> That would be calibration and it's still necessary if you want color accuracy.
Your correction is backwards. Profiling + colour-managed apps gets you accurate colours regardless of source colourspace. Calibration doesn’t, and is not strictly needed either.
No, my correction is correct. Colorimeters are physical measurement devices to adjust the display so that it reports an accurate color profile in the first place for which to color manage to. It's required for the monitor itself to be able to display accurate colors at all.
> Colorimeters are physical measurement devices to adjust the display so that it reports an accurate color profile in the first place for which to color manage to.
No. You can profile an uncalibrated (unadjusted) display and the profile will be correct. There is zero inherent requirement to adjust the display, or for the display itself to report a profile.
> It's required for the monitor itself to be able to display accurate colors at all.
Also no. Once you have profiled the uncalibrated display, you can accurately display colours within its gamut by converting to the profile.
It's better because it's the minimum change to mouse cursor behavior that allows the feature to work. You don't need to see the cursor while it's off-screen because the point is manipulate the 3D object, and you can look at the 3D object instead. The same is true for things like controls in an audio DAW which might also benefit from off-screen mouse movement.
If there's really a case where you need to see the exact position of the cursor while it's off-screen, you could display it wrapped around only while it's actually off-screen. But this would potentially confuse new users, so it should be optional and disabled by default.
> You don't need to see the cursor while it's off-screen because the point is manipulate the 3D object, and you can look at the 3D object instead.
Disagreed. Seeing the cursor at all times gives you some point of reference, and once you release the tool, you know where your cursor is.
> If there's really a case where you need to see the exact position of the cursor while it's off-screen, you could display it wrapped around only while it's actually off-screen.
I don’t understand what this means. If it’s not off-screen then it’s automatically also not wrapped around.
> But this would potentially confuse new users, so it should be optional and disabled by default.
This presumes that “cursor is suddenly allowed to be off-screen and not visible” is less confusing.
>Seeing the cursor at all times gives you some point of reference, and once you release the tool, you know where your cursor is.
Seeing is an inferior means of knowing where the cursor is compared to intuition. When I move the cursor, I know where it is with no conscious effort because I treat it as part of my hand. I disable mouse acceleration to make this easier. I don't need to look at my hand to know where my hand it. My subjective experience of mouse clicking is the same: I look at the target and the mouse cursor automatically appears there. If you allow software to move the mouse cursor you weaken this intuition.
>I don’t understand what this means. If it’s not off-screen then it’s automatically also not wrapped around.
When the cursor moves off-screen, it could be displayed with position modulus the screen width/height. Additionally, the cursor shape could be changed to make it obvious it's not the true position. This might make sense if you really need to know the exact off-screen position and the GUI control you're manipulating doesn't provide sufficiently precise feedback.
>This presumes that “cursor is suddenly allowed to be off-screen and not visible” is less confusing.
It is less confusing because other than extending the range of the mouse off-screen, the mouse behavior doesn't change. As soon as the off-screen action finishes, the mouse cursor snaps back to the position it would have otherwise been in.
An alternative option would be to snap back to the position it was where the special off-screen mode was initiated. This might actually be better, because it makes the off-screen mousing mode an extension of moving the mouse while it's lifted off the mouse pad, which users already have intuition for.
> Seeing is an inferior means of knowing where the cursor is compared to intuition. When I move the cursor, I know where it is with no conscious effort [...]
Realize it consciously or not, visual feedback is a critical part of this loop.
> As soon as the off-screen action finishes, the mouse cursor snaps back to the position it would have otherwise been in.
The cursor jumping to the edge of the screen, which is not somewhere the user ever saw it and may be outside of the application, seems worse than any current issue while still being insufficient for most legitimate use-cases.
I don't really see any fake cursor approach that isn't going to behave awkwardly in practice - e.g: is it your real (invisible?) cursor or fake cursor that can click to focus another application, and what happens to your cursors when you do so?
Just letting the user deny mouse control for an app (like on Wayland) seems sufficient to solve your annoyance. Maybe adding a separate permission for control while unfocused, since that's rarer. No need to break all windowed applications with reason to capture/move the mouse.
> Research by TRL in the UK in 2020 found that mobile phone interfaces for car touch screens, known as Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, reduced reaction times as much as drink or drug driving.
“Warning!
Using the XML syntax is not recommended, for reasons which include the fact that there is no specification which defines the rules for how an XML parser must map a string of bytes or characters into a Document object, as well as the fact that the XML syntax is essentially unmaintained — in that, it’s not expected that any further features will ever be added to the XML syntax (even when such features have been added to the HTML syntax).”
> Yes, it is written systemd, not system D or System D, or even SystemD. And it isn't system d either. Why? Because it's a system daemon, and under Unix/Linux those are in lower case, and get suffixed with a lower case d. And since systemd manages the system, it's called systemd. It's that simple.
> I think everything about the 10.7 Lion GUI looks better than the 10.6 Snow Leopard GUI — except for the omission of the resize affordance in the corner.
Your correction is backwards. Profiling + colour-managed apps gets you accurate colours regardless of source colourspace. Calibration doesn’t, and is not strictly needed either.
https://discuss.pixls.us/t/rip-displaycal/21775/130
reply