On Tuesday, October 11, 2011 20:54:42 Thomas Lübking wrote: > BUT: running them automatically because you're away and the system is > idle is simply not a justifiable (anymore)
With all due respect, and with full agreement that screen savers are not in general required to *protect the screen*... who are you to unilaterally declare what is and is not justifiable for a user to want to do with their own computer? Do you mean that it is not justifiable by the reasoning of protecting the screen from damage? Because if so screensavers haven't been required for their original purpose for years and years now, that's nothing new. Regards, - Michael Pyne
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
