The answer at https://electronics.stackexchange.com/a/42266/1951 looks like this to me:

Normal font rendering at the top, but the MathJax stuff below it is pretty bad. Is it possible to fix this somehow?

• It does look terrible. That hurts my eyes! Oct 10 '12 at 13:12
• I didn't get abdullah's comment to the answer, but the rendering in the question here looks bad indeed. I wanted to post a screenshot of what I see in Firefox, but it's the same endolith posted in his answer here. I also placed text in columns in my answer to the same question, and it looks fine to me. Maybe switching to another browser may help. I always found that even common typefaces like Times New Roman render better in Firefox than in IE, for instance. Oct 12 '12 at 15:41

This is dependent on the browser you are using, so no, nothing can be done by the Stack Exchange team (short of not using MathJax).

One thing you can do is try switching the renderer that MathJax uses. To do this, right click on the MathJax table/text/formula/etc., roll over Math Settings, and then Math Renderer:

I think by default HTML-CSS is used (although in the picture I above I switched to SVG). MathML is only supported by certain browsers, but the one I was using didn't have it so I couldn't post a comparison with it enabled.

• That fixed it for me to make it look perfect, thank you! Oct 10 '12 at 16:42
• It seems you have to do it once per site though, at least doing it once on the main site seems to have fixed it everywhere, the change here did not carry over though. Oct 10 '12 at 17:04
• @Kortuk: you're welcome! Maybe there is a browser plugin or userscript out there that will change the setting for all browsers. Oct 10 '12 at 17:42
• SVG does make it look significantly better, albeit only in comparison. I suppose I can only dream of the day everyone has high-DPI displays OR there is ubiquitous support for ClearType for the sensitive types like myself... sigh... Oct 10 '12 at 22:11

It looks fine to me. I think you'd have to talk to http://www.mathjax.org/ about that.

Does textrm work better than mbox?

$\begin{matrix} \textbf{Capacitive Storage} & & \textbf{Inductive Storage} \\ \textrm{Must have infinite internal resistance} & | & \textrm{Must have zero internal resistance} \\ \textrm{Volatege must stay in it forever} & | & \textrm{Current must flow through it forever} \\ \textrm{You deal with voltage} & | & \textrm{You deal with current} \\ \textrm{Self discharge may take years} & | & \textrm{Self discharges in very short time} \\ \textrm{Electric field doesn't leak outside much} & | & \textrm{Magnetic field may interfere other components} \\ \textrm{Lighter} & | & \textrm{Very heavy (iron, copper, etc)} \\ \textrm{May be cheaper} & | & \textrm{Fe and Cu may be very expensive in some countries} \\ \end{matrix}$

• textrm renders the same as mbox. Native table markup would be great, but this font rendering needs fixing too. Oct 10 '12 at 13:57
• @romkyns: well the font rendering is in your browser, and it's rendering text generated by mathjax, so there's nothing stackexchange can do about it Oct 10 '12 at 15:37