Mail Archives: djgpp/1999/02/11/16:56:34
Ralph Proctor wrote:
> I only write this because I believe "savers" are a waste of memory
Hmm... as I write this on my Linux box, `ps' with the xlock
"screensaver" running shows it eating about 3 MB... of course, xlock has
about 60 designs (from "ant" to "worm") and they're all compiled in to
the binary. Can't argue with you on that one.
> and are
> mainly for the purpose of home/office decoration.
Hence the interest in them. :) AFAIK, modern screens don't really need
saving. Burn-in was much more of a problem with old monochrome
monitors. Screen savers are mainly useful to look at and impress your
friends ("Look how smoothly that ball bounces!")
And if you *really* want to protect the monitor from burn-in, you should
use some of the DPMS facilities to stop the scan or power the thing
down.
--
Nate Eldredge
nate AT cartsys DOT com
- Raw text -