|
There definitely seems to be some personal preference involved here; I know people who love it, and people who hate it.
It's important to note that the quality of the results can vary widely between systems. Probably the biggest quality impact comes from the Dost Per Inch (DPI) of the display. This is the density of the pixels on the screen. The more dense the pixels (the higher the DPI), the more your eyes will blur the color fringing into actual text color you want to see. The lower the DPI, the more you will see the fringing effects.
Think of it in the ridiculous extreme; imagine a 20" wide monitor with a DPI or 1, so there's 20 pixels across. If a character is supposed to be black on white, but has colored edges due to LCD text rendering, you're obviously going to see the colored edges and it'll look awful.
Now imagine it at the other extreme, with one million DPI, or 20 million pixels per inch. Assuming that the colors are chosen wisely in the rendering algorithm, and that your eyes do a nice job of blending into the true text color, then any color fringing effects should be insignificant and you should see just the text color you wanted.
Another factor that affects quality is whether the monitor is connected with an analog or digital connector. This surprised me when I first saw this effect, but apparently the use of an analog cable can minutely affect display such that the rendering algorithm may be making assumptions about RGB/pixel placement that are not perfectly suited to this situation, and thus the color fringing effect may be more noticeable.
By the way, I'm with you on CRT refresh rates; I cannot walk into anyone's office that's running a monitor at a seizure-inducing 60 Hz without taking over their maching and upping the refresh for them. Drives me nuts.
|
java.net RSS Feeds
