From owner-freebsd-current Fri Sep 18 16:24:04 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA29527 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Fri, 18 Sep 1998 16:24:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smtp02.primenet.com (smtp02.primenet.com [206.165.6.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA29469 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 1998 16:23:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr06.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp02.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA03252; Fri, 18 Sep 1998 16:23:09 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr06.primenet.com(206.165.6.206) via SMTP by smtp02.primenet.com, id smtpd003185; Fri Sep 18 16:23:02 1998 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr06.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA28068; Fri, 18 Sep 1998 16:22:35 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199809182322.QAA28068@usr06.primenet.com> Subject: Re: ELF -current Screen Saver Issues ? To: mike@smith.net.au (Mike Smith) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 23:22:35 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com, vanessa.voysey@k2c.co.uk, current@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199809182223.PAA01486@dingo.cdrom.com> from "Mike Smith" at Sep 18, 98 03:23:00 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Consider that the goal of a screensaver is to spread the displayed image > over as much of the screen area as possible, levelling the wear on the > phosphor (both colour and monochrome) while maintaining some beam > current. That'd work great, if you had a record of what was on the screen so that you didn't burn the same pixels that were burnt before (ie: average burn on all pixels was equal). Seems that it'd cause the thing to wear out all at once, instead of becoming marginally usable before becoming useless, so it'd wear out faster... > It's important to keep the beam current up in some applications as it > improves regulation and extends the life of the power supply. This I'll agree with... though it seems more applicable to the old high-res screens, before the scan rate went up. For this, it'd seem the best thing, without a running total of relative on-time-per-pixel, would be to burn as few pixels as possible (ie: no snake, no life program, no "bouncing chuck"). > With > most modern monitors, you're better doing the 'green' thing and telling > it to turn off, of course. I agree with this too... It just annoys me that they aren't called "screen toys" instead of "screen savers", since the software rarely does the work necessary to actually prolong the useful life of a monitor subject to burn-in, unless it does something like a single pixel scan over the screen (starting at a random location to avoid cooking the upper screen before the bottom, of course). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message