I liked the app solution. I checked it out when I was using Ubuntu. I don't have a linux right now, and I am not sure which I will pick when I put it on again. I don't think this is an issue though. There are more important things to work on. Screen savers haven't been necessary for years, and they are often annoying. Either you set it to a really long timeout, or they pop up in the middle of a TV show. I want the screen either on, or off. Save some electricity and let your monitor go blank, sleep, or off. If you like a certain screen saver that much, you can install the stuff needed to make it work right. Linux is all about messing with things anyways.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Irios <nachodelosr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Why is it that we *have* to be stuck with the suckiest screensaver selector > of any platform? We've got some of the coolest screensavers, but some are > really very bad; however, there's no way to make a selection, and all users > are stuck with choosing just one, or letting any one pop up at random. All > because a square headed upstream maintainer has determined It Is Bad for > Us. > > Who cares about diverging from Gnome upstream in this? Don't we diverge > from > upstream with the notifier, for example, which is far more important? Let's > kick the screen saver selector in the butt! Then we may push it upstream, > and everything will be dandy. > > -- > no 'Settings' button in gnome-screensaver > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/22007 > You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber > of the bug. > -- no 'Settings' button in gnome-screensaver https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/22007 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is a direct subscriber. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
