Blurry? Sounds like a poor renderer. You may want to turn anti-aliasing off. What OS are you on?

opan 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

I have never encountered a non-HiDPI setup where non-bitmap fonts looked especially different or good, so I don't think my OS[1] is relevant. If you look at screenshots of classic Mac OS it has a beautiful timeless look to the fonts, that I feel I similarly get using Terminus in my terminals. I also wanted to list an old Windows version out of fairness, which would be 3.1, I guess, but when quickly looking up screenshots, it doesn't look quite as good as I want it to. Your first instinct that my setup is wrong when I'm commenting on the state of fonts as a whole tells me you're probably used to the blur. Most people who aren't already a bit weird about their terminal fonts don't seem to understand or at least don't seem to care when I talk about the blurry font problem.

[1] But I'll tell you anyway so I don't seem like an asshole. I'm using Guix System GNU/Linux and the Sway Wayland compositor on my primary PC at the moment.

	▲	anikom15 a day ago \| parent [-]
		I have no blur because I don’t use anti-aliasing at all. Different renderer settings can have a big impact on how the text looks at small sizes, which is why I commented. For a long time I used anti-aliasing with light hinting, full anti-aliasing with no hinting. I’ve never liked subpixel hinting (ClearType). In the end, I found that turning off anti-aliasing gives me the best readability.

▲

zdimension 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I think "blurry" was used here referring to the fact that they don't really pay attention to the differences between fonts, not to an aspect of the rendering.

	▲	opan 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		It was kind of a double-meaning. Non-bitmap fonts really are blurry, comparatively. AFAICT the non-bitmap fonts just hide this thanks to people using HiDPI displays now, which is basically like saying "well, it looks fine from far away".