> > >>> At least for the end-user, something in 3D should appear, like > > >>> screen saver > > >> > > >> Actually a proper screen saver just turns the entire screen to > > >> black, and puts the display (and graphics card) into a low power > > >> mode if available. > > > > > > Yeah. I hate screen savers that suck CPU time.... and for what? > > > > That's right, but it's not the reality which is simply that > > screensavers are turned on by default on friendly-user distros. > > Speaking about 3D screensavers seems stupid on this list, but, one is > > speaking about a feature for the mass, hence, if OGC is a graphics > > card for the mass, then one has to comply. Am I wrong ? > > Oh come on. Screensavers are an artform. They quit having much > practical use a long time ago, but who cares? They are eye candy > for eye-candy's sake. Anyway, my distribution actually calls them > "screenhacks" not "screensavers". Most users of course, are not > using the CPU cycles that screenhacks consume. :-)
Eye-candy style "screensavers" are quite annoying. Ever try to talk to someone who is running one? Humans evolved to pay attention to movement, since movement might be a dangerous predator. Therefore such a "screensaver" is a major distraction. A proper screensaver should either put the graphics chip into a low power mode (to reduce power bills, heat, and global warming), or do something useful, like protein folding. http://folding.stanford.edu/FAQ-highperformance.html Does it seem odd to anyone that we can use ATI & Nvidia graphics chips to crunch numbers for medical research, but we can't write a graphics driver for them? _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
