Because it will support a greater range of colours, simultaneously and independent of a users custom colour settings and any 'standards' that are associated with the current range.
- Why not support 48-bit colours then? Hell, lets go for 1024-bit colour, because hey, more is better! What's the point of having a greater range of colours if half the people you chat with can't see them because of limited colour displays or incompatible software? If colour support were to be extended it could be done to prevent major incompatability by utilising the remaining 83 colours of the double digit format. That way it would provide enough colours that people wouldn't need to change the display of any colour, it would display just fine on limited-colour displays (older computers, PDAs, mobile phones, etc.), and it would
actually be practical for IRC.
Perhaps it isn't an improvement *to you*, but the fact you find yourself making the same points is probably a good indication it is to others.
- This forum gets thousands of visitors a day. One thread every three months or so hardly constitutes an overwhelming demand.
