On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Pasha R <pashar.ml@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 10:17 AM, drago01 <drago01@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Pasha R <pashar.ml@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Jason D. Clinton <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 05:29, Pasha R <pashar.ml@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> Probably, inability to configure your screensaver is much more >>>>> noticeable than inability to stop copy operation. :) >>>> >>>> Now *that* is intentional. >>> >>> Care to explain the logic behind this? Because it is really beyond my >>> understanding. >> >> Screensavers has lost there use years ago. >> With today's screens they don't really "save" anything but simply >> waste power for no reason whatever. >> >> I never understand why anyone would want anything but "power down the >> screen" in that case. What is the point of the fancy >> graphics when no one is looking at it anyway? > > Well, some of my family members actually enjoy looking family pictures > that picture screensaver was displaying. A screensaver isn't the right tool for this ... there are lots of dedicated apps for viewing family pictures. -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
