Screensaver to be or not to be (was: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch)

Torgny Nyblom nyblom at
Wed Oct 12 07:26:20 BST 2011

On Tuesday 11 October 2011 20.54.42 Thomas L├╝bking wrote:
> Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:02:32 +0200
> schrieb Torgny Nyblom <nyblom at>:
> > Screensaver is bling only
> No, "screensaver hacks are bling only", a "screensaver" is a
> software relic.


> The key aspect is "when and why is there eye-candy".
> You can still run all scsreensavers to look at them, they're just
> ordinary single window applications.
> You can even run them fullscreen. No problem.
> BUT: running them automatically because you're away and the system is
> idle is simply not a justifiable (anymore),

Why? I like this feature.

> and that was the concept of a
> "screensaver" which was just 10 years ago, but is no way today


> - and on
> battery driven systems actually must be tagged stupid, sorry.

But on non battery powered devices?


More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list