Comment 98 for bug 164640

(In reply to comment #61)
> (In reply to comment #60)
> I'm interested in replying to more of what you've written, but first I wanted
> to point out that I can't get your comparison page to work. (Nothing changes
> when I move the mouse on and off the images. I can right-click and do "open
> image" and then I will get a different image, but I can't even do that for both
> images for switching back and forth between two tabs.)

Ja, let me say ›oops‹. In a rush to get it out the door I neglected to test with Firefox. It seems I followed the wrong mouseover tutorial. Should work now.

But I’ve figured I must also add an example of large display type, so you get added value now.

> PS. And I'm delighted to see so much commentary with the images. So often in
> the past I've seen people trying to advocate for these patches with things like
> "look at these two images! Obviously you see why I want this patch", and then
> I'm just lost as to which is supposed to look better or why, etc.

There’s certainly an inherent danger in pointing to screenshots and shouting: »See? See? It’s so much better!« because that’s not necessarily true for everybody. Someone might just have gotten new, sharp spectacles, or she is myopic and sits 20cm from the screen — loupe effect!. Or someone’s screen is really low-res, rotated to portrait, or whatnot.

The point here is that configurability is a necessity due to taste differences. So with the patch we can have GRAY, LEGACY, FIR3 and FIR5. Importantly the FIR filters are the most versatile and robust. They work well across the board, LEGACY doesn’t. Thus they are the best candidates for the LCD_FILTER_DEFAULT designation.

A future font appearance configuration panel should offer more options to tweak this. But it should probably only make sensible combinations possible. That is, if native TrueType instructions are enabled then LEGACY or monochrome make sense. If slight hinting is enabled, then FIRx and GRAY make sense.