Gutenberg converts tasks that used to take 2-3 clicks into 10-20 click tasks, or even worse makes them impossible altogether.
What is with catering to the worst and most clueless users only? We need more than that. We deserve more than that. Gutenberg is disastrous for anyone with an IQ above that of a carrot.
What is with catering to the worst and most clueless users only? We need more than that. We deserve more than that. Gutenberg is disastrous for anyone with an IQ above that of a carrot.
Well, insulting hyperbole certainly isn't going to help.
From what I can tell (I haven't used Wordpress in a long time, so I didn't know about this), the main complaint is it's more touch-optimized, and as a result desktop editing with trackpad/mouse is more complex.
That's a fair criticism, but not a conclusive argument against. If the most common use case for non-technical users is a touch interface, then making that the default, and giving highly-technical users who prefer the old editor a way to swap back to it... seems like a perfectly reasonable decision to me, and one that should be made on the basis of user research and usage stats, not on the basis of people who sling insults and leave 1-star reviews on a plugin marketplace.
As of "lately" in the sense of "in the last 10 years", it was always great. Freetype always had great rendering, on part and often superior to both ClearType and OSX to my eyes.
I attribute the bad perceived performance of freetype to the lack of good and/or commercial fonts.
The default configuration in most distributions is decent, but with little tuning everything can be changed to your taste. I ran with grayscale AA since the beginning because I find the color fringing annoying.
I also used to like the bytecode hinter, but in the last years with my laptop having 120+ dpi, I find the freetype autohinter to be actually superior as it better preserves the letterform and provides sharper results even without subpixel AA.
The settings can also be tailored per-font, and apply system-wide, with the exception of some stupid QML and Electron apps.
Thanks for that detailed response. I last used Linux full-time as my main machine in 2009 or so. It has indeed been a while. Good to know that it has improved since that time.
I just installed the Mojave beta on my Macbook Pro. The fonts are just as blurry as if I toggle off "Use LCD font smoothing when available" in High Sierra.
So the contention that it won't be the same in Mojave is disproven. Even on Retina displays, disabling sub-pixel anti-aliasing leads to blurry, indistinct fonts.
I do not think this is an accurate way to simulate the issue reported. This simulation will look worse than the actual issue, which is not present on 4K+ displays.
OS X has never done gamma correction properly with subpixel antialiasing. Instead, it “dilates” the shapes slightly, but this is actually wrong. I suppose half the problem is getting used to the new, correct, line weights. This is more problematic on retina displays because the dilation affected the weight far more than the gamma deviations would’ve at high resolution.
Signed up for HN (again) just to vent about this terrible news. This is a change that will be hard for me to live with, and I will probably end up selling all my Apple gear.
This is the same change/downgrade that occurs if you go to System Preferences-->General-->Use LCD Font Smoothing When Available.
I did this and the fonts on my 5K iMac display looked horrible. Just atrocious. My plan is to not upgrade to Mojave, and then within a year or so sell all my Apple gear and move back to Linux.
I don't understand Apple's thinking, but I believe a lot of people will do the same.
No they won’t. People don’t notice this stuff. I pointed out the weird font smoothing issue in Finder to my best mate – a professional photographer – and even then she barely had any idea what I was on about.
It does affect Retina devices. That's the whole point. I made the same change that Apple is going to make and the fonts looked far worse (almost unreadable). You can observe the same if you have an Apple device by going to: System Preferences-->General-->Use LCD Font Smoothing When Available.
Apple is removing sub-pixel anti-aliasing for all devices, not just non-Retina ones.
Maybe this person's eyesight is better or worse than yours, or perhaps just different. You might be surprised what some people are bothered by, or trained to spot, that others aren't...
Thanks, that's much better. I think it shows that Mojave renders the fonts clearly better: check out for instance 'll' in 'ullamco'. Generally, almost identical pictures though.
I've been on the beta for a couple days (using a 2016 12" MacBook) and I haven't noticed anything. There's a visible difference when I disable LCD font smoothing in settings, but not much changes besides fonts appearing somewhat thinner.
I installed Mojave beta on my MacBook Pro. It is the same thing. The fonts look identical to toggling off the setting "Use LCD font smoothing when available" in High Sierra. And by the same thing, I mean they look very bad in Mojave.
Mojave beta installed, and the fonts look equally atrocious. They are blurry, indistinct...and just bad. One of the reasons I bought a 5K iMac (three of them, actually) was to have great fonts. I am beyond angry that I will now have to sell them.
Can you post some screenshots? I find hard to believe that fonts on a retina display can be blurry and indistinct, when the antialiasing text weight is almost the same.
Those screenshots were both in Waterfox. I also tried in Safari (didn't take any shots, though) and the fonts looked identically bad in that browser as well.
The normal UI's fonts are also worse -- about the same as the browser screenshots. Fonts are indistinct and blurry, and very light. All the result of greyscale aliasing only, I presume.
Either Apple disable "LCD font smoothing" for retina displays, or there is a bug somewhere. Because in Mojave on a non retina screen "LCD font smoothing" has got the same weight as before. And on your screen it clearly doesn't.
I hope it is a bug. If the weight were the same, it'd at least perhaps be tolerable on a Retina screen. I know the technical reasons, but I just don't understand why Apple can't leave it alone for desktop systems.
They don't remove font smoothing. They switch it from subpixel level to grayscale only. Technically subpixel should produce better results then grayscale. But IMO the subpixel antialiasing in macos looks horrible. So you might not even see the difference as it looks exactly as horrible as before.
I'd be more outraged if Windows removed cleartype, because their subpixel font antialising actually works and is configurable.
Greyscale anti-aliasing is far inferior to sub-pixel. The fonts look much worse.
BTW, I did install Mojave beta and the fonts look just terrible even on a Retina display. Shockingly bad. I can't believe Apple is doing this. I just bought a new 5K iMac a few months ago. I wish it were still in the return period...but in other news, I am now selling all of my Apple equipment as it's pointless to have it. Without the great fonts I purchased it for, it's so much junk to me.
What is with catering to the worst and most clueless users only? We need more than that. We deserve more than that. Gutenberg is disastrous for anyone with an IQ above that of a carrot.
But are there any real alternatives?