Re: Does linux support my new widescreen monitor

  • Thread starter Thread starter sully1999@gmail.com
  • Start date Start date
Charlie Tame wrote:
> Stephan Rose wrote:
>> On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 14:30:47 -0500, Charlie Tame wrote:
>>
>>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>>> In article <od6dnb_MGJVC5WvbRVnyvQA@giganews.com>,
>>>> Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:
>>>>> Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the
>>>>> video card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an
>>>>> extremely difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power
>>>>> cord.
>>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge for
>>>> many.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things get
>>> easier all the time.

>>
>> Matter of fact it's so easy that with the upcoming October Release, it
>> has hot plug monitor and driver support. So you can change monitors
>> all you want, drivers all you want, all on the fly without ever
>> rebooting or even seeing a command line.
>>
>> Now try to change a driver under Vista without rebooting.
>>

>
> Well I have to admit that a year or two back Linux was sadly lacking in
> friendliness, but it seems that the community has switched resources
> toward competing with "Windows" on this topic and preserving the
> existing security while MS has been forced to try and backwards engineer
> security into the "Easy" system. Actually UAC seems to me to be trying
> to "Emulate" the more GUI oriented Linux but for appearances only.
>
> I mean obviously a user with the PW can screw up Linux security if they
> want to, same applies to Vista, but WRT UAC I think there's more
> incentive to set about screwing it up.
>
> I take some of Dennis' points that Linux is not as secure as (Say) some
> military system, but hey, I'd expect military systems to be operated by
> trained people for specific purposes, not editing MP3s one minute and
> launching missiles the next, could give a whole new meaning to "All
> Shook Up" or "Bomb the Bass"...
>
> That said it is not Linux but the Unix philosophy or model on which it
> is based that is inherently better, and there is no blame attached to
> Microsoft for this per-se, much has changed since W95, however I do
> think maybe they would have done better to design a more isolated core
> than to continue this never ending "Integration" between Apps like IE
> and the OS itself.
>
> As for compatibility, well, I seen no real need for our server at work
> to look and feel like XP, but it does, as do all the rest of them.
> Having system updates brought in by a "Browser" for example seems
> counter intuitive when you think about it.


Definitely. I really like the whole package manager concept much better
for updates. I use an IBM thinkpad tablet at work, and I was thrilled
when I saw how easy it is to check for updates for drivers, IBM
software, etc. because they designed a package manager for Windows that
finds all the updates for you and you can just pick and choose what you
would like to update. I found it quite ironic when I learned that most
of the features on the IBM website for PC support were supported on IE only.

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

"Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on
free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of the
creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country. Consumer
rights in the digital age are not frivolous."
- Maura Corbett
 
"Alias" <iamalias@shoesgmail.com> wrote in message
news:fd6r8o$n3h$1@aioe.org...
> dennis@home wrote:
>>
>> "Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
>> news:EMidnXilcNHyf2vbnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>
>>> Any system that is modifiable by the user is inherently only as secure
>>> as
>>> the user using it. No amount of UAC popups or passwords can compete
>>> against a user that willingly installs malware.
>>>

>>
>> Do you think you can explain that to alias?
>> He thinks linux is secure.

>
> No, I just think it's much MORE secure than Windows is all. Nothing is
> infallible. With the slippery slope that Vista is taking Redmond, as a
> computer user for business and pleasure, I guess I am a bit excited about
> not having to put up with sliding down slopes.
>


That is not what you keep telling people here.
 
"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
news:Oq9i2Vj$HHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>
>> A user shouldn't really need to research to see if an OS supports a
>> standard display mode.

>
>
>
> Then why are users constantly told here that many of their problems are
> due to their lack of research?


There is a big difference between expecting an OS to support a standard
operating mode and expecting it to support every bit of odd hardware.
This is the PC world which is an open platform, mainly due to M$ selling
windows/dos to anyone that wanted to build a clone PC.
If they hadn't we would have had expensive IBM PCs and expensive Macs both
running on fixed hardware and none of this compatibility afford a computer.
Its worth remembering that incompatible hardware is the price we pay for
having so much choice and it could have been so different if M$ had sold
exclusive rights to windows/dos to IBM, no affordable clones, no internet as
we know it, no linux..
 
"dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>running on fixed hardware and none of this compatibility afford a computer.
>Its worth remembering that incompatible hardware is the price we pay for
>having so much choice and it could have been so different if M$ had sold
>exclusive rights to windows/dos to IBM, no affordable clones, no internet as
>we know it, no linux..


And then AmigA would of ruled the world as it was ment to.


--

Get the whole thing.
http://www.transbuddha.com/mediaHolder.php?id=1142
 
"dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote in message
news:OBEveHn$HHA.5980@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> There is a big difference between expecting an OS to support a standard
> operating mode and expecting it to support every bit of odd hardware.
> This is the PC world which is an open platform, mainly due to M$ selling
> windows/dos to anyone that wanted to build a clone PC.
> If they hadn't we would have had expensive IBM PCs and expensive Macs both
> running on fixed hardware and none of this compatibility afford a
> computer. Its worth remembering that incompatible hardware is the price we
> pay for having so much choice and it could have been so different if M$
> had sold exclusive rights to windows/dos to IBM, no affordable clones, no
> internet as we know it, no linux..
>
>


s/afford\ a/affordable/g
 
dennis@home wrote:
>
> "Alias" <iamalias@shoesgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:fd6r8o$n3h$1@aioe.org...
>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>
>>> "Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
>>> news:EMidnXilcNHyf2vbnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>
>>>> Any system that is modifiable by the user is inherently only as
>>>> secure as
>>>> the user using it. No amount of UAC popups or passwords can compete
>>>> against a user that willingly installs malware.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Do you think you can explain that to alias?
>>> He thinks linux is secure.

>>
>> No, I just think it's much MORE secure than Windows is all. Nothing is
>> infallible. With the slippery slope that Vista is taking Redmond, as a
>> computer user for business and pleasure, I guess I am a bit excited
>> about not having to put up with sliding down slopes.
>>

>
> That is not what you keep telling people here.


If you reread my posts, you will see that I say that Ubuntu is not a
*prone* to viruses and malware as Windows is.

--
Alias
To email me, remove shoes
 
Alias wrote:
>
> If you reread my posts, you will see that I say that Ubuntu is not a
> *prone* to viruses and malware as Windows is.


I think you mean Linux is more "supine."
 
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 07:11:52 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
> news:Oq9i2Vj$HHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
>
>>> A user shouldn't really need to research to see if an OS supports a
>>> standard display mode.

>>
>>
>>
>> Then why are users constantly told here that many of their problems are
>> due to their lack of research?

>
> There is a big difference between expecting an OS to support a standard
> operating mode and expecting it to support every bit of odd hardware.


Well on that note, Vista does not out of the box support my nVidia 8800
GTX which definitely is not in the "odd hardware" category. The best
choice of a screen resolution that Vista gave me was 1024x768 on a
1600x1200 monitor.

Ubuntu supports it out of the box and instantly gives me the correct
resolution.

Vista, I needed to hunt down a beta driver to make it work. Having to use
Beta drivers on a production machine 6 months after an OS' release is
pathetic.

Now one could blame nVidia for this, but then again, nVidia had full
support for Linux for their 8800 GTX cards from day one and Ubuntu 7.10
will recognize it out of the box. If I didn't need full 3D Acceleration I
could even just run the open source driver and not even bother clicking
the "enable" button next to the nVidia proprietary driver. Would save a
mouse click or two during the install process.

So if Linux is fully supported, XP is fully supported, but 6 months down
the line Vista drivers are still in a Beta stage...to me, that points to
more of a problem with Vista than anything else.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 04:20:33 +0200, Hadron wrote:

> Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net> writes:
>
>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>> In article <od6dnb_MGJVC5WvbRVnyvQA@giganews.com>,
>>> Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:
>>>> Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the
>>>> video card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an
>>>> extremely difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power
>>>> cord.
>>>
>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge
>>> for many.
>>>
>>>
>>>

>>
>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things get
>> easier all the time.

>
>
> But a quick visit to Google reveals all sorts of issues. Look up getting
> Beryl to work on Debian for example.


One can always find a problem with anything if one looks for it. A quick
visit to google can also reveal all sorts of issues that people can have
doing a simple task such as breathing! Breathing must suck apparently...

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
Stephan Rose <nospam.noway@screwspammers.com> writes:

> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 04:20:33 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>
>> Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net> writes:
>>
>>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>>> In article <od6dnb_MGJVC5WvbRVnyvQA@giganews.com>,
>>>> Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:
>>>>> Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the
>>>>> video card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an
>>>>> extremely difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power
>>>>> cord.
>>>>
>>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge
>>>> for many.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things get
>>> easier all the time.

>>
>>
>> But a quick visit to Google reveals all sorts of issues. Look up getting
>> Beryl to work on Debian for example.

>
> One can always find a problem with anything if one looks for it. A quick
> visit to google can also reveal all sorts of issues that people can have
> doing a simple task such as breathing! Breathing must suck
> apparently...


No two ways. And I agree. But getting high performance Video cards
working is a damn sight easier on XP because the installers are
better. Debian/Ubuntu are a pain in the hole - you need to recompile
the latest NVidia drivers using a set version of the compiler, for
example, when changing kernels.

http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?p=101723&sid=ee1ce9d8a0d2bdc079993f49ee87136b


--
Siempre surgen emergencias cuando un gobierno desea fabricarlas..., y en
una emergencia, suelen romperse las reglas.
--- Isaac Asimov
 
"Stephan Rose" <nospam.noway@screwspammers.com> wrote in message
news:uO-dnUkdCuY6LWrbRVnyhAA@giganews.com...
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 07:11:52 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
>
>> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
>> news:Oq9i2Vj$HHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>
>>
>>>> A user shouldn't really need to research to see if an OS supports a
>>>> standard display mode.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Then why are users constantly told here that many of their problems are
>>> due to their lack of research?

>>
>> There is a big difference between expecting an OS to support a standard
>> operating mode and expecting it to support every bit of odd hardware.

>
> Well on that note,


Not on that note at all really but if you must bring odd hardware into a
discussion about software..

> Vista does not out of the box support my nVidia 8800
> GTX which definitely is not in the "odd hardware" category.


It certainly isn't in the common hardware either.

> The best
> choice of a screen resolution that Vista gave me was 1024x768 on a
> 1600x1200 monitor.
>
> Ubuntu supports it out of the box and instantly gives me the correct
> resolution.
>
> Vista, I needed to hunt down a beta driver to make it work. Having to use
> Beta drivers on a production machine 6 months after an OS' release is
> pathetic.


It is.. why did you buy such crap hardware? Didn't you have a choice? Why
didn't you choose something that did what you wanted?

>
> Now one could blame nVidia for this, but then again, nVidia had full
> support for Linux for their 8800 GTX cards from day one


I bet they don't have *full* support.
There is nothing on linux to use the full capability of the card.
If you think there is maybe you would let us know.

> and Ubuntu 7.10
> will recognize it out of the box. If I didn't need full 3D Acceleration I
> could even just run the open source driver and not even bother clicking
> the "enable" button next to the nVidia proprietary driver. Would save a
> mouse click or two during the install process.
>
> So if Linux is fully supported, XP is fully supported, but 6 months down
> the line Vista drivers are still in a Beta stage...to me, that points to
> more of a problem with Vista than anything else.


What it probably means is that they took an old driver and bodged it for
linux.. easy to do as there are *no applications* that are going to use all
the cards features.
With windows they need to support the full 3D feature set and get it
reasonably quick or gamers aren't going to buy it.
 
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:00:31 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

> "Stephan Rose" <nospam.noway@screwspammers.com> wrote in message
> news:uO-dnUkdCuY6LWrbRVnyhAA@giganews.com...
>> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 07:11:52 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
>>
>>> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
>>> news:Oq9i2Vj$HHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>>
>>>>> A user shouldn't really need to research to see if an OS supports a
>>>>> standard display mode.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then why are users constantly told here that many of their problems
>>>> are due to their lack of research?
>>>
>>> There is a big difference between expecting an OS to support a
>>> standard operating mode and expecting it to support every bit of odd
>>> hardware.

>>
>> Well on that note,

>
> Not on that note at all really but if you must bring odd hardware into a
> discussion about software..
>
>> Vista does not out of the box support my nVidia 8800 GTX which
>> definitely is not in the "odd hardware" category.

>
> It certainly isn't in the common hardware either.
>
>> The best
>> choice of a screen resolution that Vista gave me was 1024x768 on a
>> 1600x1200 monitor.
>>
>> Ubuntu supports it out of the box and instantly gives me the correct
>> resolution.
>>
>> Vista, I needed to hunt down a beta driver to make it work. Having to
>> use Beta drivers on a production machine 6 months after an OS' release
>> is pathetic.

>
> It is.. why did you buy such crap hardware? Didn't you have a choice?
> Why didn't you choose something that did what you wanted?


Crap hardware? The 8800GTX is the highest performance card available so I
chose what I wanted: The highest performance card I could buy because
that is what I needed.

>
>
>> Now one could blame nVidia for this, but then again, nVidia had full
>> support for Linux for their 8800 GTX cards from day one

>
> I bet they don't have *full* support. There is nothing on linux to use
> the full capability of the card. If you think there is maybe you would
> let us know.


Actually yes they have *full* support. And yes, there is software on
linux to use the full capability of the card, such as the CAD/CAM package
I am looking to buy: Pro/Engineer. Most certainly not a toy.

I also write software that requires 3D Acceleration via OpenGL.

>
>> and Ubuntu 7.10
>> will recognize it out of the box. If I didn't need full 3D Acceleration
>> I could even just run the open source driver and not even bother
>> clicking the "enable" button next to the nVidia proprietary driver.
>> Would save a mouse click or two during the install process.
>>
>> So if Linux is fully supported, XP is fully supported, but 6 months
>> down the line Vista drivers are still in a Beta stage...to me, that
>> points to more of a problem with Vista than anything else.

>
> What it probably means is that they took an old driver and bodged it for
> linux.. easy to do as there are *no applications* that are going to use
> all the cards features.


Sorry but that's simply not true. The nVidia driver has support for every
feature of the card. Sorry to burst your poor little bubble. There isn't
a single feature of the card that is available to me under Windows that
is not available to me under Linux.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:56:16 +0200, Hadron wrote:

> Stephan Rose <nospam.noway@screwspammers.com> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 04:20:33 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>>
>>> Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>>>> In article <od6dnb_MGJVC5WvbRVnyvQA@giganews.com>,
>>>>> Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the
>>>>>> video card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an
>>>>>> extremely difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power
>>>>>> cord.
>>>>>
>>>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge
>>>>> for many.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things
>>>> get easier all the time.
>>>
>>>
>>> But a quick visit to Google reveals all sorts of issues. Look up
>>> getting Beryl to work on Debian for example.

>>
>> One can always find a problem with anything if one looks for it. A
>> quick visit to google can also reveal all sorts of issues that people
>> can have doing a simple task such as breathing! Breathing must suck
>> apparently...

>
> No two ways. And I agree. But getting high performance Video cards
> working is a damn sight easier on XP because the installers are better.
> Debian/Ubuntu are a pain in the hole - you need to recompile the latest
> NVidia drivers using a set version of the compiler, for example, when
> changing kernels.


No you don't. Well, Debian Maybe.

Ubuntu? No.

I've been running 7.10 for about a month now and gone through at least 5
or more kernel updates.

Number of times I've recompiled the nVidia kernel module: ZERO.

It's handled automatically when the kernel is updated. I don't have to do
a single thing. I *haven't* needed to do a single thing on two computers
both running 7.10 for the same length of time, both running nVidia
drivers, both having seen the same number of Kernel changes.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
Stephan Rose <nospam.noway@screwspammers.com> writes:

> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:56:16 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>
>> Stephan Rose <nospam.noway@screwspammers.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 04:20:33 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>>>>> In article <od6dnb_MGJVC5WvbRVnyvQA@giganews.com>,
>>>>>> Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the
>>>>>>> video card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an
>>>>>>> extremely difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power
>>>>>>> cord.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge
>>>>>> for many.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things
>>>>> get easier all the time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But a quick visit to Google reveals all sorts of issues. Look up
>>>> getting Beryl to work on Debian for example.
>>>
>>> One can always find a problem with anything if one looks for it. A
>>> quick visit to google can also reveal all sorts of issues that people
>>> can have doing a simple task such as breathing! Breathing must suck
>>> apparently...

>>
>> No two ways. And I agree. But getting high performance Video cards
>> working is a damn sight easier on XP because the installers are better.
>> Debian/Ubuntu are a pain in the hole - you need to recompile the latest
>> NVidia drivers using a set version of the compiler, for example, when
>> changing kernels.

>
> No you don't. Well, Debian Maybe.
>
> Ubuntu? No.
>
> I've been running 7.10 for about a month now and gone through at least 5
> or more kernel updates.
>
> Number of times I've recompiled the nVidia kernel module: ZERO.


You're right. I forgot about the restricted driver manager now. It is a
BIG improvement.

>
> It's handled automatically when the kernel is updated. I don't have to do
> a single thing. I *haven't* needed to do a single thing on two computers
> both running 7.10 for the same length of time, both running nVidia
> drivers, both having seen the same number of Kernel changes.


--
En el futuro no se usará MODEM para acceder a Internet.
-- Vinton Cerf. (1934) Padre de Internet. (Fundador de Internet
Society).
 
Stephan Rose wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:56:16 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>
>> Stephan Rose <nospam.noway@screwspammers.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 04:20:33 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>>>>> In article <od6dnb_MGJVC5WvbRVnyvQA@giganews.com>,
>>>>>> Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the
>>>>>>> video card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an
>>>>>>> extremely difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power
>>>>>>> cord.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge
>>>>>> for many.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things
>>>>> get easier all the time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But a quick visit to Google reveals all sorts of issues. Look up
>>>> getting Beryl to work on Debian for example.
>>>
>>> One can always find a problem with anything if one looks for it. A
>>> quick visit to google can also reveal all sorts of issues that people
>>> can have doing a simple task such as breathing! Breathing must suck
>>> apparently...

>>
>> No two ways. And I agree. But getting high performance Video cards
>> working is a damn sight easier on XP because the installers are better.
>> Debian/Ubuntu are a pain in the hole - you need to recompile the latest
>> NVidia drivers using a set version of the compiler, for example, when
>> changing kernels.

>
> No you don't. Well, Debian Maybe.
>
> Ubuntu? No.
>
> I've been running 7.10 for about a month now and gone through at least 5
> or more kernel updates.
>
> Number of times I've recompiled the nVidia kernel module: ZERO.
>
> It's handled automatically when the kernel is updated. I don't have to do
> a single thing. I *haven't* needed to do a single thing on two computers
> both running 7.10 for the same length of time, both running nVidia
> drivers, both having seen the same number of Kernel changes.
>


The "true linux advocate", "kernel hacker", "emacs user", "swapfile
expert", "X specialist", "CUPS guru", "USB-disk server admin", "newsreader
magician" and "hardware maven" Hadron Quark, aka Hans Schneider, aka Damian
O'Leary has these problems because he is running a liveCD only

So he needs to scrounge the net for all his problems he "has"
Some "small errors" might creep in that way
--
Linux: Because rebooting is for adding new hardware
 
On 2007-09-23, dennis@home <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
> news:u5Zj%23gh$HHA.1168@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>> In article <od6dnb_MGJVC5WvbRVnyvQA@giganews.com>,
>>> Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:
>>>> Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the
>>>> video card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an
>>>> extremely difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power
>>>> cord.
>>>
>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge for
>>> many.
>>>
>>>

>>
>>
>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things get
>> easier all the time.

>
> Yes Ubuntu sets 1280x768 on my widescreen monitor automatically.
> Shame its a 1280 x 720 lcd panel.
> Just as well I can change it but I wonder how many newbies would fail?
> XP and Vista get it right BTW.


XP could also just be "getting it right by accident". That
happens on occasion when a confluence of malfunctions happen to line
up right. If Ubuntu is setting up a monitor to a certain resolution
I would expect that the monitor is giving it some indication that it
should be set to that resolution.

In an absence of any real information, it's hard to say really.

--
If you think that an 80G disk can hold HUNDRENDS of |||
hours of DV video then you obviously haven't used iMovie either. / | \
 
Pennywise@DerryMaine.Gov wrote:
> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>> running on fixed hardware and none of this compatibility afford a computer.
>> Its worth remembering that incompatible hardware is the price we pay for
>> having so much choice and it could have been so different if M$ had sold
>> exclusive rights to windows/dos to IBM, no affordable clones, no internet as
>> we know it, no linux..

>
> And then AmigA would of ruled the world as it was ment to.
>
>



True enough, always makes me smile when they accuse MS of stealing from
Apple, it was actually Workbench and Intuition they stole :)
 
Hadron wrote:
> Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net> writes:
>
>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>> In article <od6dnb_MGJVC5WvbRVnyvQA@giganews.com>,
>>> Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:
>>>> Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the
>>>> video card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an
>>>> extremely difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power
>>>> cord.
>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge
>>> for many.
>>>
>>>

>>
>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things
>> get easier all the time.

>
>
> But a quick visit to Google reveals all sorts of issues. Look up getting
> Beryl to work on Debian for example.




Don't need to look it up, I have it running alongside the one I'm typing
on. BTDT



> For some "it just works".



Probably not on Debian actually but see this is what you are missing.
Beryl, Compiz and a couple of others are NOT finished products and the
community does NOT release them pretending that they are. I said, which
you and Dennis apparently cannot interpret, "Getting easier", I did not
say perfect...



> Fortunately the "advocates" here are not in charge of prioritising bug
> fixes. If so, we would all be tweaking the MBR and xorg.conf from now
> until eternity.


I have had far worse challenges trying to get things to work under Vista.
 
Stephan Rose wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:56:16 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>
>> Stephan Rose <nospam.noway@screwspammers.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 04:20:33 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>>>>> In article <od6dnb_MGJVC5WvbRVnyvQA@giganews.com>,
>>>>>> Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the
>>>>>>> video card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an
>>>>>>> extremely difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power
>>>>>>> cord.
>>>>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge
>>>>>> for many.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things
>>>>> get easier all the time.
>>>>
>>>> But a quick visit to Google reveals all sorts of issues. Look up
>>>> getting Beryl to work on Debian for example.
>>> One can always find a problem with anything if one looks for it. A
>>> quick visit to google can also reveal all sorts of issues that people
>>> can have doing a simple task such as breathing! Breathing must suck
>>> apparently...

>> No two ways. And I agree. But getting high performance Video cards
>> working is a damn sight easier on XP because the installers are better.
>> Debian/Ubuntu are a pain in the hole - you need to recompile the latest
>> NVidia drivers using a set version of the compiler, for example, when
>> changing kernels.

>
> No you don't. Well, Debian Maybe.
>
> Ubuntu? No.
>
> I've been running 7.10 for about a month now and gone through at least 5
> or more kernel updates.
>
> Number of times I've recompiled the nVidia kernel module: ZERO.
>
> It's handled automatically when the kernel is updated. I don't have to do
> a single thing. I *haven't* needed to do a single thing on two computers
> both running 7.10 for the same length of time, both running nVidia
> drivers, both having seen the same number of Kernel changes.
>



For Debian look up "Envy".
 
"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
news:uqO3FVy$HHA.5868@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Pennywise@DerryMaine.Gov wrote:
>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>>
>>> running on fixed hardware and none of this compatibility afford a
>>> computer. Its worth remembering that incompatible hardware is the price
>>> we pay for having so much choice and it could have been so different if
>>> M$ had sold exclusive rights to windows/dos to IBM, no affordable
>>> clones, no internet as we know it, no linux..

>>
>> And then AmigA would of ruled the world as it was ment to.
>>
>>

>
>
> True enough, always makes me smile when they accuse MS of stealing from
> Apple, it was actually Workbench and Intuition they stole :)


Apple stole it from Xerox even down to the one button mouse.
How a thief has the nerve to accuse someone else of stealing what they stole
I will never understand.
Must be a lack of morals I suppose.
 
Back
Top