Lock Screen in menu only works when screensaver is configured.

[Mike A. Harris]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Matthew Miller wrote:

>> The default screensaver definitely should not be "random" IMHO, 
>> but it also shouldn't just be "blank".  I believe the default 
>
>Why shouldn't it be random?

One main reason is for security/privacy/confidentiality purposes.  
Currently, a large number of the screensavers leak screen content 
information, by turning your desktop into a jigsaw puzzle, or 
some other eye candy that uses the current graphics on-screen in 
a manipulative manner.  In enviroments which are sensitive to 
information leakage of this nature, those have to be disabled.

Since there's no real tangible benefit to having random 
screensavers by default, and there is a tangible benefit to 
having security by default, it makes sense to not have a random 
screensaver by default.


>Although this seems silly, a _lot_ of people in my office have
>seen the screensavers bouncing around on one of my test
>machines, and said "woah, what's that"? And then when I explain
>that it's the default xscreensaver that comes with Linux, they
>are impressed -- "wow, that's really graphical, and nicer than
>Windows".

Indeed, and random screensavers should still remain an option for 
that purpose.  It just shouldn't be the default.