I'm not sure bitmaps are such a bad thing, provided they are only used without scaling. For the same reason png icons look better than svg ones at native size.
2009/9/22, bobince <bobi...@gmail.com>: > I agree with Eric, it's nothing to do with Tahoma as such: Karmic simply > renders all fonts using embedded bitmaps where they are available. Did > this used to happen? I don't remember having the problem before. > > Most embedded bitmaps are much worse renderings that what FreeType would > naturally produce, simply because they're not anti-aliased. I think > Ubuntu should set embeddedbitmaps false as default, and only turn it on > for the packaged CJK fonts that really need it (because their hinting > isn't sufficiently good to make the characters readable at smaller > sizes). > > -- > ttf-tahoma-replacement makes some web-sites look ugly > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/412195 > You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber > of the bug. > -- ttf-tahoma-replacement makes some web-sites look ugly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/412195 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
