« Asus eee PC "includes XP drivers" | Main | Knocking spots off Leopard? »
The difference ClearType makes
As I mentioned the other day, I recently had my Windows computer refreshed to its original state. Getting rid of all the random software from the last two years has radically increased performance (reducing my stress levels by a similar amount).
The downside is reinstalling all the software that I actually need. It's not been as painful as I was fearing but today I realised that there were some important settings that I forgotten about.
As the screenshot suggests, it was ClearType that had got missed. This clever technology improves the quality of onscreen text on LCD monitors by controlling the three elements that make up each dot onscreen rather than controlling the pixel on its own. This gives a smoother look to fonts. I tried some screengrabs but they didn't show how radical the change is.
I had been wondering why Word looked so dreadful the last couple of weeks, especially as I wasn't using any odd fonts. Turning ClearType on was really simple. Read on for the full instructions.
Right-click on an empty part of the Desktop and select Properties. Click on the Appearance tab and then on the Effects button. Make sure there is a tick in the box labelled 'Use the following method to smooth edges of screen fonts:' and then select ClearType in the menu below in favour of Standard. Click on OK and then on Apply to force the change. Click on OK to close the Display Properties window.
If it doesn't seem to give that much of an improvement, there is a ClearType Tuner PowerToy that can tweak the settings for individual monitors.
TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: The difference ClearType makes.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blogs-1.gos.vnu.net/mt-tb.cgi/81058
Interesting post - personally I have the opposite problem and can't stand using any computer with an LCD monitor until I've disabled Cleartype. Interestingly, Apple's Safari browser for Windows uses its own font smoothing that's even more aggressive.
posted-by Tom | October 31, 2007 12:38 PM