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."
Seriously.
It's pathetic that this problem wasn't solved a decade ago, or more. I've edited modelines, used any number of awful configurators, and they're all terrible.
Every single one was completely and totally terrible.
Linux is a steaming pile of shit, but Ubuntu is at least doing a good job of acknowledging that it'd steam a little less if it was easier to use.
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?
Yeah, man. I'm only screwed in Linux when it doesn't boot at all... but that's usually when I screw up my fstab somehow (why does this happen so often, I do not know). And even then, I just boot the install CD and fix fstab with vim.
I'd say Linux recovery capabilities > Windows recovery capabilities. I've never hosed Linux so bad that I had to reinstall, but I've done it to Windows hundreds of times. Linux is just designed better. People may laugh, but it's true - it's easier to control and manipulate to your bidding.
There's no console mode in Windows where you can say "MAKE_MY_COMPUTER_SUCK=0" and have your computer magically fixed.
P.S.: Mandriva 4 ever, screw this Ubundu fad. Mandrake was the first user-friendly distro and still holds the crown. 8-)
Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
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.
Funny. I use Windows and find myself looking down upon Linux and Mac OS users for using operating systems that can't run mainstream software or games without hassling about with problematic emulators or virtualisation.
I am quite happy with Windows XP. Regardless of what any Linux tool or Mac zealot might say, XP is fast, stable, secure and compatible. It also has the greatest library of software/support by far and most hardware "just works" without issue.
None of this is to say that I like or dislike Microsoft, however I am not too blinded to admit that they did a good job with Win2k/XP.
As I said before, the GUI is not the OS with Linux. Not everybody is a neophyte and some choose simply to NOT install the GUI or to simply turn it off when it is not being used. Stop assuming the lowest common denominator always applies.
You have gotten too accustomed to having to do things in a GUI to realize that it is about flexibility and choice. With Microsoft (their new server offering and DOS notwithstanding) you do not not have that option. In order to us their OS you need the GUI.
Yes to most of the unaccustomed, an OS without a GUI or with a misconfigured GUI means it is broken, in that THEY cannot use it. That is not the case, however. They should know that it is not broken, is likely easily fixable (relatively, meaning they don't have to nuke and format, lose everything, etc). Linux is flexible. It is not just a desktop OS. It works on servers, set top boxes, pdas, etc. GUIs are purely optional
So, the GUI that my arcade cabinet loads at boot (an svgalib-based menu, not KDE, Gnome, etc.) is now magically part of the OS? Every device running embedded Linux or Windows CE that only supports http configuration now suddenly has no OS?
No.