11–20 of 91 posts
I am puzzled by so much fuss about one simple and small app (I am not questioning its usefulness, I am using it too). Every once in awhile (and frequently lately) it pops up on hacker news front page or somewhere on the web.
I am puzzled by so much fuss about one simple and small app (I am not questioning its usefulness, I am using it too). Every once in awhile (and frequently lately) it pops up on hacker news front page or somewhere on the web.
basically its the old Microsoft adage that Apple somehow co-opted, embrace - extend etc etc. Apple implemented a feature for the next release of osx that does what f.lux does, knowingly.
I am puzzled by so much fuss about one simple and small app (I am not questioning its usefulness, I am using it too). Every once in awhile (and frequently lately) it pops up on hacker news front page or somewhere on the web.
basically its the old Microsoft adage that Apple somehow co-opted, embrace - extend etc etc. Apple implemented a feature for the next release of osx that does what f.lux does, knowingly.
I am puzzled by so much fuss about one simple and small app (I am not questioning its usefulness, I am using it too). Every once in awhile (and frequently lately) it pops up on hacker news front page or somewhere on the web.
Not sure about the angst. Maybe the people behind it are annoyed, or its just good fodder with the Apple connection.
Since I installed F.lux on my work computer I've experienced a significant decrease in eye fatigue and a general increase in productivity while working at night. Would recommend for anyone who works in low-light conditions.
But the app itself is terribly broken, at least on El Capitan. Whenever I switch modes, the screen flashes the original blue colors---my impression is that even a few seconds of blue light can mess up melatonin production, so this is unacceptable, especially from an app that is pushing the idea of color temperature mattering. Also, "movie mode" results in pulses of blue light every few seconds. Sometimes I select "disable for an hour" and nothing is disabled. "Disable for current app" is also spotty.
For this concept to work, and if the ideas about the effects of color temperature are true, then the implementation has to be completely solid. So I'm glad that Apple is duplicating the functionality of f.lux rather than supporting f.lux itself on iOS. I've also been looking into alternatives on OSX.
It's time that we move on to an implementation that actually works.
Is anyone else puzzled by the idea of f.lux consuming 14 developer years (at least according to the article), it's an awesome app but that seems like a huge number for what it is: a gui interface to a very simple function*. [0] http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/sct-set-color-temperatur...
there is a whole bunch of stuff built but unreleased outside of the app.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also use Redshift,and an app called Twilight. It's fairly customizable if that's what you're looking for.
Twilight just doesn't feel the same. Unlike f.lux and redshift, which actually seem like they change the color of the screen, Twilight just seems to overlay a red filter. I can't tell you why, but the result is much less satisfactory.
I am puzzled by so much fuss about one simple and small app (I am not questioning its usefulness, I am using it too). Every once in awhile (and frequently lately) it pops up on hacker news front page or somewhere on the web.