Are screen savers necessary?

Message

kim-chee-san · #1 Post by **kim-chee-san** » Tue Jun 24, 2008 3:47 pm

So, at the expense of making myself look like an idiot are screen savers necessary if you have an LCD monitor? I just read an article that says they aren't necessary because LCDs do not suffer from burn-in like CRTs.

#2 Post by **RealBlackStuff** » Tue Jun 24, 2008 3:56 pm

It's much better to have the LCD switch off automatically after idling xx minutes.
Set this in your BIOS and/or the Display properties (under Energy saving).
Saves battery time as well.

#3 Post by **gator** » Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:18 pm

Even modern day CRTs don't probably need a screen-saver as much as the older ones do, but burn-in does happen if you leave your monitor (CRT or LCD) for too long. The nice thing about LCDs is that the afterimage goes away with time ... Most people use screen savers for eyecandy. There is still debate as to whether switching off and on the LCD is bad for the backlight, but it should not matter in the regular lifetime of a laptop ... screensaver is probably a good thing to use imho.

Trekk69 · #4 Post by **Trekk69** » Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:32 pm

I just have mine to switch off, I thought the whole thing with screen savers (a moving object on the screen) was so the pixels did not become burned in/out....but than again I heard that when I was young from my computer teacher!

pianowizard · #5 Post by **pianowizard** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:28 am

It's funny that I read this article just several hours before the OP started this thread. I always do what the author recommends: turn off the monitor when it's not in use.

#6 Post by **Harryc** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:38 am

pianowizard wrote:It's funny that I read this article just several hours before the OP started this thread. I always do what the author recommends: turn off the monitor when it's not in use.

It's a 'green' website, philosophically speaking. So, it is likely that the author is recommending that we power off the LCD's when not in use to save energy more so than any benefit to the LCD device itself. Plus he's mainly referring to external LCD's. I set my power options to power off the laptop's LCD after a few minutes and disable the screensavers.

mattbiernat · #7 Post by **mattbiernat** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 10:56 pm

my school used both LCDs and CRTs. none of them ever ran a screen saver. all CRTs had image burns but none of the LCDs. it is up to you if you wanna have a screen saver, but based on what i've seen i am never going to use one.

beGi · #8 Post by **beGi** » Thu Jun 26, 2008 4:53 am

I don't use it either, my LCD powers off after 5 minutes.....

virge · #9 Post by **virge** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 1:29 am

I use a the standard Windows XP screensaver with password enabled and the timer set to 5 minutes. Its not really to save the screen, but mostly to automatically lock my computer if I happen to leave my desk for an unexpected amount of time. When I know I won't be back for a while, I will use the "Lock Desktop" key on my keyboard which does the same thing. The problem is sometimes I get sidetracked on what should be a short visit to the water cooler.

leoblob · #10 Post by **leoblob** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 11:28 am

pianowizard wrote:It's funny that I read this article just several hours before the OP started this thread. I always do what the author recommends: turn off the monitor when it's not in use.

I saw the same article and I think it makes a good point. However, switching fluorescent lamps on and off is not a "free lunch," either. Doesn't that tend to wear them out faster (resulting in more equipment ending up in the landfill), and don't they draw more power at the instant they start up? Maybe that only applies to old school fluorescents in office ceilings. I know that some places used to leave those on 24/7 since the start-up surge to get them going was very large.

teetee · #11 Post by **teetee** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 9:28 pm

The only two reasons I know for keeping a screen saver active while the screen is not in use:
1. to prevent the red-burn effect(only happens to ancient TV and CRT monitors)
2. to prevent people passing by know what's on the screen.

I don't recall myself ever used any screen savers since I started using computers. IMO it's a waste of energy to make computer do extra work while it's not used. (especially with those fancy 3D GL ones on linux that always used 100% CPU because the integrated video chip doesn't fully support glx)

And no, I don't think screen savers prolong monitors life at all.

whizkid · #12 Post by **whizkid** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:43 am

leoblob wrote:However, switching fluorescent lamps on and off is not a "free lunch," either. Doesn't that tend to wear them out faster (resulting in more equipment ending up in the landfill), and don't they draw more power at the instant they start up? Maybe that only applies to old school fluorescents in office ceilings. I know that some places used to leave those on 24/7 since the start-up surge to get them going was very large.

Mythbusters covered this recently. Fluorescent bulbs do have an inrush current that takes more power than running the bulb, but if you are not going to be using the light for 23 seconds or longer (0.015 seconds for compacts!), it saves energy to turn the bulb off. Further, their tests showed that switching the light off every time you left the room would make the bulbs last five years, not saving much life span.

The Annotated Mythbusters: Episode 69: 22,000 foot fall, Lights On or Off
http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2006/12/epis ... l_lig.html

leoblob · #13 Post by **leoblob** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:25 am

Interesting info

The one about inrush current looks pretty convincing. Their tests of bulb life, I'm not so sure about that one...

Are screen savers necessary?

Are screen savers necessary?

Who is online