Author |
Message |
bass_maniac
|
Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:39 pm Post subject: Screensaver with Editor |
|
|
Here is my screensaver program. It runs invisibly so just double-click on the screensaver.exe ONCE. Realistically you would do this when you first logged onto your computer and then you'd just leave it and do whatever.
You must download "Explosions.exe", "Screensaver.exe", and "Screensaver.txt" and have them in the same folder for the program to run properly.
In the editor file (called "screensaver.txt") you can change the screensaver displayed and the length of time (in minutes) to wait for mouse inactivity. For demonstration purposes it is set at .1 minutes, or 6 seconds. Move the mouse, the screensaver closes and the program starts counting again.
NOTE: It may take a second or two for the screensaver to close after you move the mouse. Don't worry, it'll disappear.
Because the main program (screensaver.exe) is invisible, the only way to close it is CTRL+ALT+DEL, click the "Processes" tab, find "screensaver.exe", select it and click "End Process". Or just shutdown your computer when you're done.
Two things that make it not like a real screensaver:
1. It doesn't start automatically like the Windows one. I don't know how to make it run when you boot up the computer. If you do, let me know.
2. The title bar at the top of the screensaver window. I don't know how to get rid of that either. Again, let me know, if possible.
You may also make your own screensavers if you want. The one I have set as the default is an "omg sooo trippy cool flashes!" by s_climax. I've also posted the code for this without his permission because there is some code you will have to include in your program to make it work with screensaver.exe. The Turing file clearly outlines these "must have" lines.
Hope you find it interesting.
Description: |
|
Download |
Filename: |
Explosion.t |
Filesize: |
1.4 KB |
Downloaded: |
136 Time(s) |
Description: |
|
Download |
Filename: |
Screensaver.txt |
Filesize: |
17 Bytes |
Downloaded: |
122 Time(s) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sponsor Sponsor
|
|
|
Clayton
|
Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:41 pm Post subject: (No subject) |
|
|
to get rid of the bar at the top (you mean the row of buttons right?) just do this
|
|
|
|
|
|
bass_maniac
|
Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:50 pm Post subject: (No subject) |
|
|
I mean the bar with the "minimize" "maximize" "X" stuff. That still shows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clayton
|
Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:52 pm Post subject: (No subject) |
|
|
i dont think you can actually get rid of that with Turing, i believe its just to limited to do such a thing, however, maybe one of our brilliant mods will be able to help you out with that if there is such a beast of a command
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Gandalf]
|
Posted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:26 am Post subject: (No subject) |
|
|
No, you don't have control over the default window buttons at the top right of your window. Windows Turing can't create full screen programs, only the older DOS version can.
See, the problem with programs like this is that by making them in Turing you are completely defeating their purpose. A screensaver is normally a full screen program which uses minimal processing power and can be used to preserve the monitor or for limited security purposes. A 'screensaver' made in Turing has none of these features.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andy
|
Posted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 1:38 pm Post subject: (No subject) |
|
|
I dont think a screensaver actually minimizes processing power... infact it would technically increase it
|
|
|
|
|
|
md
|
Posted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm Post subject: (No subject) |
|
|
A screensaver _uses_ minimal processing time. Usually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Gandalf]
|
Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:35 am Post subject: (No subject) |
|
|
My point was that they use as little processing power as possible to run (minimal), unlike Turing which by default consumes 100%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sponsor Sponsor
|
|
|
Andy
|
Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:47 am Post subject: (No subject) |
|
|
but if your screen saver is running, all your background activies dont just stop.. they continue to run. so wouldnt it be as if you were adding an extra process on to the stack?
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Gandalf]
|
Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:25 pm Post subject: (No subject) |
|
|
True, but if that screensaver is only using up 1% of processing power, the background processes remain virtually unaffected. I'm pretty sure that Turing uses up 100% no matter what processes are running in the background, which would render something that has a high CPU usage useless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andy
|
Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 4:22 pm Post subject: (No subject) |
|
|
oh.. sry i read your post wrong haha... my bad
|
|
|
|
|
|
|