On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 02:41:21PM -0500, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > On Wednesday 24 January 2007 14:03, Steve Lamb wrote: > > > > > The fanatics insisted that the background should be black and the text > > > white because that was the "natural" way to view a computer screen. It > > > was the way that it would always remain. Of course, when I went to my > > > office supply store and tried to buy some black paper and white ink they > > > thought I was crazy. > > > > Of course they are. I would, too. Now to explain *your* ignorance. > > Paper is REFLECTIVE. Monitors are PROJECTIVE. What's that mean? It means > > that paper REFLECTS the light that hits it. Without an outside source of > > light you wouldn't see jack on paper. However a monitor PROJECTS light. > > In the absence of all other light you would still see a text on the > > monitor. > > Wow! Nice explanation. I have always liked white on black xterms and never > was > able to explain why so. Glad to hear that there is a logical reason behind > all this. If this is so, I wonder why gnome, kde chose to have white on black > background as defaults in konsole, gnome-terminal etc., Are those developers > so "reflective" than being "projective"? :-) >
I wich I could set *everything* on the screen to default to white on black. Unfortunately, the world is full of web pages that explicity specify the opposite. Still, I thought I could specify a different default foreground and background and at least see some pages reasonably. But that was worse -- many pages specify the foreground colour without specifying the background (or vice versa) and I ended up with dark on dark, or bright on bright, comnpletely illegible. -- hendrik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
