Why is xscreensaver removed in favor of gnome-screensaver

[Jim Cornette]

n0dalus wrote:
> On 2/18/06, Miles Lane <miles.lane at gmail.com> wrote:
>> A quote from that page:
>> ----------
>> Why doesn't the screensaver preferences tool allow me to change the
>> settings for the theme?

That is why I do not use it. You can choose a blank screen, an 
individual screensaver or all the screensavers.
You cannot adjust the source for the text that some screensavers use.
There are no controls.

Let's hope that GNOME does not decide to make breaks. Their attitude 
will be, "You don't need as brake pedal, you will eventually stop 
without one. We want to make things easier for the user and free up 
their foot to tap to the music."

>> We are trying to take a different approach. We would prefer for the
>> themes to simply work. [...]

I would rather stop before I hit the car in front of me, a tree, or 
brick wall. Put back the brake pedal!

>> There are a few reasons for this approach. One of them is to simplify
>> the UI and make it easier for the user.

Not even bothering to turn on the computer at all is simpler. Can we 
expect gnome-poweroff-forever?

  Another reason is so that
>> system administrators can more easily control (or lock down) the
>> settings.
>> ----------

What about gnome-admin-xscreensavers? If I am admin, I don't want to 
disable that which I enjoy to use.
With xscreensaver-base only, you get a blank screensaver. What more 
would an administrator for other people desire than that.
Would not even developing gnome-screensaver (Made for use on many 
desktops, Why gnome-screensaver name?)

>>
>> Personally, I think the Gnome developers' know-it-all attitude is
>> stupid and offensive.  Dang it!  They take their bloody "present no
>> options to the users" too far!  Idiots!

It is downright insane for developers to use this as a rational reason. 
If it is not very customizable by the user, it is a bad approach.

gnome-word is coming out. You can launch it, but it will choose the font 
that you want to use. It is just that easy. The program will even pick 
the proper picture that you want and the exactly correct font color and 
background.

In other words, Gnome developer attitude is plain hog slop. The only 
thing everything that the hog needed was removed to make it easier on 
the pig. If the pig dies because gnome thought that it would be best for 
the pig to not be nourished. It is best for the pig after all.

>>
> 
> I'm sure these particular Gnome developers mean well, and I don't see
> the point in getting angry at them.
> 
> I agree that neither of the reasons they list are very good. Having
> one extra button to open a second dialogue hardly clutters the UI, and
> makes it no harder for the user. To let system admins lock down
> settings, they should simply provide a "Don't show or let users open
> advanced controls." key. I think it's still a good concept to provide
> multiple variations of some of the screensavers in the list, but
> that's not mutually exclusive to allowing advanced controls.
> 
> If someone presents a well-formed and polite request for them to allow
> advanced settings, I think we could get further in resolving this
> issue.

A docile approach in bugzilla usually amounts to a bug closed. We like 
it that way. I filed a bug report for nautilus and it was closed with a 
similar reason.

Jim

> 
> n0dalus.
> 


-- 
When you say 'I wrote a program that crashed Windows', people just stare at
you blankly and say 'Hey, I got those with the system, *for free*'.
	-- Linus Torvalds