This is in the nature of a rant:
So, I bought a ThinkPad W530. A very capable laptop that came with Windows 8.
My intent was to keep Windows on the machine for several weeks while I helped a friend finish a project. I figured I could put up with Windows for that long.
I thought wrong.
After 2 days with Windows, I replaced it with Ubuntu 13.04. We'll have to find another way to finish that project.
'Twas the stunningly awful font rendering that did it. I couldn't believe how bad it was.
If you look around, you can find plenty of explanations that Windows has a different concept of how to render fonts. That's all well and good. But, is there an edict in Redmond that says text in Windows must look like it was splashed on by a drunken sign painter?
Regular and small fonts were spindly and pixellated. (No pixels, please!) Bold fonts, large and small, were smeary and often of varying shades of black; edges and lines that are supposed to be straight and smooth were not; curves that are supposed to be smooth and curvy were stepladdered and notchy. (For example, the pixels on the left edge of an 'E' should line up perfectly. If it was bolded, black pixels extending to the left of that edge were clearly visible.
In Win8, IE10 defaults to msn.com as a home page. You'd think Microsoft would make sure that site would look really good in IE10. They don't, though. It's a miserable looking piece of work.
I know Windows carries around with it all kinds of compatibility requirements. It uses, I think, 6 different approaches to rendering fonts on screen. That's no excuse, though, for continuing to market software that conjures up text that looks like rubbish.