Reply to topic

Your opinion on screen savers is required

What would you say if KDE Plasma would no longer support X Screensavers?

Poll ended at Sun Oct 09, 2011 10:17 am

I would switch to another Desktop Environment
1%
I would complain
1%
I would miss them but could live without them
8%
I don't use screen savers, it doesn't affect me
53%
Finally new screen savers, thanks a lot
32%
I don't care
5%

Total votes : 286


ashtonford
Registered Member
Posts
1
Karma
0
OS
[bug][/bug]
mgraesslin wrote: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

thats one of the big problems with kde not having a option to turn off the screensaver, blank screen with out editing files etc.
User avatar martinc
Registered Member
Posts
9
Karma
0
OS
The last time I used a screensaver was the built-in DOS Norton Commander's screen saver.
Since moder monitors have ACPI capabilities screensavers are no longer needed, just an eyecandy that may appeal some users and others don't.
Worst, most modern screen savers are just resource-hog applications that literally makes your laptop get hotter and consume far more energy than if the screen were just blank or suspended!

So for me is a big +1 to shredd the screen savers, a good screen locker and the hability to blank the screen or just turn it off is all we need in modern systems, everything else is a trivial-soft.
molecule-eye
Registered Member
Posts
393
Karma
0
OS
I never got to participate in the poll, but since I haven't used a screensaver for years (I prefer blanking the screen through power management), I wouldn't miss it at all, and I would very much appreciate the added security in a new implementation of a screen locker.

EDIT: Is this already old news for KDE 4.9.x and higher? (I notice in Kubuntu 12.10 the screen locker is still the same old miserable security-flawed thing it was from way back.)
User avatar Fri13
Registered Member
Posts
397
Karma
4
OS
As many I don't neither use screen savers as LCD displays use way too much power to be kept ON for displaying some fancy graphics and way too fast to be brought back from power saving state when needed.

Yet I can find some would like them on these days of OLED and LED displays. But I would argue most of the existing screensavers are such what people really would love to use.

Few examples what I am waiting with QML screen savers:

1. Display a animated icon when new notification is received otherwise on blank screen.

2. Display a photo stream of specifically tagged photos / specific directory as photo album/wall.

3. Implemented notification center where twitter hastags, facebook notification, new emails etc are received.

4. Few old colorful screensavers ported back like "Solarwinds" but with new style like animate official KDE 4.10 wallpaper with moving "wings".
Gannet
Registered Member
Posts
3
Karma
0
I don't use screensavers but I could if it work without bugs.
cingram
Registered Member
Posts
4
Karma
0
I don't use screen savers, so it wouldn't change anything for me.
User avatar hermantowawan
Registered Member
Posts
70
Karma
0
i dont use screen saver,so no problem anything :)

Last edited by hermantowawan on Sun Jun 15, 2014 6:52 am, edited 3 times in total.


I Am Still Learning About KDE
User avatar scummos
Global Moderator
Posts
1015
Karma
7
OS
I guess this topic has been dealt with years ago ;)


I'm working on the KDevelop IDE.
rsupremo
Registered Member
Posts
51
Karma
0
OS
I like and use screensavers. For me it's important to have interesting screen savers which are run after some time or during screen locking but I don't put emphasizes on the mechanism behind them if they provide this basic functionality.


openSUSE 13.2, KDE 4.14.2
Arch Linux, KDE 4.14.7
eschoeller
Registered Member
Posts
2
Karma
0
I really think the option to use a screensaver should still exist. I understand the thought about power savings. It should be up to the individual to make that decision, not imposed upon us. Whatever happened to our freedom? In the past I made a decision to have a fancy screensaver run for about 15 minutes and then switch to a dpms power off. I did this for style ... it was attractive to have a cool screensaver running in the background while I was having a discussion with someone in my office. Now I just have a boring lock screen duplicated across 6 monitors. The screen saver running across all 6 looked incredibly awesome!!!
User avatar JaKi
Registered Member
Posts
109
Karma
0
OS
I love to use a screensaver. It is so relaxing and it reminds me of taking a small break. I don't need a lock screen, screensavers are not for locking the screen but for fun and relaxing, they make you feel good. Contrary screen locks make you (or at least me) feel bad and aggressive. I'd like to get rid of that lock screen, it is boring, it makes me aggressive looking at it and having to type a password to deactivate it which also hinders the workflow. It always annoyed me, e.g. when I switched users, got back and my screen was blocked. I'd love to have free access to everything I am using right now - no blocking and passwords to unblock needed, it is a single user PC, (b)locking always comes in the way, screensavers don't. And you can always deactivate a screensaver with the slightest move of the mouse/a finger - no need to type something.

If the screen blends out it should be into something lively and animated or calming smoothing relaxing, not something stiff and blocking... Please give us back the screensavers and let us users decide if we want to use them or not.

In short:
1. (b)locking always comes in the way and hinders the workflow on a single user system
2. animated screen"savers" are not for the hardware or for protecting content but for fun and relaxation
3. please let the user decide how s/he wants to use the computer and what's convenient for him/her

BTW: Would you remove the addressbook from kdepim if 152 of all (!) your users would say that they don't use addressbooks and therefore it doesn't affect them? That's 53% of only 286 KDE SC users (of a userbase of approx. 50.000 users just in this forum), who accidently have seen that poll and were able to react to it.
kde-clearloon
Registered Member
Posts
1
Karma
0
Late to the party here but FWIW...

We have a number of large (30in) monitors in our house that we connect to (kinda dumb terminals), and when we're not using them, we like to have them running slideshows of our photo library, eg our "TV" in the lounge room starts streaming our photos when we're not using it. It's a nice way to keep memories alive.

We use the screensaver feature to do this and, while I'm sure we could find a workaround for it eventually, it would be really nice to just have the computer start running our photostream once we've stopped using it. We don't use lock screens at all. No need.
campbellmalaika
Registered Member
Posts
1
Karma
0
it must

 
Reply to topic

Bookmarks



Who is online

Registered users: atelierrosa, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], bionan, Capitain_Jack, claydoh, Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot], johssw, Nyugame, philippg, Sogou [Bot], TheraHedwig, Yahoo [Bot]