Separate activity for each desktop in 4.5?

[Reinhold Rumberger]

On Sunday 15 August 2010, Basil Chupin wrote:
> On 15/08/2010 23:24, Reinhold Rumberger wrote:
> > On Sunday 15 August 2010, Basil Chupin wrote:
> >> On 15/08/2010 22:17, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, August 15, 2010 08:15:04 am Ric Moore did opine:
> >>>> On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 22:13 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >>>>> Thank you Reinhold, it works, unforch it sets all 8 screens
> >>>>> alike.  I was hoping I could finally separate them&   use a
> >>>>> different image per screen.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I just did that Gene. Each screen has a separate wall paper.
> >>>> You just have to do it one screen at a time, in each one. Ric
> >>> 
> >>> I did that Ric, set screen one to the wallpaper from  my
> >>> /usr/pix tree, then switched to screen 2, and changed it.  All
> >>> 8 were changed.  So there must be another checkbox I've
> >>> missed.
> >>> 
> >>>   Someplace...
> >> 
> >> As much as I hate to burst the bubble....but this absolute
> >> desire to have a different wallpaper for each desktop is
> >> nothing but a phobia simply because you think that you *must*
> >> have a different wallpaper for each desktop or your life is a
> >> total miserable failure.
> > 
> > While I agree that this isn't a major feature, the underlying
> > design decision was stupid and short-sighted.
> 
>  From another perspective, it can also be argued that the
> additional coding necessary to produce a different wallpaper for
> each different desktop is also "stupid and short-sighted" and
> bloats the program.

Bullshit. Following that line of argumenting, no coding should be 
done ever because the results are the same (that includes bugfixing).

> >   Also, there are some people
> > 
> > around with rather bad eyesight for whom this feature is rather
> > crucial.
> 
> My eyesight hasn't been perfect since the age of 8 years.
> Nevertheless I can manage enough to tell the difference as to
> which desktop I am selecting.

Yeah, well, mine isn't perfect either, but it's way better than my 
grandpa's, who can't read anything without some pretty magnification. 
Funnily I actually know a student at my university not much older 
than me, whose eyesight ist much better than my grandpa's. Whatever 
happened to "accessibility"?

> Besides, one can run as many applications on a single desktop as
> one can manage, right?
> 
> Having a different desktop is nothing but a nicety, correct?

Nope, and seeing as nobody who ever properly used virtual desktops 
seems to understand what a beautiful concept this is for those of us 
who often need to do different things in parallel, I won't try 
explaining it yet again. I know better ways to waste my time.

All I'll say is that it's an awsome way to organise applications 
according to their use (e.g. one desktop for writing software, one 
for compiling, packaging, etc. and one for testing; then there's the 
desktop I have a couple of firefoxes running for some browsergame and 
one for kontact and watching videos and last but not least one for 
the 3-8 chat windows I regularly have running).

> For example, Windows XP came with the one desktop

What do I care about winblows?

<snip windows stuff I neither know nor care about>