(2/2)

  > it's there while I'm releasing the Enter key

  > And before you start taking into account that a lot of gui software is just poorly written trash seemingly written by morons under the CADT model (Hi, gnome!).
  
  We can definitely agree here!!! :)

  > Better than reinventing a whole new kind of terminal applications which aren't actual terminal applications, 

Why are they not actual terminal applications? What terminal functionality do they lack? Please provide excruciating technical detail on this subject about which you know nothing.

  > but only work in an environment emulated by the very thing they want to replace.

For the umpteenth time, who said anything about replacing guis? I have repeatedly stated that they have their uses and are the best option for a bunch of things.

  > The same morons will come and screw up with all kinds of things there again, once that'd get more momentum. But now, since they also have to maintain EFL plugins or other graphical-to-terminal translations for their apps and file formats, they will even screw up heavier.

EFL plugins? Graphical to terminal translations? What are you talking about? It's almost like you don't understand the technology and have invented some fantasy architecture for all this stuff which is nothing like the actual architecture that exists and has been described here and elsewhere.

  > On an average day, I open a Dolphin window maybe once or twice... Often not even once (e.g. I just open my IDE and stay there, or the browser, or a game, you name it). You don't need a new one for every operation! 

  > if your workflow is seriously superior, then be happy that EFL and all that exists and supports all the file formats that you want to preview, and be happy that it provides all the features you need. I'm happy with you then. I have the feeling that it's a very special workflow for a very special task at best, though.

  > And you type "xdg-open" while I can just press Enter (or double-click ^^)

  > Why should I constantly want previews of something, so often that I'd care about a second of waiting time once in preparation,

  > Couldn't you just leave it open then?! Yeah, you'll definitely have some reasons...

Have you ever left dolphin open for 160+ hours in a directory containing 80,000 mp3s? How'd that work out for you? How did it handle it? How much ram did it use? What was your system load like?

  > Sure you do! I know! Terminology is one of them. That's exactly the point.

  > For an actual (virtual)terminal, it would at least remotely make some sense to me. Because there it's not an option to just use a common X11/Wayland image viewer.

Let's say you do mean that: You still have no clue what you're talking about. For instance it's trivially easy to view an image or play a video with no graphical environment running*, as long as you have hardware that can do a framebuffer. Like, for example, every graphics card made in the last 30+ years. And if you have that hardware, then you can run terminology on it, too. As raster already mentioned and you failed to understand.

* (one of my machines is indeed set up to play video 24x7 and does not run a windowing system or graphical environment at all)

  > It's trying to make terminal apps graphical, right? 

If you think it might be, you might want to look into that. Ascribing motivations to inanimate objects seems like it might not be healthy.

  > And all that technical complexity is just there

You don't know. Because you don't understand how it works, and you've ignored the people who tried to tell you.

  > because you don't have to move your eyes to another window 

Please try re-reading my other responses and this time try to comprehend what I'm saying if you'd like to continue this discussion.

  > there are very basic image viewers without any features

So then, you're saying they don't open up a window? They don't decode jpeg?

I question the usefulness of this software. But I can't wait to see your list.

  > I've no idea why they should be slower than the EFL previewers

  >  I'd definitely dislike to see all that arriving in major desktop environments. And I'm still optimistic in that regard

  > If it does, at least there might be ways to integrate the Dolphin thumbnailers. :)

Are you saying that you wish lsix[6] existed? And that it worked in konsole? And that you wish you could use it right now with literally 3 seconds of effort to install it? Are you saying that, after typing a hundred thousand words railing against the inclusion of any graphical features in any terminal ever?

  > In some way that's exactly what I'm wondering about when people have terminal-centric workflows in an environment that could actually just do graphics.

I love how, after having the massive complexity of gui applications explained to you, you just brush that off and say "just do graphics". That's pretty good trolling right there.

  > In particular when they then start to patch graphics support inside their terminals

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixel

[2] https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391781

[3] https://github.com/hpjansson/chafa/issues/78

[4] https://invisible-island.net/xterm/xterm.log.html#xterm_359

[5] https://man.archlinux.org/man/extra/xscreensaver/phosphor.6....

[6] https://github.com/hackerb9/lsix