>61071647
MacOS font rending is great though?
I've switched from MacOS to Windows and getting used to the shitty font rendering on Windows was really difficult.

>>61072122
Bindows is shit overload. Reading anything is pain to my eyes.

>>61071710
>complaining about HFS+ when AFS is just around the corner
Also windows is 10 times worse, and at least I don't have to wait 10 minutes for the search function to find a fucking file that's just in my downloads/documents folder.

>>61071647
Steve Jobs insisted that anything on the screen should look the same in print.
So OSX doesn't use fonts that snap to pixels, and the result if a blurry fuckfest.

There is no perfect solution.
But now that people read far more from their screen than from prints the Windows method makes far more sense.

File: linuxisapieceofshit.png (216KB, 698x424px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 698x424px

>>61071833

>>61072122
>>61072289
It's macOS now, notice the lowercase 'M'.

>>61072039
Switching to a resolution higher than VGA might help.

>>61071647
>Japanese
kys weebfaggot

>>61072339
lel autismo t*rry just got
B T F O
T
F
O

>>61072289
Windows is a literal eyestrain wtf are you talking about

>>61071647
ye u need a retina for it to look acceptable, from the looks of it you dont have a retina version
blame steve jobs

>>61072339
>not posting the frame where he's visibly miffed about the contents of this email

>>61073745
thanks