Inconsistent Dialog Fonts

Think you've found a bug? Post a description here.

Moderator: Serin

Post Reply
kagerato
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:38 pm
Contact:

Inconsistent Dialog Fonts

Post by kagerato » Tue Jun 07, 2005 2:00 pm

I've noticed on several occasions that some dialogs (many of them, actually) use "MS Sans Serif" and others use "MS Shell Dlg". It seems like a rather simple bug, but an annoying one nonetheless.

On Windows XP (and presumably higher), there is an option to change font rendering from standard to "ClearType". ClearType is a sort of anti-aliasing effect which greatly improves the display quality of text (supposedly moreso on LCDs than CRTs, but I like it on both). Unfortunately, ClearType cannot be applied to raster (bitmap) fonts like 'MS Sans Serif' (sserife.fon).

The solution? Change all of the dialogs to use 'MS Shell Dlg'. This is not an actual font in and of itself but rather a Windows selection mechanism. On WinXP, 'MS Shell Dlg' can evaluate to any truetype font one wishes through the manipulation of the appropriate value in HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\FontSubstitutes. On earlier systems, it is automatically assigned a raster font instead. The 'shell dialog' pseudo-font was introduced with the intent of maintaining a sort of graceful backwards-compatibility, I believe.

The license (EULA) seems to explictly forbid the end user from correcting this problem using a resource editor: "...you may not: (i) reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software; (ii) modify, or create derivative works based upon, the Software in whole or in part..."

I do not know of any legal precedent which has established EULAs as legally binding, however.

Thank you for your time.

User avatar
Serin
Site Administrator
Posts: 1785
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 6:57 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by Serin » Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:56 pm

Hello,

This has been resolved in the newest release. Thanks!

kagerato
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:38 pm
Contact:

Post by kagerato » Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:20 pm

No, thank you. This version is a significant improvement on an already excellent program. Well done.

:D

Post Reply