Comment 25 for bug 206018

If you are unhappy about the outline part of Zen Hei, I can fully understand that. The outline quality of the font is still a long way from commercial ones. However, on the other hand, I can also see that the outline fonts are entirely "usable" (as screen fonts), particularly for those frequently used Chinese characters. It simply take years of efforts to polish all the rough edges and make a good outline font, and we are doing it everyday, you are welcome to report "sub-optimal" characters or polish by yourself using our wiki.

But if you are complaining about the wqy bitmaps vs firefly's bitmaps, that does seem to be a bit surprising. Based on my own observation from most Chinese Linux online forums (particularly http://forum.ubuntu.com.cn/), it is relatively rare to see similar comments among simplified Chinese users (for traditional Chinese users, some of them may prefer the Ming-Ti-styled serif decorations in firefly's bitmaps).

I do support for a poll between different choices for CJK fonts. I actually thought about doing it long time ago. A survey about the preference of bitmap vs vector, Song vs Ming vs Hei, wqy bitmaps vs firefly's vs simsun vs OpenSUSE Founder fonts will be very informative for CJK font developers.

One thing I want to point out though, the 12pt CJK glyphs in wqy's fonts are exact copies of Chinese National Standard GB19966-2005, which was "professionally" developed by Beijing Founder Electronics (Fang Zheng). Glyphs of other sizes in wqy's bitmaps were "standardized" using 12pt as reference.