681
votes
|
|
889
3
208
|
|
|
|
|
36
votes
|
|
42
1
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
-7
votes
|
|
8
3
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
-208
votes
|
|
114
45
322
|
|
|
|
|
|
178
votes
|
|
196
49
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
406
votes
|
|
423
20
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
712
votes
|
|
728
20
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
81
votes
|
|
117
34
36
|
|
|
|
|
|
-208
votes
|
|
21
11
229
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attachments
Duplicates
Comments
|
taron
wrote on the 11 Mar 08 at 15:31
|
|
|
No. I want more of them, they're great, funny AND good to impress Windows guys.
I don't how many space on the CD they need, but I don't think it's that much.
|
|
|
|
A lot of the screensavers are really terrible! Not very impressive at all. I say remove the junk, keep the quality! (But make sure it's easy to get the rest of the screensavers back for those who want them. Like an removed-screensaver package or something).
|
|
|
|
Fewer screen savers with more options, please! Having a few really cool and configurable screen savers would be the most impressive by far.
|
|
|
I'd say, leave all of them in there, but please include the option to customize each one.
Even the so-so ones are better then the most Windows screensavers... half the time, windows screensavers ask you for money every five minutes.
|
|
dino99
wrote on the 11 Mar 08 at 16:57
|
|
|
make them optional
who care about except geek and kids ?
It's a serious OS not a play station
|
|
Mario92
wrote on the 11 Mar 08 at 17:38
|
|
|
|
My computer doesn't even run but only couple of them :(
|
|
|
|
Provide good screen saver . rather than adding useless screen saver :|
|
|
alvevind
wrote on the 11 Mar 08 at 18:11
|
|
|
I agree there are *way* too many, and most of the are not very interesting or useful and seem very dated.
Keep the 15-20 best ones and scrap the rest.
Just post a poll on ubuntuforums.org or somewhere, and you'll have 100 people helping out selecting the best ones in zero time.
(Make the lousy ones available through the repository if people moan about needing them.)
|
|
|
|
one of the most annoying screensavers on ubuntu, is "blank screen"... if the screen is blank, TURN OFF THE MONITOR, don't waste the energy (especially on laptops)
|
|
|
Hello people. Don't forget that many of these screensavers are in the "extra" packages. Perhaps we should put more of them into "extra" packages.
Don't remove choices. Simply separate the commonly desired ones from the less desired ones in "extra" packages.
|
|
|
|
I don't understand why there is _ANY_ screensaver by default. It seems like there should only be "turn screen off". If people want the actual screensavers (who looks at their computer when they aren't using it?) they can install the package.
|
|
|
|
leave about 10, preferably mostly 2d ones that don't require 3d acceleration. put the rest in a package called screensaver-pack or something, and as pointed out many times before, make them configurable.
|
|
|
+1
Quality first. Minimize the list to a select few based on quality and theme and put the rest in a package that can be added by the user as an option.
|
|
ssam
wrote on the 11 Mar 08 at 20:37
|
|
|
|
and encourage people to turn their monitors off
|
|
Őry Máté
wrote on the 11 Mar 08 at 20:39
|
|
|
|
I can't understand at all why we screen savers need by default. Energy saving should be the first. Screen saver is obsolete.
|
|
Lee
wrote on the 11 Mar 08 at 20:41
|
|
|
The more the merrier -- especially for random mode.
AS LONG AS THEY WORK, that is. Often, they don't.
|
|
Lee
wrote on the 11 Mar 08 at 20:43
|
|
|
|
BTW people, screensavers are not intended to be impressive (not as their main feature, anyway) they're supposed to **save** your **screen**. To do that, the main requirement is lots of movement, with no static areas of color/brightness/contrast. Many of the "impressive" screensavers are actually damaging to your screen.
|
|
ebrahim
wrote on the 11 Mar 08 at 21:44
|
|
|
The best screen saver I know (in term of saving the screen): a blank screen.
But screen savers of Ubuntu are really great. I love most of them :D
|
|
Estesark
wrote on the 11 Mar 08 at 23:03
|
|
|
"80+ screensavers"? Don't know where you're getting that from, I've only got 78... ;)
I agree that it's too many. I think that twenty or so should be enough, and at least half of those should be able to run without a decent graphics card - my GeForce 7100 GS (no comments please) isn't able to display most of the current batch at a decent speed, and as there isn't a configuration option, I'm stuck with dimming the screen.
|
|
|
5 screen savers?
That is too few!
PS. The SkyRocket screensaver is absolutely awesome, I watch it like a little kid!
|
|
|
I agree...
Maybe getting some screensavers out will make some space to include more Wallpapers
|
|
johno
wrote on the 12 Mar 08 at 02:33
|
|
|
Screensavers have been obsolete for years. Even CRTs have had DPMS standby modes for a long time that give substantial power savings and negligable resume time. But now with LCDs there isn't an issue of burn-in anyhow, and they benefit even more from switching the display to standby.
I guess a fade to blank screen after 10 minutes, and the DPMS standby one minute later, would be a reasonable default. But overall, the dozens of low-quality "screen-savers" don't worry me too much - because blank-screen is all that's needed anyhow.
But for the people that insist on chewing through a needless 40W of power to have a moving pretty picture showing it makes sense to cull back the default list.
|
|
|
|
I love the screensavers, they keep my cat entertained for hours! ;-) bb
|
|
johno
wrote on the 12 Mar 08 at 02:42
|
|
|
Come to think of it, why isn't there a button to press or click to "turn display backlighting off now"? Basically a keybinding or toolbar icon to "xset dpms force standby"
That way when you get up and leave a computer you can tell it to start saving straight away. (better still engage S3 suspend... but the overall most popular idea is most popular for a reason :-(
|
|
|
3 meta-packages should be made:
screensavers (default installation) - should have ~10-15 2-D only screen savers.
screensavers-extra - should have all the other screensavers that do not requite openGL/compiz.
screensavers-3d - should have screensavers that require a 3d rendering engine/graphics card (openGL/compiz).
|
|
amiga_os
wrote on the 12 Mar 08 at 13:32
|
|
|
Absolutely. mmcmonster is right... though, like the original idea, I think 5 screensavers is more than enough for the default install.
After all, space screensavers use on the CD could be used for something else. There's loads of other things that are higher priority than having a tonne of screensavers, most of which don't work.
The only reason we have so many screensavers, is they're a cool thing to do when you're learning to program.
|
|
|
|
I never use screensaver actually... Just keep 3 or 4 different ones and let them be configurable.
|
|
gh
wrote on the 16 Mar 08 at 13:06
|
|
|
|
There should be no 3D screensaver installed by defaut, because at least one of them makes the computer freeze (I don't remember the message it displayed).
|
|
xiphias
wrote on the 19 Mar 08 at 20:11
|
|
|
Actually, i like having LOTS of them. A filter on quality would be a good idea, but i still think it is one of the features that impresses a lot of people new to ubuntu, thanks to the fact that you do not need to change anything on your newly installed system to have this. And, turning them off is easy.
At least it shows what creativity exists on the platform and within the OS-community in general.
|
|
arbulus
wrote on the 25 Mar 08 at 18:31
|
|
|
Screensavers are completely obsolete. There is no such thing as burn-in on an LCD screen, which is exactly what screensavers were created to prevent. Since the condition no longer exists, I say do away with the solution. Beside that, they take a great deal of processing power to run, so your computer is using more power to run a screen saver than it would be just sitting there idle.
I say remove them completely from the default install and leave a "Screensavers" package in the repos that people can install if they really want them.
|
|
|
|
Probably said before, preinstalled screen savers should energy efficient and should be simple; eg black screen, and maybe bouncing ubuntu logo, every other screen saver should be easily installed from the desktop settings -> screen savers...
|
|
dino
wrote on the 16 Jun 08 at 13:48
|
|
|
Just to clarify:
> Isn't gnome "keep it simple"?
yes. gnome comes with about 5 IIRC.
All others came from http://www.jwz.org/xscreensaver/ (not part of gnome)
|
|
ebrahim
wrote on the 16 Jun 08 at 20:25
|
|
|
|
@arbulus: There are still many CRTs out there. And showing a blank screen eats less power than showing anything else!
|
|
|
|
i agree. as much as i like some of the screen savers, having 75-80 by default is stretching it a little. great idea to pull the excess off into a separate package...but i definitely don't think they should be removed completely. screen savers may be largely obsolete now in terms of their original intended use, but lots of people still like them just because they look neat. isnt that enough reason to keep them, albeit drastically cut back?
|
|
|
|
Perhaps it would be good to have only 5 or so screensavers and have a button to "Get more Screensavers".
|
|
|
I personally hate the screen savers bundled in ubuntu, well most of them. They look really tacky and outdated. Out of them all the ubuntu logo and 'flurry' are my favourites, but all the rest should be removed, never to return! Vista doesn't have 95 screensavers included.
There are too many, but cutting down isn't totally it, we need new screen savers, not one Ubuntu release has come with a new screen saver that includes 'hardy', '8.04', 'gusty', 'intrepid?' etc. this should be pretty simple in relation to the whole os being upgraded.
|
|
iswan
wrote on the 1 Dec 08 at 08:48
|
|
|
|
Most of them are ugly ! I see that fedora have only a few amount of screensaver. Just choose five best screensavers to put on the live cd !
|
|
|
|
i agree, please take them off, see fedora, they have just four r five screensaver, made by them, we should do the same, I think we should vote five to the default installation, and the other ones comes with a optional package.........
|
|
politas
wrote on the 31 May 09 at 05:29
|
|
|
Everyone who "doesn't use screensavers" should not be weighing in to a discussion of how many screensavers should be available. That's like non-programmers debating which IDEs to make available.
I would just like to point out that an LCD uses more energy to show a black pixel than it does for any other colour. LCDs have a constant light source as the backlight, and then provide power to the liquid crystals to make them filter that light.
So, for LCDs, if you want to reduce power usage, a pure white screen is better than a black screen. Counter-intuitive, I know, but true. Of course the best option is to power it off entirely.
|
Post your comment
|
