[Tins]

solofx7,

I think by reading all your responses that it has nothing to do with the fonts. I zoomed in on the screen shots by fongyuen which you said show what your talking about. Really the only difference I can see (when you do not look at the fonts) is the the images from windows are lighter. This is best seen when comparing the drop shadows from the letters in the google logo/name. I would think that either the brightness and/or gamma setting is different between the OS's.

I'm not sure if the whole gamma/brightness thing is right or not. But, as a graphics artist, I've found that just the slightest change in brightness/contrast can make a world of "emotional" (for lack of a better word) difference when looking at an image. Meaning the way you feel about it.

If I'm wrong about all of that I have this question, being new to Macs I'm not sure of the answer. How do you feel about the icons in Mac over the icons in Win? I've had a theory in viewing Mac OS X that there are a lot o PNG files being used. PNG files are the only images readily usable with a 24 bit alpha channel which would explain the cool "magnifying" effect of the dock. PNGs are fickle thing though. They are a lossless file which sounds great but for instance you do not view them at actual size or larger (ie thumbnail or shrink a PNG) they tend to look "fuzzy" if you will.

I could be wrong about all of this, like I said I'm new to Macs. Either way I hope you find your answer.

[JKT]

Originally Posted by Tins 

How do you feel about the icons in Mac over the icons in Win? I've had a theory in viewing Mac OS X that there are a lot o PNG files being used. PNG files are the only images readily usable with a 24 bit alpha channel which would explain the cool "magnifying" effect of the dock. PNGs are fickle thing though. They are a lossless file which sounds great but for instance you do not view them at actual size or larger (ie thumbnail or shrink a PNG) they tend to look "fuzzy" if you will.

The icons files in OS X actually use up to 4 different size images (16x16, 32x32, 48x48 and 128x128) to display the scaled images, with interpolation occurring in-between. If an app icon is looking fuzzy it is because the developer hasn't included one of those intermediate size icons to allow display of smaller sizes without then being scaled down from a larger image (which are often too detailed for rendering on pixellated screens at smaller sizes).

[JKT]

FWIW, if you use the Pixie application that is a part of the Developer tools, you can see how things are rendered in the OS. Any lines are as sharp as they can be (1 pixel width, no anti-aliasing unless they are rounded corners):



What it does show is how text is anti-aliased (note, I use the Strong setting).

[MARINEOSX]

I think that it is all user opinion. I looked at those screen shots and found it much easier to read the text of the OS X side. I like the way that the font is smoothed and not jagged. I also prefer the way that OS X interface looks over Vista or any other OS for that matter. I know a lot of people that say the same thing and some that dont. Obviously Apple wants there OS to look one way and MS wants theirs to look the way they want. it is all prefference. You should try shapeshifter maybe by changing some of the themes and what not you can get it to the way that you prefer. I know that it is not a text thing either, I dont know why after telling everyone 60 times that it is not just text they are stuck on that. LOL Hope that you find a way to customize it to your tastes. I try to do the same. If you find anything interesting let us know.

[JKT]

FWIW, the other major difference that makes things look "sharper" in Windows XP is that windows and edges are surrounded in their entirety by a very dark border, whereas in OS X they aren't surrounded by a line at all on two edges and rely on the drop shadows for window differentiation.

[CaptainHaddock]

Originally Posted by JKT 

FWIW, the other major difference that makes things look "sharper" in Windows XP is that windows and edges are surrounded in their entirety by a very dark border…

And in related news, Da Vinci's Mona Lisa is less sharp than the paint-by-numbers version I coloured in last night.