Ugly fonts whith Core2

geneSmith gene.smith at
Wed Jun 9 17:13:21 UTC 2004

Patrice Brockhaus wrote, On 6/5/2004 8:05 AM:

> Hallo!
> Does no one here experience fonts whith core 2 being very ugly? Here they are 
> as unreadable,  that I still use core1 for this reason - well not only for 
> this reason: Why is KDE so damn slow on my 333-celeron? KDE works great whith 
> core1.
> I can't see any difference between anti-aliasing turned on/of in 
> KDE-Controlcenter although the difference is clearly visible in Core1 when 
> doing the same thing. I neither couldn't see any difference between freetype 
> patched (natural AA, or how was this called?) and non-patched. Fonts appear 
> very unclear, somehow thinner as in core1 and lack contrast.
> I'm not quiet shure if this is a problem of font-rendering or a general 
> graphic-problem. Is there a software to increase contrast of XOrg? My monitor 
> is already set to maximum. I'm using the same Nvidia proprietary driver whith 
> both fedoras. I can see no difference in 2D between nv and proprietary 
> nvidia-driver.
> I like core1 very much, but I'm very disappointed whith core 2. :-(
> Bye,
> Patrice
When I clean installed the final fc2 (after running test versions for 
several months) I got excellent fonts everywhere. I think this is the 
first linux install I have done in which I *did not* have to go 
adjusting fonts all over the place.

I run a 500Mhz Ath (384M ram) and the only thing that seems slower in 
kde is the panel menu rendering. Otherwise, it seems to run about the 
same as kde 2.x in rh7.2 which I last had on the machine.

When I used the Nvidia proprietary driver with rh7.2 and I ran gvim and 
resized the window, it was extremely sluggish to redraw. When I went 
back to the stock rh driver, it was fine (I don't do fancy graphics or 
games). You might try the stock fc2/xorg Nvidia driver and see if that 
helps with the menu (mine is a bit slow, but not unusable).

Lit up like Levy's

More information about the fedora-list mailing list