Hardware Cleartype in WinXP?

[yangsong]

Does anyone know if Parhelia's HW anti-aliasing (glyph, line, etc) supports Cleartype in Windows XP?

It would make sense, since the Parhelia is so DVI/WinXP oriented.

More reading:
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/cleartype/
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20020203.html

MMHK/ola

[Jussi]

I too really like the idea of antialiased text. Too bad that text looks a bit too blurry with WinXP cleartype.

Is Parhelia going to make make a difference here? A screenshot or two would be great .

[xortam]

I thought I read that the P coordinated with ClearType. Check the Matrox site and P reviews.

[Phoenix]

NO - Glyph AA supports only the grayscale type ("normal" setting in XP) and doesn't support ClearType acceleration.

Phoenix.

[Yannick]

Originally posted by Jussi
I too really like the idea of antialiased text. Too bad that text looks a bit too blurry with WinXP cleartype.

I'm using WinXP ClearType. I'm running my desktop at 1600x1200 on a 17" diamontron screen, but with the large fonts setting (since it would look a bit too small with small fonts).

The text is still a little too blurry, but still much better that with small fonts.

Of course you have the graphical glitches associated with large font settings in badly developed applications, and also on some websites. For websites, once you know that Ctrl+mouse wheel changes the Internet Explorer font size dynamically, that's not really a problem.


I don't think either that the Parhelia supports ClearType.

In fact, I don't really care. I haven't noticed the performance hit that ClearType probably generates.

[Kruzin]

If Pheonix says it doesn't, then you can believe it doesn't.

[Rob(QG)]

I'm using WinXP ClearType. I'm running my desktop at 1600x1200 on a 17" diamontron screen, but with the large fonts setting (since it would look a bit too small with small fonts).

The text is still a little too blurry, but still much better that with small fonts.

Not really sure why you would want to use cleartype with a CRT monitor - standard smoothing works best on CRT, cleartype only works properly on TFT screens.

[RedRed]

dont believe that!, Rob.

Dinnt know that Yannick, thanks....
Regards
RedRed

[Rob(QG)]

If you look up the technology you'd understand why

I've tried it on laptop and monitor - looks brill on laptop, and not awful on monitor, but not the greatest either.

Cleartype works cos on a TFT the screen is arranged like this:

RGBRGBRGB

This allows cleartype to "triple" the horizontal res. On a CRT, however the dots are less well ordered so it doesn't work properly.

[Michel Carleer]

Depends on the screen type. The Trinitron type (or its descendents) is also RGBRGBRGB.
That's the difference between in-line and dot-trio tubes.
By the way, some LCD are also dot-trio.

[Jon P. Inghram]

Actually, Trinitron (and other imitations) are just like that, vertical RGB stripes.

[edit] Doh, he beat me to it! [/edit]

[Rob(QG)]

Didn't realise that.

Sorry.

Me and my cheap monitor

[Jon P. Inghram]

Just because it doesn't use a Trinitron style mask doesn't mean it's junk. The "old fashioned" type is supposedly better for text and hard edged stuff like that.

[Ryu Connor]

AG monitors only quantize the phosphors in one direction, while Invar-mask phosphors are quantized in all directions; the AG therefore relies entirely on the electron gun's focus for vertical control, while the IM has help from the dots and mask. And at very high rez, this makes a difference. That said, AG is getting better, high-rez more common (16x12 is no longer the top), and costs have fallen everywhere. It's becoming less significant all the time... only the fact that IM monitors still get lower dot-pitches overall is still holding their top spot.

He is comparing Invar Shadow Mask versus Aperature Grille (Trinitron/FD Trinitron) from the perspective of a CAD user. The individual I'm quoting is a pretty straight shooter, but I'm interested in any dissenting opinions someone may have.

Coming back to the subject of ClearType. I really think it's totally geared for TFTs. It looks like a blurred mess even on Trinitron and FD Trinitron monitors from my perspective. Of course that's my subjective opinion. I'm very picky about text quality and you may think that ClearType looks great on a AG tube.

To change subjects one last time. If you are still on Trinitron versus FD Trinitron tubes, I'd seriously consider going out and taking a look at the picture quality of the new tubes. The difference between them is incredible. Classic Trinitron could be classified as a little strong on the green and even dingy. FD Trinitron is amazingly vibrant, rich, and the color balanced properly. Of course much of my experience was tempered by my past dual monitor setup being a 100ES (Trinitron) and a E100 (FD Trinitron). It makes seeing the differences plain as day.

[Michel Carleer]

One year ago I switched from CRT to LCD (going from dot-trio to in-line).
The thing I immediately noticed is that when a drawing program paints a single vertical line two pixels wide and made of one of the three fundamental colours, then the line looks like a double line each one pixel wide. Because there is a black space in between. It can be very confusing.
This you don't have with dot-trio tubes as the pixels of one colour are not vertically aligned.
I suppose the same applies to Trinitron type CRTs