Why isn't xwinwrap a bigger deal?

[mazz0]

Video wallpapers are ace - why aren't more people interested?!

I like a nice subtle nature scene myself, like a tree with the leaves blowing gently in the wind, or a little gently flowing stream, so when I'm at work it's like I'm out in the countryside or something. Perhaps I need a change of career...

[Skripka]

Video wallpapers are ace - why aren't more people interested?!

I like a nice subtle nature scene myself, like a tree with the leaves blowing gently in the wind, or a little gently flowing stream, so when I'm at work it's like I'm out in the countryside or something. Perhaps I need a change of career...

Because most of the time, the desktop is covered with stuff, and the reward usually ain't worth the performance hit.

[FuturePilot]

Because most of the time, the desktop is covered with stuff, and the reward usually ain't worth the performance hit.

My thoughts exactly. Most of the time I have a bunch of windows covering my desktop.

[mazz0]

Sometimes I unminimize my windows so I can see my desktop more and make the whole look of the screen cheerier. Am I weird? :(

I don't get the "performance hit" explanation. I hear it a lot when talking about this (as I did when it was first added to Vista), but neither the video background feature in Vista nor VNC with xwinwrap used a significant amount of CPU or memory for me - I'd have thought only very old machines would need to devote a significant proportion of their resources just to playing a video, and whilst I know and appreciate that Ubuntu runs well on older machines (I'm not going to be telling my parents to start using video backgrouds on their cheap old PCs that are only used for email and internet) surely a lot of people (especially geeks like us!) have PCs with enough power to be pretty much idle most of the time?