Slashdot Mirror
New Failsafe Graphics Mode For Ubuntu
ianare sends us to Ars Technica for news of the Ubuntu Xorg BulletProof-X feature, coming soon to a 7.10 (Gutsy) build near you. "It provides a failsafe mode that will ensure that users never have to manually configure their graphics hardware settings from the command line. If Xorg fails to start,the failsafe mode will initiate with minimalistic settings, low resolution, and a limited number of colors. The failsafe mode also automatically runs Ubuntu's new GTK-based display configuration utility so that users can easily test various display settings and choose a configuration that will work properly with their hardware."
Linux gets Safe Mode!
I guess that's an advance.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
This is great, but should have been done a long time ago! I have heard several people say they "tried ubuntu but it wouldn't work"... I determined the graphics failure to be an issue 100% of the time.
Get a web developer
How does this work for drivers that need X to be noting running to install?
I wonder why this type of thing isn't built into X11/xorg itself? When is X12 coming out anyway? The *nix window environment could use a little modernization...
Install on reboot?
(\(\
(=_=) Bani!
(")")
Although I personally do not care about that feature, I view it as a positive step towards mass adoption of Linux. I have to admit it scares me a bit although. Once mass adopted, we won't have the satisfaction to know we are running a better OS anymore ;-)
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
As silly as it sounds, I've come across so many new Linux users who have messed up their display settings in some way, been unable to use the command line to fix it and have just resorted to giving up or reinstalling, neither is really an ideal option.
Whilst to the average Slashdotter this may sound silly, I'd bet it's one of the biggest things that puts your average Joe off Linux through the years. Being able to easier recover from broken Linux installs will, imo go a long way to keeping people using Linux rather than the current situation where quite a few try, but many give up. Linux is generally nice and stable, but when it does go wrong, to most people it's just far, far too hard to recover your installation back into a working state - much more so than, dare I say it, Windows. This is however why I'd say Ubuntu has been making such headway in attracting new users to Linux because they do seem to understand what problems exactly that up until now have been putting many new users off Linux.
This is very good, I'm sure a lot of users would like to have the choice of selecting these in a graphical mode, which with they may be more familiar. Many users familiar with Windows/OSX will automatically be more familiar with Ubuntu because of this feature. It's important to have as many options available on CLI and GUI at the same time.
I remember that back in the day YaST (SuSE's Yet Another Setup Tool) used to be incredibly handy because the CLI and GUI for the tool, which controlled almost all configurable options of the Linux distro, would behave almost exactly the same. The CLI used curses for display, and I believe the GUI was QT-based. They functioned pretty much identically. Personally, I have no problem just editing a text file. But, if you are a linux newbie and you poke around in the GUI and mess something up, then suddenly you can't start X, you feel a little bit safer knowing that there's a tool you can use to revert your settings that works exactly the same on the CLI as it does in the GUI, so you can access the program in almost any situation, even from a remote terminal.
Twinstiq, game news
Being able to get a console and edit xorg.conf will probably always be with us, but it should never be the primary means of configuration for a desktop machine. I see this as a major step forward for Ubuntu in reaching it's target audience. I use many distros, but I generally choose Ubuntu for desktop systems because I really don't have the motivation to do all that by hand just for a lousy desktop. It's also for people like my dad: he can follow instructions and install an OS, but he's not touching a config file.
"I do a grep for shit, bollocks, and tits before checking in code. I'm professional..." -RECURSIVE_META_JOKE, reddit.com
Linux has always had "safe mode". You boot single user from the command line.
..... I guess you could consider it "safe mode" for X.org. But not for "Linux".
This is more "easy GUI re-configuration of X.org when X.org blows up".
Well
Although I've haven't had *nix installed on any of my home computers yet, I'm very happy indeed that Windows XP looks to be the last MS OS I will ever use.
Changing to Linux is now something I'm thinking about on at least a weekly basis, and the upcoming version Ubuntu seems very likely to make me leave Windows. (Except for a small gaming partition).
I'm a dreamer, the world is my playpen. But hey, I'm a serious person, I can't dream all the time.
Xandros and other distros have had this for years.
This has been a problem I've run into a lot as a Linux novice, and newly converted user to Ubuntu 7.04. I really wish that someone would make dual/multi display configuration much more intuitive. In Windows even the n00best of n00bs can easily configure a dual monitor setup. In the various Linux flavors I've tried it is not that simple. Seems like the system display configuration utility and the video drivers I install for nVidia/ATI cards just want to fight each other over who gets to control that second monitor, instead of just working like it does in Windows. Like I said, total novice here so I don't know if its an issue with the distro's themselves, or the third party drivers by nVidia/ATI, all I know is it is annoying, and one of the major caveats preventing me from totally embracing the penguin.
The Property of One's : "The Oneitude is directly proportional to the Colditude of the one." - S.B.
On several occasions, the first part of the install had ok graphics and the last part of the install ... the graphics were worse. OK, if there was an obvious default setting that produced reasonable graphics, how come things got worse when the distro detected the graphics card and monitor? Anyway, the 'default' mode existed but didn't seem to be an option later in the install. Even if they'd told me what it was ...
... right? Well the majority of the time anyway.
BTW, the reason I have had problems with Linux distros is that I tend to use 'atticware'. One of the benefits of Linux is that you can use it on outdated hardware
An error screen that appears in a crash, maybe a nice calming blue one... ;-)
Welcome to Windows 95!
I think that that is the case ONLY because those people are coming from a Windows background.
Personally, I find it far, Far, FAR, FAR easier to recover a damaged Linux box than a damaged Windows box. But that is primarily because the damaged Windows boxes that I get have major Registry issues.
As long as you can get an Ubuntu box to boot to the command line, it is "easy" to fix. "Easy" is in quotes because it takes a little bit of knowledge. But not much. I'm running Gutsy Gibbon at home and even with 2 problems (it is still alpha) I've been able to recover my system without rebooting in less than 5 minutes.
The magic is in APT and the repositories. As long as I can connect to the repositories and run APT, I can remove the problem or re-install over it.
As more people become familiar with Ubuntu (and Debian and Debian-based distributions) the "fear" of Linux will vanish. It's just so much EASIER than Windows. (unless your hardware isn't supported but that's a different issue)
Summer 2007 - Linux developers discover that users prefer and rely upon GUI environments.
When can we expect a unified program installation method? Sometime after peak oil?
I remember Jeff Waugh (Gnome guy, also worked at Canonical) had mentioned at last year's Ohio Linux Fest there had been talk about this for years but everyone was always busy working on other stuff. Glad to see they finally are getting it out.
<blockquote>Being able to get a console and edit xorg.conf will probably always be with us, but it should never be the primary means of configuration for a desktop machine.</blockquote>
.inf file for their monitor. That makes it even easier for them.
Unless you're in an office environment where you have many machines that are identical. Then you can just push out the default configuration and allow the user to change from there (<Ctrl><Alt><+> & <Ctrl><Alt><->).
Having the GUI is great for home users who will have every possible video card + monitor combination. Not to mention that they will be able to import the Windows
Well, KDE and GNOME do have such panels. In GNOME, System -> Preferences -> Screen Resolution In KDE, the program krandr does the same thing. For safe mode, we have the command prompt. Far more functional then windows safe mode.
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
This is clearly a great example of the agile developers of the OSS community. Only months after Microsoft announces similar features in the upcoming Windows version customized for the home user, the OSS movement has once again beat them to it, and implemented features only mentioned with vague release dates by the huge Seattle-based software company. Way to go, guys!
[quote]Mod me down[/quote]
Have a nice day M$ puppet!
Don't you like our Utopian rhetoric?
The prosecution presents Exhibit Q, which clearly indicates that it is a failure of attitude that keeps Linux from the hands of the common user.
Ok, I'm sure others have too, but I filed a bug report on this problem a LOOOONG time ago. It's taken them quite a long time to get around to fixing this, a rather significant usability problem.
A Windows user boots Ubuntu on a new laptop, say, and gets a low-res 'safe mode' telling them that there's no specific support for their video hardware ("Ubuntu failed to start the windowing system because it was unable to properly configure your hardware").
Yeah, now what?
They can't download a driver package and update. They're stuck with whatever came with the version of X in that Ubuntu release. They can't use a driver off a CD that came with the machine, because there aren't any. If X was capable of a better mode it would have used it, like the plain vesa driver with a resolution matching the LCD.
So what are they supposed to do?
It's better than getting dumped to a VT, sure, but it doesn't solve the real issue. On Windows 95 I could put in the CD, install driver.exe, reboot and presto. With Ubuntu the only option for the average user is to wait 6 months.
This feature might be useful if you like to intentionally break xorg.conf, but unless there is actually a way to get real hardware support installed, rather than seeing if you can force X into a different mode (which it should do automatically), it seems pretty useless.
Its been over 10 years and linux is just getting up to windows 9x standards of usabillity.
I use WinXP at work and Fedora 7 at home, and Fedora passed Win98 at v2 and WinXP at v6 in terms of appearance and functionality (it was always ahead for stability). My 8 year old PC at home with Fedora 7 feels like it's about 5 years ahead of my 2 year old WinXP PC at work.
Incidentally, if you used Firefox V2 it would red-line your spelling mistakes, such as "usabillity" and offer the corrected version, usability.
And how long did he think he could get away with it?
Just kidding. Bryce is a fine fellow, and is also the excellent boss of the Inkscape project.
Didn't Microsoft do this with windows in like 95? ;)
If you browse a newly created Ubuntu disk.. it will NOT be one file ending in .iso
There should be several directories.. If not it isn't burned correctly.
You need a proper burning program like Nero or Active ISO Burner. You burn FROM an Image, you dont copy the image to CD.
Again .iso .iso .iso .iso
If you browse a newly created Ubuntu disk.. it will NOT be one file ending in
Again
If you browse a newly created Ubuntu disk.. it will NOT be one file ending in
Again
If you browse a newly created Ubuntu disk.. it will NOT be one file ending in
Again
If you browse a newly created Ubuntu disk.. it will NOT be one file ending in
waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
The one thing that always drives me nuts when installing Ubuntu is that the fonts really blow. And even if you install nice Windows fonts, you STILL have to screw around with your font configuration files to make them look nice. Especially in Firefox. Kubuntu is *slightly* better, but it still sucks.
I sometimes wonder if the Ubuntu team should *really* focus on fixing all the problems with GNOME/KDE. Put all their energy into making the GUI as good as it can possibly be. All the other pieces of a Linux distro are handled well-enough by other people, but the *important* GUI work seems to be handled by a too-small group of developers for the GNOME/KDE project.
I hope that they make sure that the dialogs you'd need to fix graphics issues are sized to work in whatever graphics resolution they use in "safe mode".
I say this because I know that many of the current GTK dialogs are too large for 640x480, and because there are Windows dialogs that are annoyingly unusable in Windows "safe mode".
The cake is a pie
Again
I will be more careful next time
Again
I will be more careful next time
Again
I will be more careful next time
ok I got it... again sorry dude. :)
waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
You obviously don't get it. You can't go to "System -> Preferences -> Screen Resolution" if you can't see anything 'cause your graphics are messed up! And the whole point is to make it easier for people who don't like using the command line.
RedHat, back in the day, used to have Xconfigurator.
:P
Going from RedHat, to trying out other distributions... Was a big case of WTF?! Seriously, the idea that the average user has any idea what refresh rates are, or the proper arcane settings for their monitors and video cards (which may not even be referenced in the manual of said devices)...
Sure, if you want to run Apache, you should know how to make a virtual host entry. You want to run MySQL, you should learn how to put in a root password.
A GUI is not Apache or MySQL. A GUI is, quite frankly, basic. Hate to pull Windows into the argument, but you install Windows, and boom - no wierd questions about horizontal refresh rates and font directories or anything else. It just works. You then install a driver and it works even better. That's what people want, and there's no reason not to have it.
Dicking around with config files and vi is great - for heavy duty stuff. X is not heavy duty. X is something that should work by default, without making users jump through hoops - unless, of course, you'd like Linux to be nowhere else but servers.
AFAIK, this sort of thing was present in Windows going all the way back to Windows 95. Granted, of course, its gotten *better* since then (and maybe the Ubuntu feature will be quite solid), but I honestly don't see why Linux distros wouldn't have included this as a feature a long time ago. Is this something that's new specifically to Ubuntu, or do most Linux distros force you to command line if the graphics card fails to initialize its drivers properly?
SuSE has been using something similar for at least 4 years, it's tied into YaST a bit heavily, but surely it would have been easier to port SaX then to write a new application from scratch. A little bit of NIH syndrome, maybe?
I want to re-iterate some of what's been said here. Just to be clear, I'm no *nix n00b. I learned on VMS and IBM VM/CMS then moved to a mixed VMS, Ultrix, HP-UX and SunOS/Solaris environment in 1991. I started using redhat in 1995, switched to Suse in 2002, and to Ubuntu in 2007. I work as an engineer and do some software development. At home I have a Windows box which gets used for work and acts as a file and print server (since it's the more powerful machine). Beside it is a linux box that likewise gets used for dev work and cross compiling code. I am capable of dealing with problems that may arise on either the Windows or *nix platform.
In my kitchen is a laptop. It's running Ubuntu. It's the machine my non-techy wife uses. She has been using linux since 2002 and I would guess she represents a "typical" user. Present her with a GUI, dialog boxes, a clear and user friendly interface and she's fine; put her in front of a shell prompt and she's lost.
Features like this "Failsafe Graphics Mode" are critical if we expect more widespread adoption of linux. This is where Microsoft and Apple have done a very good job of making it easy for a typical person with limited or no technical background to configure and use the machines. A previous poster suggested that linux has always had a failsafe mode; but, booting into single user mode and dumping someone at a shell prompt is not good enough. At that point most people would give up. We have to work to make the platform as user friendly as possible if we expect it to be adopted. linux needs more of these user friendly interfaces for diagnosing problems and configuring hardware. That laptop my wife uses, in order to get the wifi interface to work I had to drop back to a command prompt to troubleshoot the problem, then edit a couple of configuration files to make it work. (and for the record, it's a Ralink 2500 based card made by Asus, which is supposed to be well supported) That's just unacceptable to most users. Let's try to keep the typical end user in mind when we design these projects. I think the folks working on Ubuntu are setting a fine example.
But the real question is, why can't it just automatically detect hardware and set everything up at startup so I never have to do any configuring at all, like OS X or even Windows?
FBSD has defaulted to a VESA mode for some time now i thought. Not that its 100% but it covers 99% of what is still running ( and that you would want to try running X on ).
Sure its nice, but doesnt seem 'earth shaking'
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I had this problem last time I tried installing ubuntu, that X.org thing failed, and I couldnt figure out why, eventually I knew why, I needed to install the ATI drivers, and had to do it via command line
unfortunately for some Graphic Cards, newer ATIs, Xorg is UNABLE to Boot even using failsafe drivers like vesa.
Ubuntu makes it hard enough to get to a pure cmd line as it is, now with the failsafe mode...
Ubuntu...Bringing Windows to GNU/Linux...
I've had three goes at (k)ubuntu now, and fuckups with xorg have driven me back to Windows every time - I've posted about this a few times, the simple inability of ubuntu to find my native resolution, and the need to manually edit configuration files is a killer for beginners. This is great news, now I will be bothered to re-use the dead 30GB partition that currently boots to a blank screen, which it's done ever since I added 1440x900 to the display modes in kubuntu.
Once the unwashed masses use Linux, we'll have to move on The Hurd, then we can have all the old problems all over again...
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
From that description, it sounds like I never have to manually configure my settings -- unless of course, it couldn't detect my settings and fell back to a crappy generic driver and resolution. "I see stuff on the screen" does not mean the same thing as "It works."
I suspect sometime after peak oil but before hell freezes over. Seriously, after learning the rpm and apt-get package systems. I lost interest in fiddling with others. If distributions want to lock themselves out of the market, just keep fragmenting -it's allowed. Hopefully Xorg can incorporate a generalized default graphics routine so every freakin distribution doesn't re-invent the wheel. I can't count the number of times a noob has returned a live cd to me because "it doesn't work" How would my grandmother know she should have just selected the VESA line?
Nope. It's both. How difficult is typing "apt-get install --reinstall foo"? The only difficult part is finding that information when you're an average user who doesn't have access to a GUI web browser. But once you have it, it's simple.
Why? That just limits the range of options.
Why? It's a fact. Linux is NOT Windows.
Nope. Bad analogy. While the majority of USER INTERACTIONS are the same between models of cars (and Ubuntu and Windows), they are NOT all the same.
Imagine the fun of a user refusing to change the way he puts fuel in a car. He learned that the fuel tank is on the driver's side and he'll be damned if he's going to put fuel in on any other side.
Would you consider that person an idiot? Yes, you would.
Cruise control belongs on the stick, not the steering wheel. I don't care if I crash into things.
And manual vs automatic?
Linux is NOT Windows. Don't treat it like it is.
Welcome to the 1990's and the VESA support in just about every graphics card in existance that never got used until around 2000, and only now at the mid-to-end of the decade we get a VESA safe mode.
I would say I'm above the average computer user. I've configured FreeBSD to act as a back-end spam filtering and anti-virus filtering system. It works great, I can set up a box in about an hour or two, depending on how fast it compiles SpamAssassin and ClamAV. My laptop's Windows XP installation bombed out about a month ago. I said to myself, this is your chance to install Linux, use it as your browsing platform, and get really familiar with it in your spare time. I tried 5 (count them 5!) different distro's. I wanted to get one of them to load simply onto my laptop, give me an x-windows environment where I could check on web crap, and learn the rest of it at my own pace. I tried Fedora Core first. Graphics issue. Tried Ubuntu. Graphics issue. Tried Debian, graphics issue (granted, this one was the best of all of them - I could actually get a graphics display, it was just a double image - totally unusable). Tried FreeBSD. Graphics issue. Tried Slack. Graphics issue. None of these so-called mainstream distro's would allow me to pop in a disk, and get my laptop working without serious headaches. I finally (after two days of downloading ISO's, burning them, trying them) gave up, and installed XP again. 1 hour later and 8-10 mouse clicks, and my system was working without any sort of real input from me other than my name, company, and cd key. I like Linux for it's ability to be tailored exactly to your use. I like that I can configure it to do SPAM filtering, and only SPAM filtering. I don't like that I have to jump through 8 burning hoops to get a simple desktop with a browser. Maybe this will give me the tools I need to finally be able to have a linux system that I can actually use daily, and then figure out the guts of when I'm not trying to put out fires at work. I can only imagine how intimidating it would be to someone who has a hard time using Windows.
You can't even burn an ISO properly in Windows with its default burning interface. (Not that getting the necessary freeware is so hard, but every extra step stops some people.)
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
I'm not aware of any such drivers on Ubuntu. Are you talking about the non .deb NVidia provided driver package? You shouldn't be using that. Ubuntu includes drivers.
That's what I always used to call Ubuntu. Being a die-hard linux user/sysadmin for going on 10 years now, and a rabid Debian and Slackware fan - I always scoffed at Ubuntu. I felt like it was "dumbed down".
Seeing the positive effect Ubuntu has had in spreading more mainstream use of linux, I've changed my ways. This is just another step further in helping more people to step away from Windows and discover something better. I agree that X11 problems account for the majority of failed end-user attempts at trying linux out.
Since Feisty came out, I've been able to quickly install a GNU/Linux distro on several machines (family members, friends) and have them up and running, and the users happily working on a friendly OS. All of them have stayed with Ubuntu. No Ubuntu/XP dual booting, just straight up scrapping Windows and going full ahead with Ubuntu. Most of them (my wife included) have said "I will never go back to Windows again".
Every time a user says "I will never go back to Windows again", an angel gets its wings.
Just disrupt the deflector shield with a tachyon burst.
Nothing is wrong with it.
The problem is with the people claiming that a GUI is NECESSARY.
Years ago we had DOS. And we ran WordPerfect. And we ran Lotus 123. A GUI is not necessary. It is nice. But it is not necessary.
No one is saying that it would hurt Linux adoption. Just that the argument that a GUI is necessary is incorrect.
No one is forcing them. No one is saying that they should not have that option. Just that the argument that a GUI is necessary is incorrect.
And by "trying Linux out" you mean "complaining that it isn't exactly like Windows. Linux is NOT Windows and anyone who is honestly "trying Linux out" will try to learn the differences.
Of course I can. Since I went through the learning experience I am better suited to know what the differences are and what the minimum skills required are. Again, Linux is NOT Windows. People spent time learning Windows. Why do you expect a completely different system to exactly the same?
Ever drive a manual transmission? It's different from an automatic. It requires a different skill set.
Which is why I get so many calls to fix broken Windows boxes.
What happens when the "click here to fix all the problems" GUI does not launch?
With Windows, you bring it to me.
With Ubuntu, you don't have to. You type "apt-get install --reinstall foo" and it works again.
Now, what is the problem with having a few basic commands written down on a 3x5 card and taped to the side of the box? When the GUI fails, a little thought and some very simple commands will bring your box back WITHOUT having to bring it to me.
X configuration is by far my biggest time waster on linux. If they manage to make the gtk based configurator half decent, they will finally make x as usable as mac was back in... 1984.
Seriously though, I'm happy *someone* is finally trying to fix one of the big problems in X, of which there are legion.
nVidia's configuration tool for their restricted drivers doesn't properly generate a xorg.conf in all cases. The tool isn't put in the menus automatically, I forget what the command line for it is. nvidia-settings or nvidia-configure or something? Anyways, if your monitor model name has a " in it, it won't be escaped when it's enclosed in quotes, and xorg.conf will get confused and won't start next time you boot. Oops.
Fortunately nvidia-settings (or whatever) makes a backup so it was easy to restore and reboot. Then I examined the file it outputs and rather quickly noticed nVidia's mistake.
Perhaps just as important as the safe mode is the multi-monitor support; configuring multiple monitors is still a pain in Feisty Fawn.
The graphical installers ALWAYS try to use an ergonomic refresh rate
that drive my old Genuine IBM VGA monitors bananas.
The installer should be written for 640x480, 60 Hz, PERIOD.
And authors of said installers should test them at 640x480.
There's nothing that makes me want to microwave an Ubuntu CD faster
than a dialog box with the buttons off the bottom of the screen.
--Gene
Mission: To provide products that consume time and energy as entertainingly as permitted by the laws of thermodynamics.
Over the years, I have wanted to try Linux, and ended up stopping First time I tried Linux, I could find no drivers for my DSL modem, and no internet meant no OS Second time, I played around just fine, but I lose the GUI once, and could never wander through the help to get it back (I found out about 'startx' later) Third time, I had network drivers (even managed to get WiFi set up on my laptop), I could get back into X if I ever got stuck out to a command prompt, but when I started messing around with video drivers, my xorg.conf got messed up, and I couldn't for the life of me figure out how to get it to work again. Maybe Fourth time will be a charm
I think that that is the case ONLY because those people are coming from a Windows background.
And the problem with your perception is that you think that the linux command line mentality is better for the average joe user. I don't disagree that if you know what you're doing, it is much easier to fix a broken Linux than it is to fix a broken Windows. But the key here is that most people don't know what they're doing. Parts of the design of Windows are aimed at users that don't know what they're doing so that their PC will at least be somewhat functional for them with all of the familiar interfaces even if something bad happens.
You see, the command line or text messages with a black background mean nothing to the user. For all purposes, if they don't see something that resembles their desktop, they think their computer is broken. They also don't care if they have to type in one command to fix it because to them, learning that the command line exists and that you can even enter text commands is too much to deal with. If you can't expect failure in your software and implement necessary messages and functionality to recover to a close but not quite mode expected by the user, it doesn't mean a damn thing because they will end up calling the nearest geek to fix it. And when they do that, it doesn't matter how long it takes you to fix or even if you can't fix it. They've already lost time waiting for your service and your service is only seen as a backup effort. If geeks were not available, they probably would have considered their computer broken and the only way to fix it would be to purchase a new one.
The people at Ubuntu are doing more for linux and open source software adoption than anyone else has. Take a hint and learn something about understanding other (non-techy) user's viewpoints. If all open source developers could actually understand those users, then linux might eventually be ready for the desktop.
... like that other OS's "Safe Mode" - VGA resolution with network support disabled. Not a bad idea, though the other GUI-based "user friendly" distros should have thought of it a long time ago.
Of course these days, VGA resolution is mostly unnecessary. I think 1024x768 with 256 colors should work on almost everything out there.
. . . . Is this the new '50 Cent' game?
Strange that they would bundle it with Ubuntu.
What happens in linux sometimes is, especially with those pesky generic LCDs, the refresh rate has to be manually set or the handling is all messed up, or your card isnt supporting a certain resolution. And what you get is that the screen will show you the boot splash, the computer loading, and when its time for your GUI, boom theres just a black screen. And you cant do anything unless you boot into a terminal and configure xserver.xorg by HAND, which let me tell you can be VERY ANNOYING for the everyday user. Of course I'm not the everyday user, but if I were, I'd probably just use windows.
And this is one step closer to Ubuntu becoming mainstream. =]
IBM "Genuine VGA" monitors? You're USING them!?!?
Dude, if they still work, save them in your cellar! They will soon be collectors items and you can make a fortune!
But if you are trying to work with them, it's obvious that the only reason you don't microwave your install CD is that you are so cheap you make Scrooge look lavish. I can spend $5-$10 at the local thrift store to get SVGA, 1280x1024 monitors, 15 inch. If you're still using IBM VGA monitors and you expect everything else to work on them, you are [unrealistic/indescribable/retarded/virgin].
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
I've attempted installing 7.04 on five different systems:
1. Abit AB9-Pro Core 2 Duo System
2. Dell Inspiron 1100
3. Dell Inspiron 2500
4. Dell Inspiron 2600
5. Toshiba Laptop (I forget the model, single core Celeron 2.0ghz)
The AB9-Pro system would get to the Live CD options but would freeze with graphical issues. The Inspiron 1100 installed without a hitch, but in 640x480 which required a LOT of tweaking and eventually, X Server would come up with errors and wouldn't even boot thereafter.
The final three laptops would get past the Live CD options but wouldn't get beyond X Server graphic errors.
I used two different copies of Ubuntu 7.04, X Ubuntu and Ubuntu Alternate with the same errors each time. I know this wasn't related to my burning methods.
I then downloaded PCLinuxOS (which I'm using now) and it installed without a hitch on both my AB9-Pro and my Inspiron 1100 (which I'm using now).
but we have to put up with you and your kind, who has never run a protein gel, read a DNA sequence, or solved a single biological problem of even the remotest significance for the good of humanity in the slightest inconsequential way; preaching the Gospel of how your Body works by your definitions spawned from everything you could glean from the National Enquirer and the Maury Povich show and the view out of the window of your single-wide mobile home, and delivered as if you were James Fucking Watson.
Speaking for 99.99999999 of humanity, go conduct a poll to back up those numbers and then get back to us, junior!
"Laziness is an optimisation protocol"
Is there equivalent functionality for Xubuntu? (or the other *ubuntu?)
This is a great advance for my own usages! I'm not nearly advanced enough to fix mistakes that I make on a Ubuntu box. I had attempted to install Nvidia drivers on my box once and for some reason, it fried X, and I was left with only a command line to work with. I was able to ftp the log with my limited knowledge, but it didn't help me fix the issue in the end. I ended up just wiping the drive and starting over. I would have loved a fail-safe GUI to work with.
very simple...they burn the .iso image as a file instead of an image...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
...how scared todays linux users are of the command line
Make SELinux enforcing again!
It does what Windows has been doing for the last 5 years?
Glad to see computing is advancing.
"You had this look that of an angel, it was such a bad disguise" --Dishwalla
Thank god we have the alternate cd for those 60Hz refresh rates are kinda equal to shining a laser beam into your eye. Anyone manufacturing anti-flicker safety goggles btw? (ones that'd blur framerate to 15 fps while using refresh rate of 120Hz or so internally)
You see, the difference here is that nobody in their right mind attempts the job of a biologist without any qualifications. EVERYONE thinks they know about computers in a way which has understandably pissed off the OP. Maybe he has a point.
If your goal is to discourage people from using computers then an operating system that cannot be recovered within a GUI is realy the way to go for you.
But don't moan about people using Windows then.
This is single worst problem with Linux.
I've lost count of the number of times I've had to fix this over the years.
It even breaks after monthly patching, etc. and there's no way a normal user can be expected to "boot into single user mode and use vi to fix it".
This should have been done ten years ago.
No sig today...
"I determined the graphics failure to be an issue 100% of the time."
Me too.
I have to fix Xorg.conf this on 90% of all new installs. I have to fix it after monthly patches, etc, etc. It's a total pain in the ass and it's not something a normal person can fix.
This is ten years overdue.
No sig today...
1) You're running an x86 PC with a VESA compliant graphics card, or any platform which has 'legacy VGA' registers mapped. What about PPC or something? It's frighteningly rare for the kernel framebuffer not to work on these platforms but there are some times where the X.org driver/autodetect or most commonly GDM doesn't quite configure your card correctly and hands you a garbage display. I never understood why X.org can't have a TRUE framebuffer console driver which simply inherits the mode the kernel gives it.
This isn't bulletproof it's just a band-aid.
2) Everyone loves GTK+ - well, I pretty much don't. Does this mean the Kubuntu guys have to install GTK now? Actually not, because there is a cute KDE app for it, but seriously.. why does everyone fawn over the GTK stuff and never show the Qt stuff?
In fact, it turns out this was a KDE app to start with. Quote;
Which just begs the question, why wasn't this news when the KDE app got written?
3) Everyone loves GDM, well, I don't. What's up with KDM these days? Does it handle it better? None of the developers are telling the success story on any project I'm watching right now, it's all "GDM breaks this" and "we have problems with that". So it worked on KDE before, but nobody thought to say "this is a great feature, now we port it to GTK"?
There are some very strange priorities in the software world these days.. bug reports flood the net and nobody talks about anything being finished..
One of the best things about Windows is the device manager, IMHO. Or rather, the whole "Computer Manager" application. A graphical way to 100% manage your devices is very helpful.
Personally, this is the one area that Windows has right and Linux/OSX has wrong. A graphical method for knowing what the system sees for hardware and then changing it is essential for the average user... sometimes even for moderate users like me, for that matter. I shouldn't ever have to drop to a line command as long as I have a graphical environment.
Maybe i'm wrong but SuSE long had a graphical installer before debian, ubuntu and others, it also if i remember had ways of bringing YaST to you even if graphical boot failed. I know its not quite the same, you probably had to launch sax2 yourself but i still don't see why this couldn't have been done 2-4 years ago....or even further back. Its not like we don't have a VESA driver built into X11 now is it? Syllable/formerly AtheOS and Windows not to mention other OS's out there all automatically fall back on VESA or VGA mode should the GUI be incompatible with the setup where you can comfortably use things without a safe mode. My guess is AtheOS has probably done this since 2001 or before.... thats 6 years ago....and finally someone decides ooo ubunto should fall back to help people who don't have 2 days to spend fixing their pc. I wonder if win 3.11 was capable of the same...
That's something Microsoft Windows did already back 1995. What's the Fuzz?
I'm not sure why this couldn't be in X.org directly. xorg.conf is by far the greatest problem in making Linux a viable alternative on the desktop. Most of my xorg.conf was even autodetected with the configuration utility (could be done by X.org on startup)
Today my xorg.conf contains:
Paths to fonts (could be autodetected or stored in a standard font configuration, at second though, isn't there some other font configuration file already?)
Basic mouse and keyboard settings (could be set to a default inside X.org)
Screen and graphics card settings (Basically a name for both and some settings for nvidia)
Touchpad options
Modules to load (could be done dynamically)
that's simply the touchpad, nvidia and keyboard layout options that are important. Keyboard layout could be shared with the rest of the system (my console knows my keyboard layout, why is it then in xorg.conf?). The nvidia driver could store it's own settings and likewise the touchpad (oh, and user specific mouse settings please?). xorg.conf could exist only to override what you specifically didn't want as the autodetected values and a cached version of the autodetected values could be stored to speed up boot if no parameters changed. And please, give me live updating of these settings, restarting X is tiresome.
Here it is: Open a terminal, go to the root directory and type the following:
sudo rm -rf
It will uninstall *everything* for you. Next question.
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/96084
Oops! Your new IDE chipset doesn't have drivers in the kernel we made, so we're not able to mount the CD-ROM that you booted from! But just to make things more fun, you'll get an error message that gives you no clue to the problem!
Not to mention all the fun trying to get Ubuntu working properly with the D830's trackpad and not having random clicks from just scooting around the screen. I have never been impressed with GUIs under Linux... they always work fine on the hardware that the developers use, but need not just command-line fixes, but command-line + hours-of-googling fixes on the hardware that _I_ try to use.
FYI the D830 was for work, and I normally use OS X. It's bullshit like this (and that damn X-windows 3-button copy/paste) that keeps me on OS X. When I do use Linux, I stick to the command line. Only recently have I considered moving up from Slackware to Debian, and that's because I got hooked on apt-get in Fink.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
Let me be the first to welcome Linux to 1995, when Windows 95 was first introduced with a "safe mode" for graphics problems. Let's hope that in another 12 years, Linux will have caught up to Windows XP.
I don't respond to AC's.
Ubuntu just kills Mandriva these days.
I've still got a Mandrake 8 box running, emulators, OGLE (IMHO, the best DVD playback), some net utilities, and other old things. I really like it. That's about the last time I really liked it.
For some reason the Mandrake/iva stuff just didn't quite gell. After some futzing around, I generally got the system running well, but that's the problem! Nobody, besides the geeks, wants, or needs to do this!
Hell, I don't want or need to do this, and I know my stuff! I also know where my time is best spent and it's not doing that crap.
I put the kids on a Ubuntu box and it's just fine. I really don't have to do much sysadmin at all, and they like it. (they are teens, having seen some OSes in their time) After a few months, I saw their cameras, portable media players, e-mail, pictures, games running nicely. This just has not happened with other environments, without hassles.
Their perspective:
win32 = virii, spyware, driver / DLL conflicts over time This translates to windows rot, getting slow, iffy, etc... they are very careful on one of these machines, largely because they know stuff happens (interesting huh?)
most Linuxes = runs great, but only does some things, without intervention (They do what they want, and it's safe, but it requires help and does not just work)
mac = pretty, but you have to buy stuff, or run "old" software. (that's OSS stuff on Mac)
Ubuntu = fun, has all sorts of stuff that can be loaded, pretty, fast. (I set up their package manager so that it just worked, let them find it and use it. They came back and said, "this gimp thing is awesome" found a ton of bizzare picture edits --go figure)
Of course, I can change that perception with work on my end. The take away here is that Ubuntu has required very little of that work, by comparison to most other environments.
Somebody, somewhere, needs to make a cheap, all in the box, Ubuntu system. Just include sound, 3D graphics, video in, video out, USB, game controller port, portable media reader, DVD playback, Rip Mix Burn for video and audio.
This is possible for a few hundred dollars, minus display. It's a winner. Does not need to be the fastest, or the latest, just needs to be loaded up and ready to run. Think of it as the Mac Mini for the rest of us.
Blogging because I can...
Damn, that's one epic shit.
A little offtopic but, here u go anyway
Why there is SO MANY targeted windows server add on linux news?
Isn't that SUPPOSED TO BE RANDOM?
I saw that pattern in the past... it's starting, since MS does not need "need" Linux no more, now it has OSX with acceptable share and therefore cannot be labeled as monopoly.
Sorry for the offtopic again. O_O
That's an nVidia driver config dialogue. I can't speak for the GP, but I have an ATi card; and when I tried to get dualscreen's working (about a year ago, with 6.06; I don't know whether anything's changed since then), it was xorg.conf all the way. Which was painful.
IIRC, there was an ATi specific set of instructions, and a generic Xinemara set. The ATi specific set just didn't work - the machine failed to load X and dumped me at a command line, no matter what variations I tried. After figuring out the basics of bash syntax (mostly by trial and error) and restoring the original xorg, I tried the Xinemara way. Whilst I eventually got this to work (after about 4 hours of trying various different variations in xorg), it was a kludge at best -- my right hand monitor is 1024x768 whilst my left one is 1152x864, but Xinemara apparently couldn't cope with that, and gave me a 'virtual' desktop spanning the two monitors 864 pixels high, which I could scroll the view of the right hand monitor up & down in. So a maximised window would either have its top or bottom cut off. Horrible solution, I don't know who thought that would be a good idea. I now just unplug my right hand monitor whenever I boot into Ubuntu.
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
The reasons I use the IBM monitors:
1. They still work and look good at 15 years old.
2. By definition, they ARE the standard.
3. I would have to pay $20 to legally dispose of them in my state.
Besides, it's not like I'm asking for Hercules monochrome mode support.
--Gene
Mission: To provide products that consume time and energy as entertainingly as permitted by the laws of thermodynamics.
I don't know how many times I've had to remember where that config file was... I always missed that feature from Debian...
As I just said in another post, the problem seems to be that many linux distros require VESA 2.0 support *IN HARDWARE*, and if this is absent (as can be the case even on modern video cards) the linux installer will freeze solid first time it tries to go into graphics mode.
I twigged to this when I realised that for some distros, on otherwise-identical hardware, the only difference between success and failure was whether the video card was S3 (no VESA 2.0 support in hardware) or Matrox (VESA 2.0 support in hardware).
Presumably some distros DO have software VESA 2.0 support, so they don't encounter the issue.
It would be nice to have this info up front; it would save a lot of "it doesn't work!" complaints.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Abut fucking time!
Okay, three words.
It's about fucking time somebody in the IT industry realized that the answer to a problem is not just a fucking unintelligible error message - or crashing.
Hopefully Microsoft will steal THIS idea...
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
I know people who run 19" monitors at 640x480, because they HAVE TO, due to vision problems.
I have a number of clients who are elderly, and run a 19" monitor at 800x600, because that is the highest resolution that they can see properly.
So you're saying you're okay with locking out these users? They're hardly rare... your own grandparents are probably among them.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
As somebody said, we had this in SuSE for a long time (Sax), but other distros had this also. For instance, I used Debian, and it had "X -configure" which started VESA gui which tried to autoconfigure everything, and if not, it had some buttons to, for instance move the screen up, down, left, right. I believe this will be more polished, but it is not never-before-seen stuff.
"Fail safe" does not mean "cannot fail". (No such thing.) It means "designed to fail safely." For example, brake systems that are designed to lock up if the brake fluid leaks.
Usually when people say "fail safe" they mean "foolproof". Foolproof systems do exist, but only until some fool figures out how to circumvent them!
I just spent all weekend trying to install Kubuntu on my desktop. With an NVidea 8800-based video card, it's nearly impossible. The catch-22 there is that you can't NVidia's linux driver w/o a running system- but it's a GUI installation. It was very unclear that the alternate installation CD had a text-based mode. The description of the CD gave the impression that it was only for oddly-configured machines, like ones that ran on kerosene and used disk drives made of butter. I gave up- it was hopeless.
I finally switched to OpenSuSE. Granted, the distro took an overnight to download on my crappy connection, but it installed booted and let me stuff in the NVidia drivers like a champ. I'd really prefer to go with Kubuntu, but I think I'll wait. Maybe this will all be settled when they release some other silly version names like Horny Hippo, Idiotic Ibex, or Jumping Jehosephat. Hopefully I won't have to wait for Nerdy Nergleheimer...
Then let me add to your statistics. My shiny new laptop bought last September failed at the "install X" step when installing Ubuntu Dapper Drake from CD. It yielded a black screen, and I never did see the final steps of the install process. It wasn't the CD, it was a graphics problem with Intel video chipset.
:-)
Once fixed, it was still a few sad months before the display worked as I would like.
However, I am now the happy user of Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon, whose Intel driver is most excellent. Apart from the bugs every odd version or so, but the ones without those bugs work very well.
(The X video driver is the only package on my Ubuntu which is "version locked" to an older version because the current one has problems).
Slackpkg is great and all but it's only for packages that are a part of the distro (correct me if i'm wrong) ... yeah there's slapt-get (and is swaret still going?) but the breadth of apps that the ?ubuntu's have is not there because of the smaller userbase.
Also so far I've not managed to upgrade Slack with just "slackpkg install-new; slackpkg upgrade-all;" whilst I've heard plenty of reports of a dist-upgrade working.
It's supposed to be "easier" for non-technical people, until you have to explain that what they are looking at is booted off the cd, not their hard drive.
IMHO it's not the installers that need to be "easier", but disaster recovery--ie you put a new video card in, and Linux goes to hell in a handbasket. It's the last remaining thing that Windows really does better. So this is great.
expandfairuse.org
So you're saying you're okay with locking out these users? They're hardly rare... your own grandparents are probably among them.
No. I'm saying other people are locking them out. And that you don't have to be one of them.
I don't write device drivers, I don't manufacture VGA cards or monitors. I don't decide what hardware gets supported. I deal with whatever hardware is supported. And "works" for me and my staff is wwwwaaaayyyyy more important than "works like I think it should". Because I'm about getting stuff done.
If you are willing to deal with major headaches because of a "standard" that you adhere to that can be otherwise dealt with for $5-10 at the local thrift store, be glad that you don't work for me. Because if you did, you wouldn't for long. I'm not willing to invest 2-3 man-days of skilled programmer time to figure out how come a driver won't work on a 15 year old monitor when a 10 year-old monitor that will work can be had for $10 and 1/2 hour.
What's YOUR time really worth? At $100-$200 per hour of MY time, a trip to the thrift store sounds awful convenient, to hell be damned with "the standard".
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Mmm, okay, I think we're talking at cross purposes somehow...
Yeah, when it's cost-effective to just replace some old piece of crap, AND when it's not critical to what you're doing or your way of doing things, then a cheap replacement is the thing to do. Don't cling to it just because you're stubborn.
But sometimes that's not the problem, as per my examples. Sometimes people have no better option available to them, or the "better" option doesn't actually work well for them.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
yes it happens, still today with ext3 and reiserfs, that the filesystem check crashes and you have to do it manually.
Now imagine a lambda user in front of a linux PC asking to "run fsck manually", that's a BIG no.
Atari rules... ermm... ruled.