For many monitors this is not true. For a screen where the resting state of the LCD pixels are open displaying black means the monitor has to switch the diffuser to closed in order to block the light, which uses more energy than displaying white. There are lots of different LCD technologies which affect whether black or white is more efficient. For CRT screens black is always better.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-b...
Did you test that setting every pixel black actually triggers this? Most OS just shut the monitor after inactivity (by ceasing to output video signal, or something like that).
Ahh maybe you are referring to dynamic contrast (which is still a misfeature).
> What's dynamic contrast?
Shutting certain backlights to raise the contrast between the dark side of the screen and the lit side. It has various undesireable side effects such as the darkening and lightening giant areas unexpectedly. They often try to make the transition gradual which just makes the screen even less real-time.
No, it takes around 200ms for it to turn back on.
> Shutting certain backlights to raise the contrast between the dark side of the screen and the lit side.
Ah, no, there are no sections in this one, the whole backlight turns off and on.
Ctrl+L
data:text/html,<body bgcolor=maroon>
Enter
F11
For maximum points I'd expect candidate given task "fill your screen with black" to simply turn it off.
Doesn't always work, but good enough.
(OTOH, if the interviewer has no idea why they're asking this, and they're just blindly checking off boxes from "The Greatest Checkbox List For Interviewers (tm)", it will fail like any other tool wielded by a clueless user. A very specific failure mode here is "THE BOOK has The One True Solution, and I'm expecting you to read my mind and choose this.")
Pros:
* Only 1 keypress per display
* The button is guaranteed to be present on all displays by default
* It doesn't frustrate you by pointing out the dead pixels
* Optimal energy efficiency
* You don't have to customize scripts or settings on your OSs, even if you reinstall
* You don't have to know if you've got an OLED that turns off the hardware pixels when they're black, or LCD that turns off its backlight, or whatever a CRT display used to do
* You don't have to worry about a working Internet connection to access the site
* You don't need a browser
* You don't even need a CPU
* The off color is not customizableNope, two on my right hand monitor
> The button is guaranteed to be present on all displays by default
Nope, no button at all on the left
> You don't have to customize scripts or settings on your OSs, even if you reinstall
reinstall? What is this 1998? If I did have a new computer then when I restore my essential home directory (~/bin, ~/.vimrc etc) any script would be in there
That UX seems completely unnecessary
> Nope, no button at all on the left
Buttons are nice. You can press them. You can feel them. You can see them.
> reinstall? What is this 1998?
Believe it or not, in 2021, if you've missed the window to do a dist-upgrade before Ubuntu EOLs the release (which is much quicker on non-LTS), there's no easy way to upgrade the distro - the recommended option is to reinstall.
> any script would be in there
What about on Windows? Now you've got different repos for different OSs, which you manage. Any script you write needs to be maintained. The button is universal. No extra effort needed. No maintenance.
You press the button and the monitor shuts off. It's the perfect UX.
I don't know about Windows, nor care about it, I don't use it. I may have many OSes that I do use, but I only have one on my desktop with a monitor plugged in, and it's been the broadly the same for 21 years (debian, then ubuntu)
Yes the buttons on the monitors are rubbish, they're also what there is. My TV which has my monitoring screen and music on is controlled from a remote control, one button to mute, one to turn it off completely. If I didn't have the remote though, the button would be awful (it's on the back, and again is a multi stage menu system to turn off)
Mine doesn't have one, it does have a touch activated area that's not findable by touch because it's completely smooth.
* power button is some gimmick optico fingerprint reading crap that is somehow less user-friendly than a light switch for 10 cents
* turning the monitor back on will take 3-15 seconds, and due to above you may end up waiting 20 seconds to discover you didn't activate the button properly, depending on the monitor
The pursuit of aesthetics, in this case, is at the expense of usability.
> Save energy
Only on one type of oled? It's more energy intensive than white on the majority of screen types.
> Stealth mode / Meditation / Better than standby mode
This might blow your mind but... phones can be placed face down. Or hit the standby switch. Or put it in your pocket. All way easier than going to your browser, finding it in bookmarks, and selecting black.
Monitors have an off switch you can just reach over to, that is also way easier.
Additionally, both of these methods _actually_ save energy.
The reasoning is super flawed but I'm glad you probably had fun writing it. That's all that matters.
I know it's only a few buttons away, but you could add a button to switch to full screen.
function allscreen(){
if (iOS) {
if (!vid) {
let e = document.createElement('video');
e.src = color.substring(1) + '.mp4?v=2';
I imagine that might negate the claimed energy savings.
Frequently asked questions Does it work on iOS devices? Yes. We're using a workaround, since iOS does not support native browser fullscreen.
Please report a but with more details if this is also true for you on Firefox Nightly.
This worked, because Flash merely overlaid the full screen warning over what the app displayed. A huge dump of random text meant most humans missed the warning.
<body style="background: black;">
<script>
document.addEventListener('click', () => document.body.requestFullscreen())
</script>
</body> javascript:let b=document.body;b.bgColor="black";b.innerText="";b.requestFullscreen()also.. tangentially I have been experimenting with directly exposing photo paper with my phone screen, and pulling it away in a fraction of a second. Do any android devs out there know if it would be feasible for me to whip up an app that flashed the screen including backlight on and off to show an image for a fraction of a second at a specific brightness?
You'd have to standardise the hardware or have a v good db of models and light etc.
https://github.com/MonitorControl/MonitorControl
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/oledify-pure-black-wallpapers/...
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.gombosdev....
1. Pretty simple to implement, you could make this in a few hours 2. Tell's a story and justifies its existence. 3. It has some degree of utility so at the least the creator will use it for a week or two before giving up on the gimmick 4. Easy to understand within 30 seconds, which makes it good for interviews 5. The code is probably small enough that it could be reviewed during interviews
Good project lmao
xset dpms force off
data:text/html,<html style="background:black;"><head><title>Black</title></head></html>
I don't need it very often, but turning the monitor off, creates other issues which were harder to fix than to use this tab ;-)
I have no idea if this is actually rooted in science or something I just adopted and post-rationalized, but I guess I know what to research next coffee break.
Use space to hide notes and arrow keys to switch contents.
(although I'd wish Windows screensavers wouldn't go off through mouse movements.)
More colour choices would be great. Sometimes I use my second screen just for face illumination during video calls. I found that ft.com salmon-pink is one of the better choices.
javascript: (()=>{const div = document.createElement('div'); div.style.background = 'black'; document.body.appendChild(div); div.requestFullscreen();})();
Can't say I will use it, but good on you for rolling it out.