For KDE Plasma 4.8 we (the Plasma developers) are working on a new screen locker implementation. The new solution will solve some security constraints of the existing screen locker and will make the lock screen way more appealing.

On the downside it means that we can no longer include the almost 20 year old X screen savers. As a temporary solution we will offer a fallback to the old implementation if a screen saver is configured. For 4.9 we plan to remove the support for X screen savers completely. We want to offer a better way to provide screen savers by making use of Qt Quick, so that everybody can contribute new screen savers which can be shared through kde-look.org.

We are not sure how our users would react if we remove the X screen savers and replace them by a new solution. We would like you to contribute and share your opinion. Tell us why you need screen savers and how you would think about if the currently used screen saver could no longer be used. Please participate in the poll and leave your comment in the thread.

Thanks

I'm in between "I'd miss them" and "I don't use them", as I don't usually use them (it depends on the machine).

And as long as some new screensavers could be used (so that new users don't complain: "what? there are no screensavers? wth?"), it would be fine

I think this is a really good initiative to ask this kind of questions on the forums. I don't know if you already did it in the past but I encourage you to do it again in the future.

Many complaints you are subjected to are due to misunderstanding. Im' sure explaining your decisions and asking for the opinion of users would reduce complaints. And you could also point out to trolls that a choice was first validated by users on the forum.

Concerning the screensavers, I think this is a good solution. A new system was needed for a long time. Keeping both of them during the first 6 month will permit users to use old screensavers while new ones are developped with the new system.

Stickied to get better exposure.

I don't know what architecture asciiquarium uses but if it stays compatible or gets ported I'll be happy.

I am fine with removing screen saver support from the screen locker but, I do not see why screensavers should disappear. Can not the following scenario be a compromise for both users and developers?:

* Implement screenlocking with QML
* Let classical screensavers run without locking the screen

There are 4 kinds of users with two 1-bit properties: «wants to save the screen (to use a screen saver)», «wants to lock the screen». Let's call those properties S and L respectively. What could happen to these users if the scenario above occurs:

User 1: S: no, L: no
Does not lose anything in any case.

User 2: S: no, L: yes
May be surprised by the change but what the user cares about is still there.

User 3: S: yes, L: no
Nothing changes. The user still sees the pretty screensaver and never sees the locking screen because it is not configured to be locked.

User 4: S: yes, L: yes
This user wants to save the screen when the user is working on something else than the computer but, wants to lock the screen when the computer is alone. The user could start the lock manually or automatically. The latter case configured to be after X seconds of screen saver.


In my scenario almost every user can be happy with it. If user 4 wants the screen saver and the screen locker to be the same thing, this scenario can not help him.


So I ask you, can not the following be a simple compromise?

* Implement screenlocking with QML
* Let classical screensavers run without locking the screen

So I ask you, can not the following be a simple compromise?

* Implement screenlocking with QML
* Let classical screensavers run without locking the screen

I voted "I don't use screensavers" but that solution sounds sensible, assuming it is simple of course.

Hi there.
I dont use (X)SS at all. whould it be not better to disable the screen on this time? I mean who needs screensavers 2011? even on my old CRT i never used any screensaver in his 17years old lifetime. it went to a standby mode after 10min

dpalacio wrote:So I ask you, can not the following be a simple compromise?

* Implement screenlocking with QML
* Let classical screensavers run without locking the screen

You will always be able to just use the plain old xscreensaver implementation. But it won't be embedded into KDE's screensaver framework anymore. The current implementation is a hack around X and we don't want to invest time into that legacy code.

Kookii wrote:I mean who needs screensavers 2011? even on my old CRT i never used any screensaver in his 17years old lifetime. it went to a standby mode after 10min

I quite agree that power saving is the better solution and we will clearly advertise to use power saving instead of screen savers to protect the environment. Unfortunately there could be users who love to have some animation running on their screen when they are not around.

I use screen locking at work to lock my screen. Losing XScreensavers there would not be an issue, and I would be quite happy for improvements to screen locking (it is somewhat buggy as is). Beyond that, I haven't used a screen saver in ages.

I hardly ever use screensavers, beyond the screen locking functionality. Once in a while I experiment a bit with having plasma applets on my black SS-screen. Something like an email/messenger notifier, Amarok buttons, a clock, etc. But for some reason, that never really stays. That can be also a bit buggy. If anything I'd like to see an improved functionality (but it is really not enough to complain about). In other words: Go forward, go forward!

illissius wrote:I don't know what architecture asciiquarium uses but if it stays compatible or gets ported I'll be happy.

+1

Kookii wrote:Hi there.
II mean who needs screensavers 2011?

+1

put the screen to standby and save energy.

i suppose those who still wan't screen savers are looking for shiny eye candy. therefore i guess a new approach would be indeed the way to go!

How video players now should block Plasma-implementation of screensavers?

RussianNeuroMancer wrote:How video players now should block Plasma-implementation of screensavers?

This doesn't change, we only changed the visual aspects, not the interfaces to the outside world.