On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 10:43 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:53:48 -0500, Dimi wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 15:09 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > > I fail to see how a solid cursor is that much harder to find than > > > a blinking one. Unless you're only entering solid boxes as text? > > > > There's a reason it's been like this in like ... forever. > > What's the reason? > > I could understand some of the opposition, if the cursor still were an > underscore character or a narrow line, both which would be difficult to > spot in a text editor. gEdit for example. A blinking insertion point is > easier to spot in such a case. In typical line-based terminal emulators, > where you cannot move the insertion point as freely as in text editors, > the blinking cursor box is unnecessary. It's distracting even, in > particular in terminals which don't wait for input because they are busy > executing something. > > > On a busy X session (I typically have 30-40+ windows open) > > not having a blinking cursor is crazy. > > The problem with your arguments is that you call something "crazy" without > explaining *what* would be crazy about it. Only one out of your 30-40+ > windows would be active/selected and highlighted with different window > border colours. > I've been running without a blinking cursor now for almost 24 hours, and I feel great. I recommend you all try it too. I don't even realize that there was a change, and I have had no difficulty in identifying where the cursor is. I do not know how many trees I've saved yet. Being in Malaysia, there's plenty to go around, but that's not really a good reason not to care... ________________________________________________________________________ Basil Mohamed Gohar abu_hurayrah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx www.basilgohar.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
