Slashdot Mirror


2 Displays and 2 Workspaces With Linux and X?

Borov writes "I'm planning to buy a second monitor in near future and I was searching for ways to configure it under Linux. It seems there are two main ways: 1) to have one 'big' desktop, which means I have single workspace — changing virtual desktop switches both monitors or 2) to have separate X sessions for each display — which means I have separate workspaces, but I can't move applications between them. I need something in the middle — a separate workspace for each screen, so that I can have independent virtual desktops on each screen, but still have the ability to move applications between monitors (no need to strech one app across both of them). I've read that some tiling window managers can do this kind of thing, but I'd rather go with 'classical' window managers, like Openbox/Gnome/KDE or similar."

460 comments

  1. re: by Mitsoid · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Good question, I would like to know the answer as well.. Windows 7's easy dual-monitor setup has me addicted now!

  2. Very good question. by sleekware · · Score: 1

    I have seen a picture on the net awhile ago of a key-commanded window manager that someone had spread across 6+ different monitors. Does anyone know of this?

    1. Re:Very good question. by ZankerH · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You're probably talking about Awesome WM. It does both tiling and floating.

    2. Re:Very good question. by __aastpl2241 · · Score: 2, Informative

      xmonad is one of those WM

    3. Re:Very good question. by sleekware · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ah! This might be it, I just Google'd it and it looks very promising: http://awesome.naquadah.org/

    4. Re:Very good question. by sleekware · · Score: 2, Informative

      This one looks promising too! (Just did a Google search for it, http://xmonad.org/ Guess I'll have to try them both...

    5. Re:Very good question. by sammyF70 · · Score: 4, Informative

      yes. probably Awesome WM. There is such a picture on the Awesome homepage (http://awesome.naquadah.org/). It's often advertised as a tiling manager and Julien Danjou seems to have been so upset about that that the 3.4 release now defaults to floating layout on all tags (you can default any tag to tiling or floating, and in the case of multiple monitors, you can have a tilingbehaviour on one monitor, and a floating one on the other monitor, and move windows and applications back and forth).

      Awesome is indeed awesome, if you don't mind some manual editing of the lua configuration file.It should fit the OP's requirement nicely. Additionally, it's a blast on netbooks

      --
      "DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
    6. Re:Very good question. by kabniel · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've been using xmonad for 6 months now and i dont think i can ever go back a regular non-tiling window manager again, dual monitors with independant workspaces is just too sweet.
      Win + w/e to switch focus between screens
      Win + tab to cycle through windows
      Win + 1-9 to switch between workspaces on active screen
      Win + Shift + 1-9 to send active window to workspace of choice

      It was a pretty steep learning curve at first since the config is written in haskell, but totally worth it.

      You can have floating windows if you really want to, but who wants to drag around windows all the time ;)

    7. Re:Very good question. by Ruie · · Score: 1

      A simple solution - make two screens a single desktop, install KDE 3.5.1 and create one panel for each display. There is nothing in KDE that prevents you from having more than one. And you can connect several USB keyboards you feel like it..

    8. Re:Very good question. by patrickthbold · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Awesome is very fun to configure.

    9. Re:Very good question. by Kessler · · Score: 1

      Awesome WM will do *exactly* what the OP wants. However the OP also insisted on a "classical" window manager. Though Awesome can behave a bit like a classical window manager (floating window mode is, in fact, now the default behavior), the result would be unsatisfying. Trying to manage two screens with nine virtual desktops each by dragging things around with a pointing device is insane. Awesome's keyboard shortcuts for window management make that task vastly more efficient for those willing to invest a little effort in climbing over the learning curve.

    10. Re:Very good question. by chammy · · Score: 1

      Xmonad is ridiculously slick for this kind of situation. Even if you don't like the idea of a tiling wm, it's worth trying out. On my multihead work machine it's a life saver! The fact that it can be controlled via keyboard makes using my netbook a lot more enjoyable as well.

    11. Re:Very good question. by pintpusher · · Score: 1

      I'll jump on the AOL-that bandwagon.

      I've been using xmonad for a while (maybe a couple of years? since version 0.4 or something anyway), and I'll probably never leave it. It's just so ridiculously easy once you hop over the learning curve. It's fast and simple. The community support is great too. ++xmonad.

      --
      man, I feel like mold.
    12. Re:Very good question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have been using stumpwm (and linux as my desktop) for the first time since lastt week. It is written in common lisp. It can do exactly what the OP desires and much more. with large monitors Fitt's law falls apart. Being able to reprogram my window manager as it is running (with slime/swank) is absolutely amazing.

    13. Re:Very good question. by GigaplexNZ · · Score: 1

      I've read that some tiling window managers can do this kind of thing, but I'd rather go with 'classical' window managers, like Openbox/Gnome/KDE or similar.

      Awesome is indeed awesome, if you don't mind some manual editing of the lua configuration file.It should fit the OP's requirement nicely.

      The requirement stated that they were aware of things like Awesome, but that option doesn't appeal. How does this fit the requirement, again?

    14. Re:Very good question. by sammyF70 · · Score: 1

      insofar as Awesome is not a tiling manager, even though it is often categorized as such. It is a highly configurable windows manager which just happens to be very good at tiling.

      --
      "DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
    15. Re:Very good question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, the Awesome WM will do this, I'm doing this at work with two displays, and at home on 4 displays.

      XMonad (http://xmonad.org/) also supports this approach.

  3. Re:Gentoo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    We won't know until you finish compiling.

  4. tiling by by+(1706743) · · Score: 2, Informative

    I know you don't want a tiling manager, but for anyone wondering, I can speak from experience that dwm works wonderfully with two monitors. I run an external 1920x1200 display, and an internal 1024x600 from my netbook.

    1. Re:tiling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tiling window managers are really great. The poster should really at least try one for a few weeks. I personaly use Awesome. It really is one of the best ways to exploit large/multiple screens.

    2. Re:tiling by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 0

      Tiling window managers do not manage windows. Welcome to 1970.

      --
      -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
    3. Re:tiling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tiling window managers do not manage windows. Welcome to 1970.

      Please exlain for us born after 1970.

    4. Re:tiling by Al+Dimond · · Score: 1

      Ironically, one of the pitches for tiling window managers is that typical window managers don't really manage windows -- that a good tiling manager saves you the effort of having to resize and place all your windows manually. I tried one for a couple months a few years ago and didn't really like it, but I can see the appeal.

    5. Re:tiling by KlomDark · · Score: 1

      Hell, explain it for people born BEFORE 1970, that made no sense at all.

      // 1968

    6. Re:tiling by nedlohs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      except that they do manage windows. You never manually resize or shift a window a little to see something behind it, for example.

      It's stacking window managers that don't do the managing.

    7. Re:tiling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they do. In fact a good one can do so a good deal more effectively than most other solutions. In the case of the question poster above, several of the better ones handle much more gracefully than any amount of gnome/kde/compiz/windows/osx window "management" can conjure up. It's ok if you don't prefer them, but there is no call to unfairly berate them.

    8. Re:tiling by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

      If you don't have the ability to move one thing over another, what you have is not a "window", in the commonly-accepted sense. Therefore, tiling window managers do not manage windows- maybe they manage tiles.

      --
      -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
    9. Re:tiling by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

      If you don't have the ability to move one thing over another, what you have is not a "window", in the commonly-accepted sense. Therefore, tiling window managers do not manage windows- maybe they manage tiles.

      I will admit that gnome/kde/compiz/windows/osx all suck horribly, but throwing out the most major feature of a window that actually makes it a "window" cannot be accepted as a way to make a "window manager".
      If instead of the ability to move things around and partially-obscure one with another, I got rid of the ability to put things side-by-side (perhaps by requiring that each new window always partially obscured another) I assume you would find that unacceptable, might even consider it so far removed from the concept of "windows" that it was not befitting the name.

      The same can also be said of "full-screen-only" managers. Would you consider iPhone to have a window manager, for example?

      --
      -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
  5. Re:xinerama and xrandr by pwnies · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Offensive, but he's right. A simple google search would have revealed this.

  6. Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Not a 'classical" window manager but the only one that can do this afaik.
    http://awesome.naquadah.org/

    1. Re:Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Awesome is the best, hands down.

    2. Re:Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Xmonad and dwm can do it too.

  7. 4 Screens by spribyl · · Score: 5, Informative

    I have 4 screen using 2 nvida 9500 cards and KDE.
    I have one X session. By not using Xinerama my maximize button is limited to the size of the two screens on one card. I can stretch the window to full size using all 4 screens.
    I also use multiple desktops to manage windows.

    Right now each screen gets its own window. When I need to look and wide things(log files) I maximize to two screens. For really big things I can stretch the window to all four screens.

    1. Re:4 Screens by cephalien · · Score: 4, Informative

      Last I checked, KDE + NVIDIA is the way to go; GNOME doesn't really support multiple monitors in anything but a combined mode.

      --
      If firefighters fight fire, and crimefighters fight crime, what do freedom fighters fight? - George Carlin
    2. Re:4 Screens by daff2k · · Score: 1

      I'd love to know how you configured that setup? I have tried that with KDE 4.3 using two Nvidia cards (each dual-DVI capable) and connecting three monitors but TwinView doesn't natively allow for more than two monitors. What it does seem to allow is for one of the "twin views" to be composed of two xinerama screens though. It then puts that xinerama dual-screen together with the regular screen as TwinView. But that screws up the screen borders, i.e. maximising a window on the xinerama dual-screen gets stretched over both monitors.

      What did you do?

      --
      And which parallel universe did you crawl out of?
    3. Re:4 Screens by Xtravar · · Score: 1

      Are you using Compiz? My experience with nVidia + more than TwinView = Compiz fail.

      --
      Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
    4. Re:4 Screens by AlXtreme · · Score: 2, Informative

      Xfce4 + Nvidia also works pretty well, Xfce4 handles multiple desktops with multiple monitors just fine.

      --
      This sig is intentionally left blank
    5. Re:4 Screens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, the problem with one X session is that when you change virtual desktops all 4 will change. 4 monitors will negate this somewhat, but I'm a heavy user of virtual desktops and like to keep an app open on one screen and switch through desktops on the other.

    6. Re:4 Screens by Narishma · · Score: 2, Informative

      KDE has it's own compositing manager, it doesn't use Compiz.

      --
      Mada mada dane.
    7. Re:4 Screens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a work around though, but it's not perfect.

      http://mugginix.com/articles/2009/Nov/12/Xinerama_Composite_Fail/

    8. Re:4 Screens by eatsleeplim · · Score: 1

      I'm using 2 screens using AMD 780G (yes, it's integrated graphics) and KDE - and using fglrx. Wasn't too much tinkering to set it up. Also works similarly to the parent post: - single X Session, not using Xinerama, and maximize button stretches a single full monitor. - Able to stretch the window to full size across the 2 monitors too. - Multiple desktops to manage windows - blah blah blah. Yes, it doesn't work exactly as what the original poster asked for, but I do find the setup sufficient (at least for my needs anyways). Also, software like Yakuake to provide me a drop-down terminal (on one monitor) which works across the virtual desktops as well...

    9. Re:4 Screens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ATI works very good as well, I've had zero issues with 2 screen setup in Kubuntu so far.

    10. Re:4 Screens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have 4 screen using 2 nvida 9500 cards and KDE.

      OMG - please tell me your contracts start with a blowjob !?

    11. Re:4 Screens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since this is the only post that even comes close to addressing what was asked...

      Let me phrase what was said above in a manner that matches the questions in the story.

      1) Configure your system to have one X Server with two screens (do not use an nVidia span).
      2) Enable the Xinerama extension to X11

      Behavior:
      You should be able to drag windows from one screen to another.
      Maximizing a window should fill one screen, but you may resize a window to take up both.
      I am less sure about how the virtual desktops work, but you may have a window occupy more than one virtual desktop. I think that changing the workspace will change both screens.

    12. Re:4 Screens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scotty is that you? -Can you beam things from the massive altar? :)

  8. gnome is just fine. by chibiace · · Score: 2, Informative

    gnome with two screens is just fine. you can maximize on either side and even use the window list say one panel per screen to show what windows are open on each display.
    most distros dont even need configuring for dualscreen now.

    --
    he who controls the spice controls the universe
    1. Re:gnome is just fine. by Wannabe+Code+Monkey · · Score: 2, Informative
      gnome with two screens is just fine. you can maximize on either side and even use the window list say one panel per screen to show what windows are open on each display.

      I just want to second this. I have two monitors and one desktop stretched over both, but with gnome if you maximize a window it will snap to the edges of just the monitor it's on. You can stretch any window across both monitors, but you don't have to. I also duplicated the top and bottom panels from the 'main' monitor (my left) to the 'secondary' (my right). The task bars (gnome calls them 'Window Lists') on each monitor show just the windows on that monitor. You could have the gnome menu at the top left of each monitor, and the fast user switcher and date/time at the top right so it would really feel like two separate desktops.

      --
      We always knew Comcast was corrupt, here's the proof: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1909890&cid=34545432
    2. Re:gnome is just fine. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What happens when you go to a virtual desktop? Do all the windows on both screens change? If yes, then you just failed to read the summary.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:gnome is just fine. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. I have two monitors on an nvidia card. Maximizing a window fills only one monitor. I have two panels, with separate window lists. You can drag windows between the two monitors as well. It's set up exactly as you are looking for, and it took minimal fiddling (I use Ubuntu 9.10 and Compiz). Good luck!

    4. Re:gnome is just fine. by Wannabe+Code+Monkey · · Score: 1

      What happens when you go to a virtual desktop? Do all the windows on both screens change? If yes, then you just failed to read the summary.

      It seems that the poster is asking for two incompatible things at the same time (at least with 'classical' window managers, which he states he wants). I'm simply saying that he can probably get 90% of what he wants with approach A. It's not a failure to read, it's just a suggestion. Maybe that approach would be enough for him, maybe not. You can calm down.

      --
      We always knew Comcast was corrupt, here's the proof: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1909890&cid=34545432
    5. Re:gnome is just fine. by raddan · · Score: 1

      Do all the windows on both screens change?

      Yes, using GNOME and the NVidia driver.

    6. Re:gnome is just fine. by dhammabum · · Score: 1

      There is a problem if you have to use rdesktop - that window will span both screens so you have to dedicate a workspace to it.

      I just converted my system to two separate X sessions as the OP mentions, it is nice having two different task bars but a minor pain not being able to move an active window between sessions.

      --
      I am not a robot. I am a unicorn.
    7. Re:gnome is just fine. by Pf0tzenpfritz · · Score: 1

      No, they don't. I am actually posting this from virtual desktop #2 on screen 0 on a Debian system with Nvidia's proprietary driver and no Xinerama (two independent screens, one Xsession) , while happily changing virtual desktops on screen 1. If anything changes on the inactive desktop caused by an action on the active desktop/monitor there's definitely Xinerama involved.

      --
      Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!
    8. Re:gnome is just fine. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it doesn't work seamlessly (well/at all) for me.
      I've got a large monitor and laptop side by side, if I try to use both I lose the top and bottom bars on the lower resolution laptop screen. I end up setting them to clone, which is rather useless but at least lets me use my big screen.

      I'm using Ubuntu 9.10/Gnome with NVidia drivers.

    9. Re:gnome is just fine. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      If you're not running Xinerama, then you cannot move windows from one screen to the other, like the poster wanted.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    10. Re:gnome is just fine. by Markspark · · Score: 1

      this is not the case for me, and i also use 9.10 with Nvidia drivers. I use the twinview settings.

      --
      i find your lack of faith in science disturbing!
  9. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Good question, I would like to know the answer as well.. Windows 7's easy dual-monitor setup has me addicted now!

    Get a Mac. It's damn easy to use multiple monitors with it. Don't even bother under Linux unless you have an nVidia card.

  10. Just adjust your usage by keithpreston · · Score: 1

    It's is going to be more work finding something that works as opposed to just adjusting your usage. Sad, but true... Plus the more monitors you have the less workspaces you will use. I currently have a 6 monitor setup (4 linux, 2 windows) and from just setting up 4 on linux, I would go with whatever works first. I'm just glad maximize works to maximize the window to a single monitor.

    1. Re:Just adjust your usage by gregmac · · Score: 1

      I'd agree with this.

      In fact, I wonder what the OP is trying to do, that involves 4+ different virtual desktops in various 4 combinations (AC, AD, BC, BD).

      I used multiple workspaces quite a bit when I had one monitor.. then when I had two monitors, I gradually used it less and less, until the only reason I didn't turn it off was to play with the Cube display in compiz. Before I got to that point though, I would tend to use a feature in KDE that let you pin a window to all workspaces, so I would use that for my chat client / media player, depending on what I was doing.

      So back to my original point, if you wanted to switch between two workspaces, but always have email on one window, you could easily do that by pinning email to all workspaces .. as you switch, it'll just stay there.

      --
      Speak before you think
  11. Gnome + Twinview by nleaf · · Score: 1, Informative

    I'm using Twinview on a standard Ubuntu 9.10 install. While it's one big desktop stretching across two screens, you can set up metamodes in xorg.conf that allows windows to comfortably use a whole monitor (i.e. maximizing makes a window take up one monitor, not stretch across). If you're using an Nvidia card, the nvidia-setttings utility will even set this up for you. Both monitors are of course set to the same workspace, though. As far as I know, separate X servers are the only way to have each monitor on a different workspace.

  12. Google by Albanach · · Score: 4, Informative

    30 seconds with Google points me to

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xpra
    xpra or X Persistent Remote Applications is a tool which allows you to run X programs usually on a remote host and then direct their display to your local machine without losing any state. It differs from standard X forwarding in that it allows disconnection and reconnection without disrupting the forwarded application

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xmove
    xmove is a computer program that allows the movement of X Window System applications between different displays and the persistence of X applications across X server restarts[3]. It solves a problem in the design of X, where an X client (an X application) is tied to the X server (X display) it was started on for its lifetime. Also, if the X server is shut down, the client application is forced to stop running.

    Have you investigated any of these before 'asking /.'?

    I'd fire up a second X session on your machine - you can run multiple instances of X with a single monitor after all, and try moving apps between your sessions. Get that to work and everything should be (mostly) trivial after you get your new monitor.

    1. Re:Google by Cormacus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You know what? I'm glad that the submitter did not investigate any of these before asking /.. If he had, then I wouldn't have had the opportunity to read his question, ponder the answer myself, and then read your informative (but surly) response.

      --
      Mon chien, il n'a pas du nez. Comment scent-il? TrÃs mauvais!
    2. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I'm glad GP wrote his post without reading the summary.

    3. Re:Google by Chryana · · Score: 4, Informative

      I tried xpra to hold the mail/news/calendar (Kontact) application in KDE, and it crashed after about a day... So I wouldn't recommend it personally, or at least not yet. As for xmove, the xpra FAQ states it has been without maintenance since 1997.

    4. Re:Google by Albanach · · Score: 2, Informative

      Which part of the summary do you believe I missed?

      He wants separate x sessions - both of these solutions are designed for such an instance. Most folk would use them on separate machines but I see no indication they won't work on a local box with multiple X sessions running.

      He would prefer a classical window manager. He can run whatever window manager he likes - these apps allow the move of an X application from one X server to another.

    5. Re:Google by Albanach · · Score: 1

      Yes, I should have been less surly, but it would be nice to have seen an I've tried x and y and they won't work because...

      That way folk are going to be better able to help.

    6. Re:Google by Cormacus · · Score: 1

      Sorry AC, you're completely off base. GP clearly read the summary. He also clearly gave some useful information.

      --
      Mon chien, il n'a pas du nez. Comment scent-il? TrÃs mauvais!
    7. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 Snarky Asshole

    8. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From your first link: xpra is written in Python (ick -- really?), and it was initially released on Feb 20, 2008 (even worse).
      From your other link: xmove is an older app written in C (yay), but is currently in Beta for its 2.0 release (boo).

      Maybe he wanted something more mature? You know like the kind of maturity that comes from 10+ years of proven reliability.

    9. Re:Google by Cormacus · · Score: 1

      I know where you're coming from. I was reacting more to a perceived hostility than a real one. I just hate it when people jump on "ask /." question submitters.

      I do appreciate the information. I may go try some of those solutions even though I've never myself had the problem in question.

      --
      Mon chien, il n'a pas du nez. Comment scent-il? TrÃs mauvais!
    10. Re:Google by pydev · · Score: 1

      Those are nice and useful for moving windows between remote and local displays. But they are not really useful for working with multiple monitors.

    11. Re:Google by ArtInvent · · Score: 5, Informative

      You know, I've messed with multiple monitors enough on Linux for a few years to know that just about anything is possible, but it's not always easy. At all. I think this is a very valid question to ask /. because he is certainly trying to do something that's not at all 'out of the box' with the simple multimonitor support in things like nvidia-settings or Xinerama or whatever. In fact, some of the responses I've read seem to indicate that exactly what he's after isn't actually possible. I recently *finally* figured out how to account for overscan on my HDTV. It involved a custom metamode line and other junk in xorg.conf, quite a lot of Google hunting, a very specialized Windows-only monitor analysis app, and mathematics to arrive at the value. A LOT of stuff that other OS's can do with a nice onscreen GUI are still not even close on Linux. Google does not give you answers. It gives you data and tons of it. And I have no idea what to say to people who take the time to read these questions and get offended that they were asked, and bother to answer them (incorrectly) along with an insulting rtfm or something. No one really forced you to read or respond to anything. You're wasting your own time.

    12. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An unmaintained project, and an unstable one. Sounds about right.

    13. Re:Google by Qzukk · · Score: 2, Informative

      But they are not really useful for working with multiple monitors.

      They are when you want one monitor to have 9 virtual desktops, and a second monitor to be running 9 completely different virtual desktops, and about the only way you're going to get anything to do that is going to be running a separate X server on each monitor.

      Merge this with Synergy+'s recommendation below, and you can do all that with one keyboard and mouse.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    14. Re:Google by timeOday · · Score: 1

      There is a vast difference between "found some keyword hits on google", vs., "I have used XYZ extensively and let me tell you what they don't mention on the homepage." It's no different than if you asked around work for a good auto mechanic and somebody said, "hey dummy, they're right here in the yellowpages!"

    15. Re:Google by mrmeval · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes but sometimes it devolves into a 9mm vs .45acp debates which never ends.

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    16. Re:Google by mr+exploiter · · Score: 1

      I have messed with Linux enough to know that this question is wrong... you shouldn't be running linux in the desktop.

    17. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chill out babycakes. The only disparaging thing GP said about you was that you're surly. Not Inaccurate.

    18. Re:Google by mc_barron · · Score: 1

      Read his question again, in particular:
      "I need something in the middle — a separate workspace for each screen, so that I can have independent virtual desktops on each screen, but still have the ability to move applications between monitors (no need to strech one app across both of them)."

      He specifically states that he must be able to drag applications BETWEEN the x sessions. Is that possible with your proposals?

    19. Re:Google by slick_rick · · Score: 2, Informative

      Mr. Albanach Surly should also mention that both the programs he linked are basically dead, unmaintained relics. One of the wikipedia pages he linked even mentioned this. He did actually read what he linked, right?

      The OP has asked a very interesting question though. If you could take something like xmove or Xpra and make an awesome window manager aware/compatible, it would be very interesting software indeed.

      --
      apt-get install redhat please god - Me (take it easy, I love Debian)
    20. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      30 seconds with Google points me to

      You've got some mad google-skills. You should put them on your CV!

    21. Re:Google by Hurga · · Score: 1

      Please document your research and your findings on the web somewhere. Thanks.

    22. Re:Google by rayk_sland · · Score: 1

      Have you investigated any of these before 'asking /.'?

      The problem wasn't with the asking. It was with whoever stuck this up as general interest item. timothy?

      --
      Jedis are stupid. If they were so powerful, why couldn't they handle counseling for a kid who missed his mom?
    23. Re:Google by Spaseboy · · Score: 1

      Not everyone wants to search Google, check all those pages, try to set it up and fail, search Google for a solution, tweak the settings, find out the card you are using is incompatible...

      We get that you are a geek and love to use Google but some people like to ask knowledgeable people a question and get an informed and CONCISE answer. If it irritated you so much to answer the question, maybe you just should not have answered it.

      --
      "I don't want more choice, I just want nicer things!"
      -Jennifer Saunders as Edina Monsoon
    24. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a very specialized Windows-only monitor analysis app

      Could you tell me what this app is called?

    25. Re:Google by mutrax · · Score: 1

      I second that. All those special requests gives one a edge when handling special requests...

      --
      Freedom of choice, knowledge & life...
    26. Re:Google by pydev · · Score: 1

      The problem is that that kind of user interface sucks. Come on, are you really going to move applications between monitors from the command line? And then you can only move them all at once. No good.

      No, what you really need here is a window manager that is smarter when it comes to multiple monitors.

  13. Use a specialized Window Manager by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The standard Window Managers (kwin, metacity) just don't cut it with many displays.

    I recommend trying out Awsome

    It's a bit difficult to get used to a first. But it really is the best WM for multiple monitors I have ever used.

    1. Re:Use a specialized Window Manager by jon3k · · Score: 2, Informative

      I prefer DWM. This is the ultimate in simplicity and usability.

    2. Re:Use a specialized Window Manager by bhendrickson · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Agreed. DWM is a 2000 lines of elegant art for programmers. It also has exactly the behavior the questioner is asking for. One changes the workspace on each screen separately, and it is easy to move applications between screens.

      Although I prefer DWM for myself, I rarely recommend it to others. Perhaps that is a bit snobbish, but I just think most people are unable to appreciate it properly.

  14. Synergy by coreboarder · · Score: 1

    I used this along time ago on FreeBSD and Windows...

    http://www.engadget.com/2005/08/09/how-to-share-your-keyboard-and-mouse-in-realtime-with-synergy/

    I'm pretty sure it won't work on the iPad though.

    1. Re:Synergy by Zerth · · Score: 2, Funny

      Crap, I can't read. It doesn't let your render apps on other screens, and running 2 x sessions would already let you copy buffers, but not apps either.

    2. Re:Synergy by sujit · · Score: 1

      Synergy+ http://code.google.com/p/synergy-plus/ [Google Code] Synergy2 hasn't seen an update in more than 3 years now.

    3. Re:Synergy by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 2, Informative

      You don't need synergy for that. Xinerama lets you do that natively. What the OP wants to do is be able to move windows between X screens.

    4. Re:Synergy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the hell is this modded funny?

    5. Re:Synergy by Bractus · · Score: 1

      Is the keyboard sharing this way is secure enough? Bractus

  15. Synergy by Zerth · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's designed to share mice/keyboards/buffers across computers, but perhaps you could use it to share across X sessions on the same machine.

    http://synergy2.sourceforge.net/

  16. xinerama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are you sure you can't just use xinerama? That should allow you to have each display (or pair of displays) as its own workspace but still allow windows to move between them.

    1. Re:xinerama by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

      No, xinerama does not allow that. Near as I can tell, it's due to a fundament design... flaw... of X - that is, windows are tied to the X screen on which they were created.

      You can set up multiple monitors such that each montior is its own X screen with its own set of workspaces. However, this prevents you from moving windows from one monitor to the other, which is what the OP wants to do, because each monitor is a separate X screen.

      On the other hand, Xinerama lets you share one screen across multiple monitors. However, you only get one set of workspaces.

      OP wants the best of both worlds.

  17. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Jetrel · · Score: 1

    Why did I waste my mod points earlier.... +1 Insightful!

    --
    If it isn't broke, tinker with it till it is!
  18. This is even sicker... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...than that guy who did 2 displays, 1 workspace.

    You want to stay away from that, I can assure you.

  19. Smash one of your monitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now you only have one to deal with.

  20. Xinerama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Xinerama is meant exactly for this. You have one big X screen, but Xinerama aware applications (pretty much all window managers, even the smaller ones, support this) can tell you actually have two displays. Windows will maximize to the correct displays, you can drag windows across, you'll be able to have different virtual desktops per xinerama screen (if your window manager supports this).

    For NVIDIA cards the usual way is TwinView + Xinerama.

  21. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    rofl epic troll is epic

  22. neither mirrored nor spanned by v1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Most people want mirrored or spanned. What you're looking for lies somewhere in between. The trick being to enable spaces control on individual displays, while still allowing drag between displays.

    Good luck, haven't seen it. What you want is sufficiently unusual that there may not be anything that provides it. I suggest looking for someone else that's made their own variation of spaces support themselves, that offers the option to switch spaces per-display, as the odds of finding someone that's hacked an existing spaces to be per-monitor is probably going to be low.

    The other route would be to find a different variation on spanning, such that the separate monitors aren't necessarily spanned, but are simply adjacent, and if you try to drag a window, it can't exist partly on one display and partly on the other, but you can still drag a window from one display to the other. That may still allow you individual spaces control perhaps? I think that's the reason you're having problems, is that most spanning allows a window to overlap off one display onto another, so for one display to change space it requires the others to change also. If you look at it that way I think you'll realize what you're initially asking for doesn't make sense. (if the displays are truly spanned (attached) and not simply adjacent)

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:neither mirrored nor spanned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually v1 there are several window managers that provide this functionality. You'll see write-ups in other places on this topic (mine not being the first) that suggest a Awesome as handling this "middle case" quite gracefully. Even the tricky senario of what happens to a window that is floating across two screens when the virtual desktops are switched on one of them and not the other is handled.

    2. Re:neither mirrored nor spanned by tinkerghost · · Score: 1

      Good luck, haven't seen it. What you want is sufficiently unusual that there may not be anything that provides it.

      I find it a bit interesting that this request is considered unusual. I have to agree with the other posters who've said it really seems like a natural evolution to the whole workspace concept. If I have the ability to create 4, 6, 8, whatever workspaces, it would seem to be common sense that I might want to place different ones on different monitors.

      Along with several other people here, I have looked into this issue for exactly the same reasons as the OP:

      • I didn't want to have 1 desktop stretched over both monitors because changing workspaces would clear the 2nd monitor of the windows I was trying to keep visible.
      • I didn't want to run 2 instances of X because I can't open a window in one screen, work with it, and then shove it to the other screen to keep my eye on it.

      Ultimately, I went with the 2 instances of X, but it is still not optimal.

    3. Re:neither mirrored nor spanned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could what he is asking for be provided for by, to use KDE terminology, a spanned desktop with multiple Panels (the thingy usually at the bottom of the screen that has icons for frequently-used applications)?

    4. Re:neither mirrored nor spanned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it is not that unusual, since I wanted exactly that some years ago. I could not find out how that time and still do not know today.
      I came up with a plan anyway but did not have time and pain enough to put it into code.
      The main concept is to use a spanned setup and a custom virtual desktop handler. Since a virtual desktop is nothing more than a clever way to hide and show windows when you switch, that same thing could be done dependent on the monitor you are on. I.e. if you are on the left monitor and switch desktops all windows on that monitor are hidden and all windows which are assigned to the desktop you switched to are shown. Windows on the right monitor are left untouched as if they were sticky/visible on all desktops. If you have multiple desktops for the left and only one for the right monitor you could actually go with sticky windows.
      But that was not what I (and I assume the OP, too) wanted. The real solution would allow to switch the desktop on the right monitor while treating all windows on left as sticky.

      BTW: you need such a setup to have e.g. an editor desktop, an IDE desktop and multiple terminal deskops (with remote sessions to different remote machines) on the left and a browser desktop, a man-page desktop, more terminal desktops (to the same and other remote machines) and a database client desktop on the right monitor. This is needed because in the course of your work you need to have different pairs of things like editor and database, IDE and browser, editor and browser, editor and remote terminal, one remote terminal and other remote terminal, remote terminal and man page, etc...

      This could be done with two separate and independent X sessions, but sometimes you'd really like to have two of those remote sessions on the right monitor visible at the same time or you find yourself constantly flipping between the browser and the database client on the right monitor and wish you could just drag the latter to the left monitor.

    5. Re:neither mirrored nor spanned by StrategicIrony · · Score: 1

      The answer is:

      Windows! :-)

    6. Re:neither mirrored nor spanned by v1 · · Score: 1

      The answer is: Windows!

      If the answer is Windows, I'm terrified to consider what the question is...

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  23. 4 monitors - one desktop - here's how by rcpitt · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I've been running multiple monitors for a lot of years under Linux - currently have 4 monitors on 2 cards with another card in there but no monitors on it (yet)

    I run one big desktop with 12 virtual desktops - then for the applications I want to stay available when I move from one desktop to another I simply right-click on the icon in the upper-left corner (of most windows - Chrome beta doesn't have one for some reason) and select "Always on Visible Workspace" - then it sticks there no matter which workspace I'm on.

    Otherwise you could set up the VNC X-server and use VNC-viewer to log back in to the local system and use that window as your second, separate desktop.

    --
    Been there, done that, paid for the T-shirt
    and didn't get it
    1. Re:4 monitors - one desktop - here's how by Hatta · · Score: 1

      That's not what he wants. He wants 2 monitors and (probably) 8 desktops, 4 per monitor.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:4 monitors - one desktop - here's how by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been running multiple monitors for a lot of years under Linux - currently have 4 monitors on 2 cards with another card in there but no monitors on it (yet)

      I run one big desktop with 12 virtual desktops - then for the applications I want to stay available when I move from one desktop to another I simply right-click on the icon in the upper-left corner (of most windows - Chrome beta doesn't have one for some reason) and select "Always on Visible Workspace" - then it sticks there no matter which workspace I'm on.

      Otherwise you could set up the VNC X-server and use VNC-viewer to log back in to the local system and use that window as your second, separate desktop.

      the reason chrome beta does not have the button you reference is because, by default, it doesn't use system title bars and orders. right clicking on the native chrome title bar are reveals a check box labeld "Use System title bars and borders"

      poof.

      title bar with buttons.

    3. Re:4 monitors - one desktop - here's how by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      You can configure Chrome to show the system borders in the "Personal Stuff" settings tab, or right click on the border and check the box. Alas, it looks considerably less pretty. It would be good if it merged the system menu into it's own.

    4. Re:4 monitors - one desktop - here's how by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't believe that I have never seen the 'Always on Visible Workspace' option. Thanks heaps mate!

    5. Re:4 monitors - one desktop - here's how by roubert · · Score: 1

      [...] I simply right-click on the icon in the upper-left corner (of most windows - Chrome beta doesn't have one for some reason)

      To get the Window Menu provided by your window manager in Chrome you have to modify your settings and set Chrome to use the window manager to draw its window borders. Then it'll behave like any other application.

  24. Enlightenment by illogict · · Score: 5, Informative

    Enlightenment DR17 (http://www.enlightenment.org) lets you do that: virtual desktops are managed on a per-screen basis, and still you can move windows between screens. Don't worry it is not "officially" released, it's really stable, I've not seen a crash or anything for months.

    1. Re:Enlightenment by silent_artichoke · · Score: 2, Informative

      I was pretty sure someone was going to mention this before me. I just started playing with e17 this Monday. I got a shock when I realized it worked this way. Looks great too!

    2. Re:Enlightenment by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link, I've wanted this ability for a long long time.

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    3. Re: Enlightenment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aparently, xmonad, FVWM, and wmii also do this.

    4. Re:Enlightenment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry it is not "officially" released, it's really stable, I've not seen a crash or anything for months.

      Funny, I actually installed it yesterday. Crashed within the first 5 minutes.
      Back to E16...

    5. Re:Enlightenment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fucking how?!

      I'm running e17 on my laptop, sometimes with a second screen attached (monitor suspended over my bed, great for TV shows, light surfing, etc. before/while sleeping). Since Firefox doesn't like two instances running, or one instance talking to two screens, this is a pain, and I'd really like to be able to shunt windows back and forth. But I can't find it anywhere....

    6. Re:Enlightenment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to use enlightenment, it was really good, I had a low resolution monitor,and it allowed me to run windows with a higher (ie fixed) resolution (habbo hotel, I'm looking at you), just flick into another desktop for the bottom of the window. heh.

    7. Re:Enlightenment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My thoughts exactly. Been using e17 for a few years now, and find it faster/more-stable/more-eye-candy then anything else that's held my attention :) Top this off with independent desktop-switching whilst maintaining ability to move stuff across monitors makes for a most usable multi-display setup. Once you switch your multi-display to e17 you won't switch back, and I stand by that.

    8. Re:Enlightenment by Karcaw · · Score: 1

      I've used enlightenment 17 for many years now and been very happy with it. I use 4 monitors, all with different 'screens', but can make windows stretch across all of them when needed. I use the fake-xinerama options on startup to split up the screens presented by the nvidia driver into subscreens.

  25. My setup by morgandelra · · Score: 3, Informative

    I use nvidia twinview on the monitors with Gnome. I also have 3 virtual desktops that I access via edge flipping on the vertical axis. I find this workas alot better than arranging the flipping on the sides with 2 large monitors.

  26. Win7 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Install Windows 7, run Linux in a VM.

    1. Re:Win7 by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      Install Windows 7, run Linux in a VM.

      Still doesn't solve the problem of Linux window management, though, does it? :)

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    2. Re:Win7 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, I installed Linux and run windows 7 in a VM on my second monitor. Only because work makes me have a windows desktop though.

    3. Re:Win7 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ewwww.

  27. Anti-Slashdot answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    I need something in the middle — a separate workspace for each screen, so that I can have independent virtual desktops on each screen, but still have the ability to move applications between monitors

    Use windows. Seriously. It solves all of the problems you are discussing. There is really no reason not to. blahblahblahblahblah

    Sounds like every response to every article that poses a windows problem and someone says "why arent you using linux?"

    1. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only there are legitimate reasons to use Windows over Linux.

    2. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by Homburg · · Score: 1

      No, it doesn't. Windows doesn't have virtual desktops at all, so the set-up the OP wants (separate virtual desktops on each display) is completely impossible.

    3. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by jgtg32a · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually there is a powertoy that gives you virtual desktops, called desktops. There are some limitations, such as you can't move stuff between desktops, and some apps get pissy about launching; once you learn to live with the limitations its a great app to have.

    4. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by scot4875 · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are any number of utilities that will give you multiple virtual desktops on Windows, while retaining Windows' native multi-display features.

      In fact, one comes from Sysinternals, which is now part of Microsoft itself. It's called Desktops. It only does 4 virtual desktops though, so if that's not enough, you'll have to look elsewhere.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
    5. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when?

    6. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Informative

      Virtual Workspace addons for Windows? They're all crap. That goes triple for the "powertoy" one.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    7. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by Al+Dimond · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is that the same one that can easily be made to crash the kernel? Or is it a new one?

    8. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by osiris247 · · Score: 0

      Could be the one I used in the past, that broke crtl+c ctrl+v. But it DID have multiple desktops.

    9. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      the windows virtual desktops are kinda crappy, actually. It works if you must have a virtual desktop equivalent for windows, but that doesn't mean it works *well* or successfully.

    10. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by Al+Dimond · · Score: 1

      Ha, that too? I never actually tried the desktops one because of the crash reports... I did try the one that was supposed to give you mouse focus. It sucked. Although I like mouse focus and multiple desktops with X11 I've mostly given up on them anywhere else.

      Apparently there are a handful of commercial third-party programs that are supposed to give you multiple desktops on Windows, some of which are supposed to be much better than the powertoy one.

    11. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      No, it doesn't. Windows doesn't have virtual desktops at all, so the set-up the OP wants (separate virtual desktops on each display) is completely impossible.

      If you assume what he wants is separate virtual desktops, plus the ability to move applications from one to another, then that doesn't exist.

      The fact is that if you truly do have virtual desktops, then they cannot know about each other by definition, therefore dragging applications between them is impossible.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    12. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by Nadaka · · Score: 3, Insightful

      legitimate reason number 1: I like a variety of video games. There is a small selection of them for linux and most of them are odd.

      legitimate reason number 2: My job requires software that runs on windows or has other policies requiring windows.

      legitimate reason number 3: My hardware doesn't have reasonable driver support under linux.

      legitimate reason number 4: ... Ok, I am starting to run out of reasons.

    13. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      It works well enough for my uses I usually put email and active work on the first one, ticketing program on another, a browser with /. et al on another

    14. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      I haven't had any crashing and cp/pa works with out any problems.

    15. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      legitimate reason number 1: I like a variety of video games. There is a small selection of them for linux and most of them are odd.

      I've never tried but can you run a game on one screen and continue using windows on the other?

      I thought games usually grab exclusive use of kbd/mouse when you run them.

    16. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by emilper · · Score: 1

      did Windows get virtual desktops ? ... I mean, useful virtual desktops, so you can switch between them, each with its own task bar, you can send apps from one virtual desktop to another, you can see from a "window selector" which apps are running in the current desktop and the others etc. ...

    17. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by lorenlal · · Score: 1

      In full screen mode, the game takes up one monitor (in my experience). It'll grab full control of input in that mode, so you have to ALT-TAB out of it.

      Now... If the game has a windowed mode, you can maximize it on one space, and have whatever else running on the other, and you can move the mouse out of the game and back at will... This is what I do on a fairly regular basis. It's quite convenient when you have to switch out to Vent on a regular basis.

    18. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by Galestar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It depends on the game.

      eg. Aion has options;
      1. Full Screen
      2. Windowed
      3. Full Screen windowed

      if you use option 3, you can full screen on one monitor, but move your mouse over to second monitor and change focus over to another application there. You can do this with 1 as well, but it takes forever (something about having to reinit stuff in directx or something - you'll see that in a lot of games), and you can do it in 2 but you get nasty window title bar and minimize/maximize/close buttons.

      --
      AccountKiller
    19. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by theTerribleRobbo · · Score: 2, Informative

      The powertoy one is pretty terrible, falls over, loses windows, etc.
      I thoroughly recommend using VirtuaWin instead.

      (I'm currently stuck with Windows at work, and it does most things GNOME virtual desktops can do.)

    20. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Sure it does but just like everything else for Windows you need a third party tool. This one is free and has nice features but if you need a really loaded virtual desktop experience I would recommend AltDesk which is rock solid and has drag and drop between desktops (which is what it sounds like the OP is looking for) and it can be used standalone or integrated into AstonShell which is a really nice shell for Windows.

      So yeah you can do virtual desktops in Windows, have been able to for quite awhile, you just use third party tools. Which lets be honest most folks don't use much of what Windows has built in when the third party tools are so much better. It would be like using NTBackup instead of say Acronis. Just lame.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    21. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by Fire_Storm82 · · Score: 1

      powertoy virtual desktops is terrible, really unresponsive and not well made at all, really reduces performance i do not reccomend

    22. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by RuBLed · · Score: 1

      +1 for VirtuaWin, better than the powertoy

    23. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by digitalunity · · Score: 1

      If you do any embedded hardware development, there are a number of targets that are not well supported for Linux.

      Beyond that, if you develop Windows software, there is no better platform to do it on than Windows. Oh and if you do CAD/CAM, there are a number of holes in the Linux platform. For example, there is no SolidWorks, Pro/Engineer support for Linux is ending, AutoCAD under Wine is sketchy at best, no Inventor, et. al.

      There are numerous reasons to continue using Windows, for the time being. It's important though that people tell their vendors they need/want Linux and if a competitor releases a Linux alternative, you would switch.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    24. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by dave87656 · · Score: 1

      And there are legitimate reasons to use Linux over Windows. Windows is great for games and home, Linux is better for reliability, manageability and cost. We spend more time and money on managing our 3-4 Windows boxes than we do managing our 50+ linux boxes.

      One woman in our company who is a Windows apologist for some reason has moved to a Linux box recently. She's still a windows fan, but she couldn't get her work done on it any more, even though it's a java application. I'm guessing she has a virus.

    25. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Powertoy from Microsoft?? bah

      Nothing like VirtuaWin, an open source virtual desktop manager for Windows.

      I have used it since maybe about 2 years and it has never crashed. It has plugin feature so you can extend its feature set. I like the plugin that lets you monitor the time spent among desktops; it is good for doing consulting work.

    26. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It works, but just barely, if one wanted to work properly with multiple virtual desktops, without using xp and nvidia's add-on, then it wouldn't be my recommendation, you've already mentioned the limitations in another of your posts.

    27. Re:Anti-Slashdot answer by IceCreamGuy · · Score: 1

      Usually pressing the Windows key or alt-tabbing works just fine in that kind of setup.

  28. Go away, TROLL! by mangu · · Score: 2, Funny

    Windows 7's easy dual-monitor setup has me addicted now!

    So, Mr. Ballmer, would you please elucidate us on which is better, to have one big desktop where changing workspaces switches both monitors at once, or having one X session for each display?

    I'm curious to know your opinion, since both alternatives have their own advantages and disadvantages and, since configuring Linux for dual monitors is so easy, using any of those two alternatives presents no problems.

    BTW, I'm curious by what you say about how easy it is to set up Windows 7. Installing putty to run an X session on *any* older version of Windows is a royal PITA, so if, as you say, Windows 7 now supports Xwindow natively, then I'm really interested in Windows 7!

       

    1. Re:Go away, TROLL! by SScorpio · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The two setups the OP is talking about have disadvantages. With the one large desktop when you maximize a window it fills both monitors and things might size oddly if your monitors aren't the same size/resolution. If you run two xsessions you can't move applications between the separate monitors since they are different sessions.

      In Windows 7 multiple monitors were made extremely easy to setup, and a simple press of win-p will pop up a display which allows the mode to switch which makes connecting your laptop to a project so much easier than the old way of pressing the func-f(x) which didn't always work correctly. Windows multiple monitors also supports having separate monitors where you can maximize a window on a single display, but you can move windows between the monitors or even span multiple monitors. Is this setup possible to do under Linux? If it is you should point the OP to some information on getting it setup as it's the answer to their question.

      Finally how do you have putty run an x session? You can use it to do an ssh tunnel, but you'll need something else to handle connection to the xserver.

    2. Re:Go away, TROLL! by Homburg · · Score: 4, Informative

      With the one large desktop when you maximize a window it fills both monitors

      No it doesn't. Most window managers have handled multihead the way you saw Windows 7 does for some years now (five or six, I think).

    3. Re:Go away, TROLL! by mangu · · Score: 5, Informative

      With the one large desktop when you maximize a window it fills both monitors and things might size oddly if your monitors aren't the same size/resolution

      That's true and it does not depend on which operating system you're using.

      In Windows 7 multiple monitors were made extremely easy to setup

      It was extremely easy to setup in Linux long before Windows 7 came out.

      Windows multiple monitors also supports having separate monitors where you can maximize a window on a single display, but you can move windows between the monitors or even span multiple monitors. Is this setup possible to do under Linux?

      Of course. In Linux, or at least in KDE, there are several other easy ways to handle window resizing. If you mid-click in the maximize button the window is maximized vertically but it keeps the original horizontal size. Conversely, if you right-click in the maximize button the window is maximized horizontally and keeps the vertical size. Want to fine-tune the window size? Press the ALT key and the right mouse button simultaneously, the cursor will grab the *nearest* window border, no need to hit the *exact* pixels of the border.

      Finally how do you have putty run an x session? You can use it to do an ssh tunnel, but you'll need something else to handle connection to the xserver.

      If you say so. All I know is that it's trivial in Linux, but I always hear people complaining they must install Cygwin and puTTY and I don't know what else to run Xwindow in Windows.

    4. Re:Go away, TROLL! by ottothecow · · Score: 1
      Hummingbird Exceed? Never heard of it before I started my current job but it works.

      Xming also worked for me on windows in the past.

      --
      Bottles.
    5. Re:Go away, TROLL! by YankDownUnder · · Score: 1

      Wow - I'm sold. I'll give up my 17 years of using alternative operating systems (UNIX/Solaris/HP-UX/GNU-Linux/OS2/BeOS/MacOS) and come worship at Steve Ballmer's pedicured feet, occasionally allowing him to beat me with a folding chair - AND give him $320AUD per copy of his OS. Yes! I have been enlightened!

      --
      YankDownUnder Veni, Vidi, volo in domum redire
    6. Re:Go away, TROLL! by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      With the one large desktop when you maximize a window it fills both monitors

      No it doesn't. Most window managers have handled multihead the way you saw Windows 7 does for some years now (five or six, I think).

      More like 10 years ... at least.

      You "can" configure them to work "wrong" - so that an app fills both spaces when maximized, but you have to edit the xorg.comf file by hand, since that's never what anyone wants - and if you DO want it (for exampe, to stretch an IDE across multiple displays) - just stretch it manually.

    7. Re:Go away, TROLL! by Unequivocal · · Score: 2

      I hear it's trivial but then I tried it: I had a T43 Thinkpad that supports an external monitor. I installed Ubuntu on it (and tried Kubuntu also). I tried versions 8.x and 9.x of Ubuntu. Double heading the display was a nightmare. The monitors had differing resolutions and it seemed like I basically got the choice between one resolution or the other for both monitors. Forum advice basically consisted of people telling me to hand edit some crazy display config file that looked like the video version a sendmail config file. I spent about 4 hours on this, and gave up, and that laptop is still running Windows XP. I really want to switch to Linux (and I'm fairly technical) but everytime I try - I run into some show stopping issue like this.

      By the way, Canonical said they would get it working for me if I subscribed to their support service which (iirc) was $250/year. Which is about what my laptop is worth (and probably not all that different from a Microsoft OS license?).

      I hope I don't get modded troll on this..

    8. Re:Go away, TROLL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope I don't get modded troll on this..

      Let's see, is there a (-1, Astroturf) mod?

    9. Re:Go away, TROLL! by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      I don't use a unix desktop anymore, but I swear I was doing this at least 10 years ago in FreeBSD myself. FreeBSD desktops at the time were a ways behind Linux (waiting for porting to FBSD), so I can't imagine its been less than 6 years. I know I was using 4.0-CURRENT, 5.0 hadn't branched yet, so thats at least 7 on WMs that had been ported to FBSD.

      I'd say its probably closer to 10 if my memory serves me (it probably doesn't), this is definitely not something new.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    10. Re:Go away, TROLL! by h4rr4r · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Are you a liar or an idiot?
      Because I am doing that right now, the t43 screen plus a 19" 1440x900 external monitor.

    11. Re:Go away, TROLL! by RalphSleigh · · Score: 1

      Agreed, the last time I tried to multi-head Ubuntu (9.04), it worked eventually, but the process was not nearly as smooth as even windows XP, which has always 'just worked' for me in this regard.

      --
      Come as you are, do what you must, be who you will.
    12. Re:Go away, TROLL! by Cow+Jones · · Score: 1

      If you mid-click in the maximize button the window is maximized vertically but it keeps the original horizontal size. Conversely, if you right-click in the maximize button the window is maximized horizontally and keeps the vertical size.

      Huh, never occurred to me to click the maximize button with the middle or right mouse button. You learn something new every day... thanks for that!

      Want to fine-tune the window size? Press the ALT key and the right mouse button simultaneously, the cursor will grab the *nearest* window border, no need to hit the *exact* pixels of the border.

      This feature is immensely useful; I always feel slightly crippled on a desktop where it isn't supported.

      CJ

      --

      Ah, arrogance and stupidity, all in the same package. How efficient of you. -- Londo Mollari
    13. Re:Go away, TROLL! by Kazin · · Score: 1

      I know nothing of Ubuntu, but on my laptop, I just use xrandr bound to a hotkey to do this, and it Just Works(TM) perfectly. I really don't see what the problem is, this isn't 1999 anymore.

    14. Re:Go away, TROLL! by zooblethorpe · · Score: 1

      If memory serves (I'm stuck at work with Windows at the moment), you can also double-click the title bar of the app with the middle or right mouse buttons to maximize horizontally or vertically in the same way.

      Cheers,

      --
      "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
      "A four-foot prune."
  29. Me Too Post by steve_thatguy · · Score: 1

    I've wanted this for as long as I've had dual-monitors. I wound up settling for an nVidia TwinView setup, but if I could find a way for each of these to be their own separate workspace that would really be terrific. I'm surprised this is so hard to set up--it seems like it shouldn't be that difficult with X.

  30. Re:Enlightenment +1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    it's really stable, I've not seen a crash or anything for months.

    More importantly: I've only ever seen the window manager crash, but it has never brought down X with it. When it crashes, it gives you a very helpful (and ugly) dialog which allows you to restart the window manager. In the 3 years of using e17, I have never had a single application crash or data loss. And the last e17 crash is from 2008, I think.

    Oh, and: mod parent up.

  31. Car analogy for Windows users by mangu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You didn't understand the question.

    Here's a simple car analogy: a Linux user asking for tips on advanced uses of virtual desktops is like an off-road rally racer asking for tips on configuring the differentials on a 4x4. Your answer is "use a Ford Taurus".

    1. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by gyrogeerloose · · Score: 4, Funny

      a Linux user asking for tips on advanced uses of virtual desktops is like an off-road rally racer asking for tips on configuring the differentials on a 4x4. Your answer is "use a Ford Taurus".

      Your car analogy makes more sense, in fact, since the largest purchasers of the Ford Taurus were car rental agencies. Everyone knows that the best off-road vehicle is a rented vehicle.

      --
      This ain't rocket surgery.
    2. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by emilper · · Score: 1

      maybe he does understand the issue, but forgot to mention "use windows and install cygwin".

    3. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by mangu · · Score: 1

      maybe he does understand the issue, but forgot to mention "use windows and install cygwin".

      Continuing with the car analogy, Windows with Cygwin is to Linux like a Ford Taurus with all-wheel-drive is to a Porsche Cayenne.

      Except for the price, of course.

    4. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by YankDownUnder · · Score: 1

      Oh BLOOD-EEEE! C'mon...Ford...Ford...Ford...all you talk about is Ford. I have one thing to say, and that's "Daihatsu Move, 1997A, 3 cylinder, 800cc, 5 speed manual". Erf...for the love of Pete!

      --
      YankDownUnder Veni, Vidi, volo in domum redire
    5. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh BLOOD-EEEE! C'mon...Ford...Ford...Ford...all you talk about is Ford. I have one thing to say, and that's "Daihatsu Move, 1997A, 3 cylinder, 800cc, 5 speed manual". Erf...for the love of Pete!

      Awww, right! There's always some fuckin' Apple fanbois...

    6. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Good lord son, that ain't no vehicle its a bloody go-cart! We Americans need leg room there feller! Anything less than a Ranger just don't cut the mustard, and the new F Series ride like a caddy and still let you haul stuff! Why would anybody want a 3 cylinder go-cart for anyway? Do the hamsters running in the little wheels huff and puff when you go uphill?

      You keep your little baby car there son, I'll stick with my nice Ranger. 4 doors, decent gas mileage, thumping stereo, plenty of legroom, and that Vulcan V6 in such a light truck really slings the mud. Now THAT is a vehicle! How anybody fits in one of those itsabatsabuchis I have NO idea.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    7. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who are you, anyhow? RedNeckAnalogyGuy?

    8. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by stinerman · · Score: 1

      I own a Ford Taurus, you insensitive clod!

    9. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by gyrogeerloose · · Score: 1

      Who are you, anyhow? RedNeckAnalogyGuy?

      No, but that gives me a great idea for a new Slashdot new sock puppet account name...

      --
      This ain't rocket surgery.
    10. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who are you, anyhow? RedNeckAnalogyGuy?

      No, but that gives me a great idea for a new Slashdot new sock puppet account name...

      Ooh! I've got one of those!

      "It's like when you're duck hunting and a flock of geese fly overhead. They don't quack but you shoot anyway."

      That could be used for almost anything.

    11. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by YankDownUnder · · Score: 1

      I've repented my wrong-doin ways 'n' picked me up a 1971 Chevy shortbed with a 400 in 'er. Took 'er to the petrol station, filled 'er up. Had to mortgage the house - musta been useless. Kids'll never be able to attend private school or eat, for that matter, but hey, I'm a V8 man now... :)

      --
      YankDownUnder Veni, Vidi, volo in domum redire
    12. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by knewter · · Score: 1

      Bravo, sir. [slow-clap /]

      I haven't run into a comment on slashdot for years that made me snort :)

      --
      -knewter
    13. Re:Car analogy for Windows users by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      The Chevy is a good truck, ain't no doubt about that, but for me it all comes down to after market parts which is why I'm a Ford man. Here the Ranger and F Series rule, which means after market parts are plentiful. How any man with a penis could be caught dead in an itsabatsabuchi 3 banger is beyond me.

      And while the 351 in my F150 was nice we can't trust them oil companies or Goldman Sachs not to play "gouge the working man at the pump" so I've found the Vulcan to be the best of both worlds. In that light Ranger bod (here is a pic of my baby. Amazing what you can pick up for 3k in the south, huh?) she'll sling mud and climb hills with the best of them without breaking my wallet. And talking with fellow Ranger drivers those cast iron Vulcans can easily rack up 350k miles (I'm barely over 100k) before needing a rebuild.

      I know you're joking but the classic 70s Chevy truck is certainly a sweet ride, easy to maintain and built like a tank. My GFs oldest boy is just about finished rebuilding a 67, really great ride. I'm assume from the UId you're in OZ? Really a shame that importing rides would be so expensive to get there, as here it is like classic ride heaven. My local car lot has no less than 4 classic El Caminos in mint state for less than 4k, and mint classic Mopar like the Dodge Demon and Challenger can be had all day for less than 3500. But here in AR it is all about the pickup truck. Even my oldest boy has been bitten by the pickup bug, and while I was never big on Nissans I have to admit that early 90s King Cab he is restoring is gonna be a really sharp street ride, with the high gloss black paint and silver chrome accents.

      It's just like I was telling my GF, once a man sits behind the wheel of a well built truck he just ain't gonna wanna go back to no stupid little beep beep car. Here a man can work all day with plenty of legroom, take his mama shopping ( gotta respect your mama in the south son, its a law) and then load up a thousand pounds worth of musical gear and hit the club for a night of fun. Lets see anyone do that in a itsabatsabuchi beep beep car!

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  32. recommending: Awesome WM by kingair_six · · Score: 1

    presuming you have some linux experience (else you might not find your way around it), awesome windows manager is a great solution and can definetely do what you want. it features 9 "tags" - virtual desktops basically, but is completely configurable via a lua script. each monitor will automatically be controlled without difficult setup and it worked "out of the box" for me - except for the laborious install process;)

  33. Re:xinerama and xrandr by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

    And what string did you search on such that those solutions popped up?

    --
    With the first link, the chain is forged.
  34. Re:dual monitor by Peter+Nikolic · · Score: 1, Informative

    not tested it yet but i believe xmonad may be of use to you as i say not tested it yet . but the mailing list seems to be very active .

    --
    Karma :Terrible I seriously like this cus at least i aint affraid of barking Caution i BITE (your a
  35. Re:if you are running a Nvidia card.... by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

    That link just describes the two alternatives mentioned in the OP. It doesn't even address the question posed by the OP.

    In other words, your link describes two monitors sharing a workspace. OP wants two monitors with separate workspaces, while still being able to drag windows between them.

  36. Ask Slashdot? by Admiralbumblebee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Has anyone noticed the OP never actually asked a question?

    1. Re:Ask Slashdot? by FlyingBishop · · Score: 1

      Amazing how people can't even read the fine headline.

      Though I suppose if you need a complete sentence to get it through your head, the question was, "How can I use 2 Displays and 2 Workspaces With Linux and X?"

    2. Re:Ask Slashdot? by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      Has anyone noticed the OP never actually asked a question?

      I take it you've never heard of implied questions.

      Owait, lemme rephrase that.

      I take it you've never heard of implied questions?

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    3. Re:Ask Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything on /. has begun to make much more sense since I started to read the posts in my inner voice like the voice of Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory.

      By the way I don't see how "I take it you have..." could possibly be part of any grammatically parsable sentence.

    4. Re:Ask Slashdot? by selven · · Score: 1

      "Ask" does not necessarily imply a question. You can ask Slashdot to help you with something. So no, you're not going to win from the pedantic front.

    5. Re:Ask Slashdot? by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1
      It's shorthand. "I parse your statement, using the assumption that you have..." shortened to "I take it for granted that you have..." shortened to "I take it you've..."

      Rather like "don't", only more elaborate.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    6. Re:Ask Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who cares?!

    7. Re:Ask Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has anyone noticed the OP never actually asked a question?

      Yes.

  37. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Homburg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't think that actually answers the OPs question. Xinerama or XRandR allow you to set up dual head (which the OP presumably already knows about - he talks about having "one big desktop," which is what Xinerama and XRandR give you), but virtual desktops are handled by the window manager, not by Xinerama or XRandR. A Xinerama or XRandR aware window manager could do what the OP wants, giving separate virtual desktops on each monitor, but simply using Xinerama or XRandR won't get that effect unless you use a specific window manager which offers that option.

  38. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "linux desktop multiple displays how-to"
    first link is for windows. don't know how google failed that hard. second one is meh. third one is gold. wiki is 5th which gives you everything you need.

  39. Re:xinerama and xrandr by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1

    I looked in to this a few years ago, wouldn't work back then so I'm glad some one asked because I'm not in the habit of constantly asking Google the same question everyday and getting the same result.
    I'm not insane, not yet anyway. Plus if you don't have a good search string then you're not going to find good answers. Some of the people here get mad for people asking dumb questions but give the guy a break. At least when (s)he's asking /. they can use real English to describe the problem and have people interpret it.

    And as far as I know even in the previous release of Suse and the 8.04 Ubuntu this was the way to do it but it was a known issue not to work.

    --
    500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
  40. X is a four letter word by Dell+Brandstone · · Score: 0, Troll

    Windows 2000 did this flawlessly in 1999. My powerbook did it flawlessly in 2002.

    My Ubuntu 9.10 and Gnome XFCE desktops still cannot do this properly today.

    X is needed for many things in enterprise... SPECTRUM, polling, whatever. Great. Run X when you need it, use something that isn't a terrible piece of junk the rest of the time.

    It's time to bin X.

    -db

    --
    [ a directive occured while processing this error ]
    1. Re:X is a four letter word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry - I missed where you could have completely different desktop sessions on different screens in Win2K or OSX

      Both only do 'stretched' desktops, which he specifically doesn't want. But hey, thanks for being like the 3,000th person to not read before posting.

    2. Re:X is a four letter word by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      If you're having trouble doing this with X, then maybe you should read the rest of the comments talking about how possible it is, and relatively easily.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    3. Re:X is a four letter word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's time to bin ignorant n00bs who think it's time to bin X.

      Fixed. And BTW, Ubuntu's role is to get Grandma off Windows, real geeks don't need it. So in the future you might take into account the fact that you don't actually know anything before making such sweeping statements that end with your foot going down your throat. There are plenty of xorg users who find no such limitations in X (see dwm, awesome, xmonad, wmii, etc).

    4. Re:X is a four letter word by WalkingBear · · Score: 1

      Funny that. My gaming machine runs XP with two monitors, single video card. Two seperate, different resolution, (one 16:9, one 4:3), even at times a different color depth desktops. Works great for me.

    5. Re:X is a four letter word by WalkingBear · · Score: 1

      Replying again for OSX. MacBook Pro, attached to 24inch LCD. MBP's built in screen @ 1440x900, attached LCD at 1650x1080. At times I attach to a 1920x1080 42inch monitor for meetings. I think I've used display mirroring once or twice in a couple of years. havnen't used the 'stretched' desktop ever.

    6. Re:X is a four letter word by Hatta · · Score: 1

      How many virtual desktops do you have on each screen? Do they change independently of each other?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    7. Re:X is a four letter word by aaron552 · · Score: 1

      In my experience, changing the color depth on one monitor changes the depth on all monitors. Far from ideal if an older gamer changes the color depth to 8-bit. Also, you're clearly not reading the question

      --
      I had a sig once. It was lost in the great storm of '09.
    8. Re:X is a four letter word by Lucid+3ntr0py · · Score: 1

      I don't think you understand what's being asked.

  41. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "What are xinerama and xrandr for?"

  42. Re:xinerama and xrandr by pwnies · · Score: 1, Informative

    "linux dual head"
    The first three mention either xrandr or xinerama. Didn't check beyond that.

  43. Re:xinerama and xrandr by idontgno · · Score: 3, Informative

    Probably "xinerama and xrandr"

    When searching for an answer, it helps to know the answer.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  44. Re:xinerama and xrandr by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 5, Informative

    xinerama + xrandr does not solve the question posed by the OP. Xinerama allows the two alternatives mentioned in the OP as the undesired options (i.e. either two monitors as one screen sharing a workspace, or a separate screen on each monitor which does not allow moving windows between screens).

    OP wants two monitors with their own separate workspaces, while still being able to drag windows between them.

    In other words, OP wants to be able to transfer running applications between separate X screens, which to my knowledge is not currently possible (or, if it's possible, the functionality is not exposed in Gnome or KDE).

    This isn't "+1 Insightful", it's "-1 Didn't bother reading the OP" (or "-1 Doesn't really know what xinerama+xrandr does").

  45. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 5, Funny

    Strings used: "xinerama vs xrandr", "xinerama", "xrandr"
    Gosh, isn't it obvious?! Fucking christ, it's the 201st decade, use clairvoyance.

    --
    Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
  46. Enlightenment 17 by jimduchek · · Score: 1

    Enlightenment 17 is the only WM (aside from, I think, a tiling one called 'Awesome') that lets you change desktops on a per-monitor basis while having TwinView or Xinerama active (so you can drag windows between). Compiz ought to be able to do it, but for some reason does not. Expect some stability issues with E17, though. I ended up going back to seperate screens, as I don't drag between monitors often and E17 crashes too much.

    --
    If I'm not back again this time tomorrow...
  47. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its the 48th century for some of us, you insensitive clod!
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_calendar#Correspondence_between_systems

  48. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah that's what he'll do. He'll sell all his gear, re-evaluate his needs, and get a Mac. Just like that.

  49. xinerama + e17 by characterZer0 · · Score: 1

    Enlightenment e17 handles this brilliantly. Each screen gets its own set of virtual desktops. Switching VTs on one does not change the current VT on the other.

    With Xinerama you can drag windows from one screen to the other.

    --
    Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
  50. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Lemming+Mark · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He's not really right, AFAICS. A solution might include Xinerama and xrandr but they're not a solution in themselves. Most window managers will switch desktops on all displays simultaneously if you use Xinerama, whereas he wants desktop switching independently on different monitors. You also can't do it easily with separate X screens because it's apparently not possible to move windows between them, which he also would like to do.

  51. Xpra and Xmove are both deprecated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both Xpra and Xmove were removed from Debian due to being dead upstream. Didn't you use Google before making the suggestions? (Kettle, meet Pot.)

    1. Re:Xpra and Xmove are both deprecated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Not sure why you think that. Xmove is dead since 1997 but Xptra is actively maintained. Last edit I found is Nov 10, 2009. In what way does that point to it being dead?

  52. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Lemming+Mark · · Score: 1

    Not a solution in themselves - using Xinerama makes it possible to have a big desktop spread across multiple monitors AFAIK, which is not what the Asker needs. He wants separate virtual desktop switching on each monitor, which most WMs don't do under Xinerama, though as he notes there are some tiling WMs that do something like this.

  53. Xinerama + duplicate panels by slinches · · Score: 1

    I use one big Gnome desktop across two monitors with some of the panels duplicated on the second monitor. The two monitors behave almost like independent workspaces, windows can be maximized on an individual monitor and only show up in the taskbar for the monitor they're displayed on. The only thing I can't do is switch workspaces on the monitors independently, but I haven't run into many cases where I've had a need to.

    --
    Knowledge Brings Fear
  54. what by Punto · · Score: 1

    why not just put some windows on one screen and some windows on another screen? it doesn't matter if the window manager considers it "one workspace", it'll still be 2 workspaces because they'll be on different physicals screens in real life.

    --

    --
    Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!

    1. Re:what by Garble+Snarky · · Score: 1

      Then you can't change the workspaces independently. I've never wanted to do such a thing, but I can totally relate to his unique desire for functionality.

      I'm always kind of confused when Linux people respond to this kind of question with "you don't need to do it that way." I thought doing it my way was the whole point.

    2. Re:what by Punto · · Score: 1

      you can change workspaces by turning your head and looking at the other monitor. the workspaces actually exist physically as 2 different screens.

      I'm always kind of confused when computer people want to do stuff through the computer when it already exists in real life.

      --

      --
      Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!

    3. Re:what by tinkerghost · · Score: 1

      why not just put some windows on one screen and some windows on another screen? it doesn't matter if the window manager considers it "one workspace", it'll still be 2 workspaces because they'll be on different physicals screens in real life.

      I normally work with between 4 & 5 active desktops. A for dev work, B for monitoring the live servers, C for email/messaging, D for reference, and E for browsing. 50% of the time, I want B to stay up, but that other 50% of the time I may need:

      • C & A to answer or ask a question
      • D & A if I'm working on integrating 2 systems & need access to reference materials.
      • C & E or D & E if I'm sourcing materials for a project.

      Having the desktop span 2 separate monitors doesn't allow that type of flexibility. I went with the 2 instances of X route to solve my problem. It's not ideal but I can make do. 2 years ago, this was the only solution that I found that worked. Now there are several people touting that Enlightenment allows exactly what I wanted, so I may re-examine my solution.

  55. Xmonad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Xmonad + regular xinerama. It's really great to be able to swap whole workspaces on and off screens... hit a key and what was on the left screen is now on the center. I don't know how I'd live without it.

  56. Re:xinerama and xrandr by __aasqbs9791 · · Score: 1

    I'm going to steal that comment the next time my friend asks me to find something he can't find with google.

  57. And also, what about other operating systems? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

    Is it possible to do the same thing in Windows? OSX? Neither relies primarily on an X server, so I can see how it might make things more difficult. I know I would certainly like to be able to use screen zooming separately on the separate monitors (on OSX, which doesn't handle screen zoom very well if you're using dual: it zooms the combined desktop, and depending on settings, re-centers the screen if you perform an action like clicking a link)

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  58. Have You Actually Tried It? by pz · · Score: 3, Informative

    I have had a computer running Linux (Fedora of one flavor or another) with two displays for getting on to be most of a decade. Wouldn't work seriously any other way. I have 12 desktops (one for each Fn key on standard keyboards), which are linked so that both monitors switch at the same time.

    If you haven't TRIED this sort of setup yet (and it sounds very much like you have not), then I would encourage you to try it first. What problem are you trying to solve with being able to switch monitors individually? WIndows can be trivially moved between virtual desktops under Linux, and with single keystroke desktop switching (remember those Fn keys?) I find that I rarely, if ever, need to move applications from one desktop to another. To promote efficiency, I have adopted, over the years, a standard pattern of where given windows are. The details are good for me, but not necessarily anyone else, so I won't go through the particulars, but, just as one example, when I want to use a browser, I hit F6, and BOOM, there are two browser windows at full screen. When I need an editor, another single keystroke (F3, if you care), and BOOM, emacs on the left, and, usually, an xterm on the right. Fully maximized. Moving windows around and resizing them is a waste of time and screen area. Twelve desktops maps nicely to the Fn keys -- which, again, is why I have 12, and, again is why switching between applications is 1-keystroke-instantaneous -- and I cannot recall running out of room, ever.

    If the reason you want to switch workspaces individually is that you don't have enough flexibility in your workspaces (like you only have four per monitor), then you're solving the wrong problem. Increase the number of workspaces you have. Also, stop putting the task bar on the long dimension of the monitor -- that's the one where you have the least distance to play with. And if you're doing any document-based work, then it's a MUST to use portrait orientation.

    Or were you just going to dick around, switching the left workspace, then the right one, then the left, then the right?

    When people join my lab, they universally comment on how efficient my work setup is ... and usually leave using a very similar setup themselves.

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    1. Re:Have You Actually Tried It? by Hatta · · Score: 1

      That sounds awful. Suppose I have IRC on one desktop, and real work on another desktop. My real work requires a few different things. Maybe switching between a browser and GIMP on separate virtual desktops.

      Under your plan, every single time I switch between my browser and GIMP I have to manually move my IRC window. Sure there are kludgy workarounds like "span all desktops" but they're kludgy workarounds and this is just a quick example.

      I agree with you, moving windows around is a waste of time. That includes manually moving them between desktops.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:Have You Actually Tried It? by r_jensen11 · · Score: 1

      Or were you just going to dick around, switching the left workspace, then the right one, then the left, then the right?

      My guess is the following scenario:
      OP uses 3 main applications
      App A needs to always be visible
      Apps B and C don't, but still rely on App A to be visible if the OP wants to be productive.

      The "best" workaround for this would be to have 3 screens instead of 2. However, I can see legitimate reasons preventing having a third monitor (space being the primary,) and the alternative would best the following from above:

      Place App A in monitor X and mark it visible on all desktops
      Place App B and App C in monitor Y and rotate VD's.

    3. Re:Have You Actually Tried It? by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      >I have 12 desktops (one for each Fn key on standard keyboards), which are linked so that both monitors switch at the same time.

      great for you, but exactly what OP *doesn't* want

    4. Re:Have You Actually Tried It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I know I don't an exact answer to the OPs question.

      I am using xmonad, and I have to say being able to swap a virtual desktop between monitors is a great feature.

      I often just want to swap all windows from my left monitor to the right. At first this sounds confusing, but if you get used to it you can exploit this behaviour. Imagine you have 2 monitors and 3 desktops with useful items. Instead of using two virtual desktops that span over both monitors and have your windows prearranged per desktop. You can just see either (1,3) or (2,3) or maybe (2,1) and then switch to (3,1).

      The same scenario in a 2 virtual desktops with 2 monitors ends up in being awkward.
      If you've got (1,2) and want to see (2,3), you swap windows between 1 and 3 and that will go well. But if you want so see (3,2) then you are forced to swap all windows from one monitor to the other and move windows from one virtual desktop to the other.

      Actually I am not quite happy with the way xmonad actually handles fullscreen, but it handles windows and virtual desktops by far better than anything else. I indeed crave for an answer to the posters question, as I might switch then.

    5. Re:Have You Actually Tried It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you get the applications to stick to one of 12 workspaces from session to session? I haven't figured that one out yet, so every time I log in I have to shove apps around ...

    6. Re:Have You Actually Tried It? by eriksallstrom · · Score: 1

      How do you make two windows of the same browser, or from two different programs, show up positioned where you want them by pressing a Fn key? I really want to know! :-)

    7. Re:Have You Actually Tried It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with your setup is that I often find it valuable to 'pin' an application on one monitor, and then flip between workspaces on the other monitor. The 1st monitor is my development IDE, the 2nd monitor is where a number of adjunct applications are running - browsers, database admin tools, remote desktops to other servers, etc. Your setup sounds impressive, with all the booming sound effects, but it sounds like it doesn't address the complexity that I typically deal with or that the OP is trying to deal with.

      Here's a use case:

      "Attach a debugger to processes on two different servers and begin debugging, verifying database activity"

      This means that I have my IDE running in one window on my 1st monitor, and my 2nd monitor has remote desktop sessions to the servers I'm debugging in workspaces 1 and 2, a database tool in workspace 3, and a browser window in workspace 4. This setup allows me to keep an eye on my debugger on monitor one, while I flip among workspaces on the 2nd monitor to facilitate my debug session.

      So, I start my debugger, attach to my server processes, and start debugging. I can view the server activity (remote desktop) on the 2nd monitor, workspace 1 (hereafter M2W1), and quickly switch to the other server on M2W2 (uh, insert 'BOOM' here, I guess). OK, my servers look good, now I can initiate some debugging activity and then switch to the database tool on M2W3, see if the data is flowing as expected (again, BOOM). Hmm, weird problem ... I will switch again to my browser on M2W4 and cut-and-paste the error message from my debugger into google ... and meanwhile keep an eye on the debug session.

      You see the advantage? It boils down to being able to 'pin' an application on a workspace and independently switch workspaces on the 2nd monitor. I've tried lots of different ways of doing this kind of thing, and this seems to work best for me.

      BOOM.

    8. Re:Have You Actually Tried It? by ZerdZerd · · Score: 1

      Mark IRC as "Always on Visible Workspace".

      --
      I'm not insane! My mother had me tested.
    9. Re:Have You Actually Tried It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, he'd probably not have to dick around switching both at the same time
      independent switch is handy when you have several code sets on one screen and several doc sets on the other, that need to be switched independently

    10. Re:Have You Actually Tried It? by pz · · Score: 1

      If it wasn't clear from the post, each Fn key is bound to switch to the equivalent workspace: pressing F1 switches to workspace 1, F2 to workspace 2, etc., up to F12. Different window managers have different methods for binding keys to switch desktops, so you'll have to look it up for your particular window manager. Same goes for creating 12 full workspaces, rather than the standard 4.

      On one workspace (6, for me), I have two Firefox windows, maximized, one on the left screen, one on the right. They never get closed. To set them up, I switch to Desktop 6 (F6), start Firefox, maximize the resulting window, type Ctrl-N for a second window, drag that second window to the second monitor, and maximize it there. After setting it up, all I have to do is hit F6 from anywhere and I'm immediately taken to Desktop 6 with the two Firefox windows fully maximized.

      For nearly all of the reasonably sized monitors (say, anything up to 22 or 24 inches), if you aren't using maximized windows, I would argue that you're wasting real estate on a dual-monitor setup. (Hell, I'd probably argue that on a one-monitor setup, too, but less vigorously, as I do find there are times on my laptop that I need more than one window visible at a time.) Not only that, but you're distracting yourself from the task at hand with bits and pieces of other windows poking out in the background.

      Another key element that might have been too implicit in my earlier posting is that once a window is established on one virtual desktop, it rarely, if ever, gets moved from that position. That way I'm (almost) never searching for which desktop has which window. If I want, for example, my web browser, it's always on Deskop 6. My media player, Desktop 12, and so forth. The pattern of which application gets put on which desktop has evolved slowly, and was biased by the symbols on various keyboards I've used over the last decade-plus. It works well for me. Yours would undoubtedly be different.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    11. Re:Have You Actually Tried It? by pz · · Score: 1

      "Attach a debugger to processes on two different servers and begin debugging, verifying database activity"

      When I need to do this, I put all of the windows on one workspace, sometimes taking advantage of Alt-TAB to rotate between them (I set Alt-TAB to rotate only within the current workspace). Or, when I need to really have one window present always, it gets shared to all workspaces. I think in some window managers, it's possible to put a given window on some subset of workspaces as well, although I've never explored that feature.

      The sound effects were to underscore that there is a single keystroke for switching between desktops for every single desktop (instead of a precision mouse gesture to click the icon for a given workspace; if you want to work efficiently, find ways of avoiding the mouse) and provide a little levity. Imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, I'm glad to see it worked.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    12. Re:Have You Actually Tried It? by pz · · Score: 1

      I know I don't an exact answer to the OPs question.

      I am using xmonad, and I have to say being able to swap a virtual desktop between monitors is a great feature.

      I often just want to swap all windows from my left monitor to the right. At first this sounds confusing, but if you get used to it you can exploit this behaviour. Imagine you have 2 monitors and 3 desktops with useful items. Instead of using two virtual desktops that span over both monitors and have your windows prearranged per desktop. You can just see either (1,3) or (2,3) or maybe (2,1) and then switch to (3,1).

      The same scenario in a 2 virtual desktops with 2 monitors ends up in being awkward.
      If you've got (1,2) and want to see (2,3), you swap windows between 1 and 3 and that will go well. But if you want so see (3,2) then you are forced to swap all windows from one monitor to the other and move windows from one virtual desktop to the other.

      Actually I am not quite happy with the way xmonad actually handles fullscreen, but it handles windows and virtual desktops by far better than anything else. I indeed crave for an answer to the posters question, as I might switch then.

      Memory is dirt cheap. Why are you only using a small number of workspaces? All of the shuffling you're describing, while it sounds like fun, can be done better and faster with having many more workspaces and just switching between them. With modern hardware, there's almost no reason to have a small number of workspaces. Seriously, a decent setup has 4 to 8GB of memory these days, and X with twelve workspaces (each with a 2-monitor desktop) and lots of active windows takes under 500MB.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
  59. Take it easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, there are multiple solutions to the problem. Yes, Borov probably could have found this on his/her own by doing some more Google searches. Yes, we need to be nicer to those new to Linux and try not to alienate newcomers. People wouldn't be flocking to Apple's Genius Bar for help they were greeted with 'What the heck is wrong with you - didn't you check Google first?!?'. We need to take it easy on those new to Linux.

    Frankly, there are a lot of options available to get this working and they are all a bit confusing at first glance - options which other OSes do not provide. There is tons of old information out there that can be misleading and can lead to a more complicated set of setup procedures than is really necessary with newer versions of the OS.

    I've got a dual monitor setup working great with the nVidia setup as well. With Fedora 12, dual monitor support works pretty well. You can try out various configurations and see what works best for you.

  60. here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    # nvidia-settings: X configuration file generated by nvidia-settings
    # nvidia-settings: version 1.0 (buildmeister@builder63) Tue Oct 20 21:01:12 PDT 2009

    Section "ServerLayout"
    Identifier "Layout0"
    Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0
    Screen 1 "Screen1" 1280 0
    Screen 2 "Screen2" 2560 0
    InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
    InputDevice "Mouse0" "CorePointer"
    Option "Xinerama" "1"
    EndSection

    Section "Files"
    FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/default/Type1"
    EndSection

    Section "InputDevice"
    # generated from default
    Identifier "Mouse0"
    Driver "mouse"
    Option "Protocol" "auto"
    Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
    Option "Emulate3Buttons" "no"
    Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5"
    EndSection

    Section "InputDevice"
    # generated from data in "/etc/sysconfig/keyboard"
    Identifier "Keyboard0"
    Driver "kbd"
    Option "XkbLayout" "us"
    Option "XkbModel" "pc105"
    EndSection

    Section "Monitor"
    # HorizSync source: edid, VertRefresh source: edid
    Identifier "Monitor0"
    VendorName "Unknown"
    ModelName "SceptreX9G-NagaV"
    HorizSync 30.0 - 81.0
    VertRefresh 40.0 - 76.0
    Option "DPMS"
    EndSection

    Section "Monitor"
    # HorizSync source: edid, VertRefresh source: edid
    Identifier "Monitor1"
    VendorName "Unknown"
    ModelName "SceptreX9G-NagaV"
    HorizSync 30.0 - 81.0
    VertRefresh 40.0 - 76.0
    Option "DPMS"
    EndSection

    Section "Monitor"
    # HorizSync source: edid, VertRefresh source: edid
    Identifier "Monitor2"
    VendorName "Unknown"
    ModelName "Acer X193W"
    HorizSync 31.0 - 80.0
    VertRefresh 56.0 - 76.0
    Option "DPMS"
    EndSection

    Section "Device"
    Identifier "Device0"
    Driver "nvidia"
    VendorName "NVIDIA Corporation"
    BoardName "GeForce 6200 LE"
    BusID "PCI:2:0:0"
    Screen 0
    EndSection

    Section "Device"
    Identifier "Device1"
    Driver "nvidia"
    VendorName "NVIDIA Corporation"
    BoardName "GeForce 6200 LE"
    BusID "PCI:2:0:0"
    Screen 1
    EndSection

    Section "Device"
    Identifier "Device2"
    Driver "nvidia"
    VendorName "NVIDIA Corporation"
    BoardName "GeForce 6

  61. Re:xinerama and xrandr by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

    While you're right to, I find it incredibly ironic that half the time when I use Google to find an answer, that answer itself contains some ridicule of the original question along the lines of "Just fucking Google it!".

    I'm kinda thankful that people ask questions every now and then as it gives me something for Google to find.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  62. Putty vs. Cygwin by flajann · · Score: 2, Informative

    I don't know about Putty, but you can install CygwinX, and run ssh in an x-session, and actually run X applications on your Windows desktop that way.

    1. Re:Putty vs. Cygwin by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      Cygwin has some issues: notably: it won't work on 64 bit windows *anything*. So as much as I'd love to run it, no bites for what is probably a good portion of the slashie crowd. Virtualbox can do it, but at that point I highly doubt running putty is the concern. I don't get why someone would need an x-session for putty anyway though, putty runs natively on windows - maybe it's my lack of understanding the reasoning/purpose to do so or something.

    2. Re:Putty vs. Cygwin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not true, I was running cygwin on wxp64 and have it running on w7 now and used it on both to run seamless X applications
      (posting anonymous as i have mods on the page)

    3. Re:Putty vs. Cygwin by Brian+Feldman · · Score: 1

      Cygwin works fine on "64 bit windows *anything*".

      --
      Brian Fundakowski Feldman
    4. Re:Putty vs. Cygwin by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      God, no sane person uses cygwin.

      Putty and MingX is the way to go.

      Cygwin is just a horrible horrible excuse for a collection of ports.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    5. Re:Putty vs. Cygwin by RalphSleigh · · Score: 1

      Really? I am running it just fine for bash/unixy tools/ssh client on x64 Win7 right now...

      --
      Come as you are, do what you must, be who you will.
    6. Re:Putty vs. Cygwin by flajann · · Score: 1

      God, no sane person uses cygwin.

      Putty and MingX is the way to go.

      Cygwin is just a horrible horrible excuse for a collection of ports.

      These days, I simply run Linux as the host system and run Windows in a hypervisor. Best of both worlds (except for games).

    7. Re:Putty vs. Cygwin by flajann · · Score: 1

      Cygwin has some issues: notably: it won't work on 64 bit windows *anything*. So as much as I'd love to run it, no bites for what is probably a good portion of the slashie crowd. Virtualbox can do it, but at that point I highly doubt running putty is the concern. I don't get why someone would need an x-session for putty anyway though, putty runs natively on windows - maybe it's my lack of understanding the reasoning/purpose to do so or something.

      If they want to run an X-Windws client through the Putty connection, they'd need it.

      Besides, I find Putty's terminal emulation to be a bit lacking in some areas.

    8. Re:Putty vs. Cygwin by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      odd. I tried it on my vista and w 7 computers and no bite. I guess I'll go back again.

  63. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shhh... any reply in a condescending tone MUST be correct! That's what I've learned from the IT folks!

  64. Two Monitors by blendedmetaphor · · Score: 1

    The main question is what does your video card support? I use an NVidia 9600GT and run two monitors. I have 4 workspaces where both monitors are included in each workspace. It works perfectly for what I need to do. I don't understand why you would want separate workspaces for each. It is not always trivial to get this working, I am running a PAE Kernel and had to run the experimental drivers to get it to work properly. Make a backup of /etc/X11/xorg.conf before you do anything.

    --
    Existence is futile
  65. Re: by anagama · · Score: 4, Informative

    I use mac laptops and linux desktops. I'm not an Apple hater, maybe even a fanboy to some degree. But I don't think a mac will help him do what he wants. With a second monitor on a mac, you can either do screen spanning or screen mirroring. He is saying he doesn't want spanning, he wants both monitors to have their own "desktop", i.e., separate menu bars and such with the added kicker of being able to move apps between the separate desktops. You can think of spanning as a big desk and separate desktops as two desks in two rooms making it a hassle to shuffle one set of papers to another. What he wants is two desks in one room with the ability to move papers back and forth at will, but with each having distinct work areas.

    It would be cool if macs did that, but they don't. So getting a mac is totally useless for him.

    --
    What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
  66. First Option Is To Just Try It & See... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1

    Don't necessarily ignore any of the other advice here but with the last two Gentoo Linux builds I've done using Xorg Server v1.6.5, the detection was pretty much automatic.

    One was an ATI HD 3200 based laptop which, once I'd put the proprietary ATI drivers in place, didn't need anything added to xorg.conf, plus it detects the external display fine as well when plugged in; the other was an NVIDIA 7600GT based desktop which, again when I put the NVIDIA proprietary drivers in place, worked with only a few lines in xorg.conf, and that was because I had to get xorg to ignore the built in graphics card on the PC mobo which the BIOS wouldn't let me physically disable.

    It is just worth starting Xorg and seeing what happens - if it's still not write, then start building an xorg.conf.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  67. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "linux dual head"

    The first three mention either xrandr or xinerama. Didn't check beyond that.

    Just don't leave linux out of that search or you'll get very different results

  68. Re:xinerama and xrandr by paxcoder · · Score: 1

    Maybe that new Irish law isn't all that bad after all...

  69. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Maybe I am stupid. But what's the difference between a big desktop over two monitors, and separate desktops, while still moving windows from one side to the other? I have two monitors, with one big desktop (Nvidia twinview) with KDE. Both sides have a separate task bar where I switch windows on each side locally. Maximizing a window happens within one monitor. But you can stretch the window over both monitors. I can, if I want, place different pictures as background on each monitor. What is not possible with my setup, you want to do? Do you want the window decorator to change while dragging windows? Have one monitor play a screensaver?

  70. E17 does all that the OP needs. EOD. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    E17 does all that the OP needs. EOD.

  71. Re:xinerama and xrandr by peragrin · · Score: 1

    neither one supports my second monitor natively. Xrandr is working on support so maybe by next christmas I can finally switch to linux on my second computer. I can hack Xorg, and recompile the kernel to make it work but since it works with only a driver install on mac and windows that is the way I am going for now. and every time i want to upgrade I am stuck.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  72. How To do this with KDE by pseudonomous · · Score: 1

    Ok, you can't actually get seperate virtual desktops on different screens, however, using KDE you may be able to get something that's roughly feature equivalent.

    Using your favorite one of xrandr, xorg.conf, or the proprietary Nvidia/ATI tools, you can set up multiple monitors. The default behavior, in the latest Xorg, at least, will let you swap windows between your two displays, the default behavior for "maximize" in KDE will be to fill a single display with one large window, but if you do need a window to span multiple desktops, you can manually resize it.

    You can add a seperate KDE panel to each desktop, both can have thier own task managers which can be configure to only show that windows from a given display screen (or not). If you want, you can set things like the desktop background independantly on each display.

    Unfortunately, this still isn't quite as functional as actually being able to actually switch virtual desktop independantly on each screen, but it's still pretty nice. (this is my personal setup, when I have two monitors available). In fact, the tiling and tabbed window management features which are allegedly coming in KDE 4.4, may address some of the remain limitations of the current dual head setup in KDE, also, allegedly KDE 4.4 fixes the bug which currently makes the "systemsettings>display>multiple monitors" configuration tool un-usable for many people.

  73. Wow by MobyDisk · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I know I'll get modded down for Linux bashing, but... this capability has been around on the Windows world since Windows NT. I think you could do it on '98 with some fiddling. It surprises me that this is not something Linux can do out-of-the-box. Is this a driver issue, or some limitation in the X architecture?

    1. Re:Wow by glop · · Score: 2, Informative

      What do you mean? How do you enable multiple desktops on Windows without 3rd party software?
      The OP is not talking about spreading the desktop over multiple screens which is what most distributions do.
      He want to combine multiple screens and multiple desktops in a way that is not common. I personally like the OP's suggestion but apparently we must be in the minority since only Enlightenment does it that way...

      That said, multiple screens have a long history of being harder on Linux due to driver issues. I believe people are usually quite successful using the NVIDIA drivers and tools. I got decent results with my EEE PC 701 and a TV. But I don't use it much so it does not really count.

    2. Re:Wow by sowth · · Score: 1

      If you would have bothered to read the entire summary, you'd know it was a limitation of KDE/Gnome, not Linux nor the X Window System nor all window managers.

      Maybe Microsoft should add reading to their MCSE program, but then all the losers would cry: "This is too hard!" I hope you are having fun trying to pay off your $30k loan by working "tech support" for the Postal Service or Burger King.

    3. Re:Wow by Quantumstate · · Score: 1

      Maybe you will get modded down for not knowing what you are talking about instead. What is being asked involves having a separate workspace on each screen. Windows does not have workspaces hence the functionality is not possible in windows. The question actually described two ways fo having a dual screen setup in linux one of which is identical to the way Windows does it. If you don't understand something, read about it first.

    4. Re:Wow by Hatta · · Score: 1

      FTFA:

      I need something in the middle -- a separate workspace for each screen, so that I can have independent virtual desktops on each screen, but still have the ability to move applications between monitors

      How long has Windows allowed that, which virtual desktop manager do you use that supports it?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    5. Re:Wow by mister_playboy · · Score: 1

      I know I'll get modded down for Linux bashing, but... this capability has been around on the Windows world since Windows NT.

      No, it hasn't. Virtual desktops have never been a part of Windows, except in the form of glitchy third-party tools, and even those don't offer functionality comparable to what the OP is asking for.

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    6. Re:Wow by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      He want to combine multiple screens and multiple desktops in a way that is not common.

      That's not true. He wants:

      I need something in the middle — a separate workspace for each screen, so that I can have independent virtual desktops on each screen, but still have the ability to move applications between monitors

      That is the default on Windows XP. I have my screen setup that way right now. Firefox is on my right monitor, and... I click "restore" then drag it to another screen, then... I clicked maximize, and it is full-screen on the left monitor.

    7. Re:Wow by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      The original poster asks for the ability to maximize a window and have it fit on one screen, rather than span both screens. But he also wants to be able to drag a window across from one screen to another.

      I have this on my Windows XP machine right now. Also, as someone else pointed out, Microsoft offers virtual workspaces as well, it is just a powertoy.

      P.S. Yet another Slashdotter who opens-up their reply with an insult.

    8. Re:Wow by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      According to the multiple desktop monitor FAQ, Windows '98 supported multiple monitors, but I don't recall exactly how it worked. For Windows XP, this is how it works out of the box. (I know OS X does this as well). I just select the "Extend my Windows desktop" check box. Once I do that, I get the 2 abilities the submitter asked for.

      1) I can maximize a window and it maximizes onto whatever screen the window is on.
      2) I can drag a window onto my other monitor.

      Now, if you want "virtual desktops" than you can download the Microsoft Virtual Desktop Manager powertoy. It's not a 3rd-party thing.

    9. Re:Wow by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      The OP is asking for 2 features.

      1) Maximize a window and it maximizes onto whatever screen the window is on.
      2) Drag a window onto the other monitor.

      Windows XP does this out of the box. If you want virtual desktops, no need for 3rd-party tools, just download the Powertoy from Microsoft.

    10. Re:Wow by Hatta · · Score: 1

      MSVDM is crashy as all hell, so I haven't tried it with a multiple monitor setup. Does it actually provide a separate set of workspaces for each monitor?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    11. Re:Wow by Quantumstate · · Score: 1

      No, this is the normal behaviour for a Linux dual screen setup. I have a dual screen system with gnome and this works with zero config. You can even get the benefits of having a second task bar by simply adding one to the second screen and by default each taskbar now only shows the programs on its screen.

      What is wanted is a separate workspace for each screen so each screen has a group of windows on it which can be independently changed. So currently if you change workspace both screens change because they are just one workspace. This is also the way that the powertoy provided by Microsoft does this.

      So Linux does by default what Windows can do by installing an additional program plus using a more complicated setup Linux can handle independent workspace switching however with a caveat of not being able to drag windows between monitors. The question asks if the second is possible with windows able to be dragged between desktops.

      Maybe my first comment was slightly insulting, so far as a factual statement can be an insult. As some friendly advice, next time someone mentions you may not have understood something perhaps you should try to actually understand it before making more incorrect statements.

    12. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no, no. How can so many slashdotters not understand this problem? What he clearly wants is a dual-monitor setup where EITHER screen can be independently set to any one of the SAME SET of single-screen virtual desktops.

      E.g., you have 8 desktops and two screens. Either screen can be set to any of the 8 desktops. For example left monitor is showing desktop 2 and right monitor is showing desktop 7. You can move an app on desktop 7 to desktop 2 and that effectively moves it from right to left monitor. The only setups I've seen are the two he specifically says he does not want:
      1) big desktop - where BOTH monitors are required to show each 2-screen-sized desktop in unison. Straightforward on Gnome and Windows with MSVDM.
      2) separate desktops - where EACH monitor has its own separate list of single-screen desktops. Applications cannot be moved from monitor to monitor because they are actually showing separate sessions, with no knowledge of the other. The first version of Knoppix I used did this by default, and I immediately noticed the limitation.

      My own personal Linux experience is limited, but I understand what the OP wants and think it would actually be a pretty cool feature with a flexibility I have not seen in any OS window manager. There must be a way but most people here don't even seem to understand what he's asking.

      Again, Windows does NOT do this by default (unless you only want 2 virtual desktops), and the OP specifically says the virtual desktops only need to be the size of a single screen ("no need to strech one app across both of them").

    13. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No.

    14. Re:Wow by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      Okay, I like that idea. That sounds cool. If that is what the original submitter wanted, that isn't what they stated in the description. But it would do what they asked for and more.

      I've never used the Microsoft virtual desktop Powertoy with multiple monitors. Now I want to see how it handles that.

    15. Re:Wow by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      As some friendly advice, next time someone mentions you may not have understood something perhaps you should try to actually understand it before making more incorrect statements.

      I would suggest that you do the same. You said that "Windows does not have workspaces hence the functionality is not possible in windows" which is a factually incorrect statement.

      Just for reference, I know what I'm talking about: my home machine runs OS X, Windows XP, Ubuntu Linux, and Debian. I don't run dual-monitors on the Linux installs, I just mirror them. Only on Slashdot does that make someone who does not know what they are talking about. I asked a question. This is a wonderful example of why people avoid Linux -- this is the same kind of response people get attending LUGs.

    16. Re:Wow by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      I don't know - I'm gonna download it and find out.

      After going through other threads I see that the original submitter didn't just want the ability to move windows across desktops, they wanted multiple virtual desktops per monitor. I had never heard of that, so I didn't realize that was what they wanted.

    17. Re:Wow by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      Reading the summary again, I get it now. This is what he meant by "changing virtual desktop switches both monitors" I thought he meant apps were maximizing across monitors.

      Of all the replies and moderations I got on this thread -- only the Anonymous Coward made a non-insulting intelligent reply. You sir, should sign-up for Slashdot. We need more like you.

    18. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>>I know I'll get modded down for Linux bashing,

      If you start your comment with insulting presumptions, what do you expect?

      You're holding up bait and complain someone's biting?

  74. VirtualBox by carbuck · · Score: 1

    Use VirtualBox and put the guest OS on the 2nd monitor. You'll have 2 workspaces and the ability to drag and drop

  75. X server abstraction makes this hard by tlambert · · Score: 1

    X server abstraction makes this hard.

    The X server sits between your display driver and your window manager and does not communicate sufficient information about the underlying devices to the client program, which in this case is the window manager itself, that it's able to distinguish the real estate boundaries between the displays. Because it doesn't know the boundaries, it can't make good decisions on mapping a workspace (a window manager abstraction) onto a display (an X Server abstraction which is being intentionally glossed over by the X Server or by the display itself).

    I've often complained that the X abstraction of the window management from the server software did a big disfavor to the overall capability to pick a window server and have all you applications adopt a uniform "look and feel" based on the window manager selected: the window manager being integral to the server would have prevented this.

    I've also complained about the need to load display drivers into what is effectively user space resulting in a loss of state information to the kernel, since it has a very hard time with "putting the display back into a known, reasonable state", either because the user space driver is making state changes to write-only registers in the card, and these are not shadowed into the kernels idea of the card state, or that even being shadowed, the kernel driver doesn't know what to do about it. I first brought this up in the context of debugging kernel panics in FreeBSD write running X windows, in the 1990's. You could address this a couple ways, including the hardware itself allowing for a kernel to reset to a "known good state" (most won't), or moving the driver into the kernel and breaking the X server/driver integration (and several projects have done this).

    Another project which attempted to put the abstractions where I thought they should be was "Saluatation", but it got bogged down in commercial encumberment by companies like HP and Ricoh for its standards, and by the license (GPL) on what reference implementations they did make available.

    Really, it's about time we decided to rethink the use of X windows at all.

    -- Terry

    1. Re:X server abstraction makes this hard by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      X server abstraction makes this hard.

      No, actually it makes it rather easy.

      Virtual desktop support is very easy. You can do it in one of two ways. Either make a large desktop and XMoveWindow windows when you move desktops. Or, make the desktops disjoint and use XMapWindow / XUnmapWindow. The latter allows windows to easily appear on multiple desktops.

      OK that deals with desktops.

      Now for xinerama.

      Deside whether or not to XMoveWindow/X(un)MapWindow depending on which Xinerama screen a window is on. Bonus points for deciding what to do if the window spans xinerama screens.

      There easy, if understand X, and the abstractions make it easy.

      What is hard is making it have a sane user intreface since it is a very unusual way of managing virtual desktops.

      But if you desperately want disjoint desktops on the left and right monitors and want programs to appear on both, then use XComposite to render to an offscreen buffer and go nuts with redisplaying a window as many times as you see fit.

      If you're still convinced that X sucks, can you outline the API calls needed (as I just did) in a system that does not suck?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    2. Re:X server abstraction makes this hard by 3.1415926535 · · Score: 1

      It does know the boundaries, that's what the Xinerama extension is for. Try running "xdpyinfo -ext XINERAMA" and it should tell you where your screen edges are.

      The inability for window managers to switch workspaces on your screens independently is purely a window manager limitation and not a limitation in X itself.

      Likewise, the inability for the kernel to know about your card state was purely a limitation in the X drivers and not in XFree86/X.org itself. That part is mostly fixed now (and was never a problem on NVIDIA).

  76. Read the original post closely by morgauxo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Does Windows 7 allow for precisely what the original poster is asking for? Independant Virtual Desktops which can be switched out individually and the ability to drag apps between them? I'm pretty sure XP doesn't.

    Linux isn't all that hard to configure for dual monitors in the usual sense, one extended desktop. Just use Xinerama (if you aren't using nVidia cards). I used to have 2 monitors and my livingroom TV all hooked to my machine. It wasn't that hard though I did have to edit the xorg.conf file which might be scary to one not used to working with ini files. I use Gentoo, I suspect a more userfriendly distro like Ubuntu might have a nice GUI wizard.

    Windows is very easy to configure this way. I have 3 monitors on my XP box at work. You just check the boxes to extend the desktop then drag the screens into the order you want. Easy is nice but unlike my Linux box the Windows one forgets what order/orientation I wanted my screens in about every 7-10 boots and I have to turn my head sideways to use the mouse to put it back. (I have a flipped monitor for easy long page reading) I prefer editing an xorg.conf file ONCE to doing this almost weekly! I'm told Mac is just as easy to configure and actually remembers your preference.

    I don't think Windows will let you have separate windows session on the same machine on two monitors. At least not unless you hook one monitor to a second computer, login to the first via RDC and the first is running a server edition... Linux can be multiheaded, it isn't exactly easy though.

    What the poster actually asked for though... I don't think either Xorg or Windows can do. I doubt Mac can either but I wouldn't know about that one.

    Or is this a new Windows feature? I'm not that familiar with the multimonitor features of Vista or 7, most of my knowledge of the Windows world ends with XP.

    1. Re:Read the original post closely by maxume · · Score: 1

      Reading between the lines on the description for this tool:

      http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/cc817881.aspx

      it sounds like it might be possible to have a different sessions on different screens, but it also sounds like it would be awkward (no moving windows between screens, and it isn't obvious that the screens could each have their own desktop object, I'm just assuming it might work).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Read the original post closely by schon · · Score: 1

      Linux isn't all that hard to configure for dual monitors in the usual sense, one extended desktop. Just use Xinerama (if you aren't using nVidia cards).

      Actually, I use Xinerama even though I am using nVidia.

      Twinview is OK, but it's missing some features compared to Xinerama - most notably the ability to do independant monitor rotation, and it's broken handling of different-sized displays.

      My setup is two widescreen monitors, the "main" one landscape and the other portrait (Samsung monitors rock for this BTW :) - this is impossible with Twinview, because Twinview requires that both monitors are oriented the same (eg, if one is rotated, the other rotates too.)

      Even if I could do this with Twinview, I'd still have a large "dead" area under my main display, which is terribly annoying (especially since that's where my taskbar sits.)

    3. Re:Read the original post closely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy is nice but unlike my Linux box the Windows one forgets what order/orientation I wanted my screens in about every 7-10 boots and I have to turn my head sideways to use the mouse to put it back.

      I'm pretty sure this is actually the result of your co-workers messing with you.

    4. Re:Read the original post closely by selven · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure Windows still doesn't have virtual desktops, so a virtual desktop setup like what the OP was asking for is impossible.

    5. Re:Read the original post closely by DavidRawling · · Score: 1

      Intel video driver? Turn off the stupid hotkeys for the Intel Display Manager. I think Alt+{Arrow} is what changes the orientation.

    6. Re:Read the original post closely by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      I used to use Xinerama b/c of the "dead space" myself. Xinerama used to be really buggy with 3D acceleration though. On my machine enabling Xinerama pretty much killed acceleration. From what I read on forums online it occasionally worked but most people had the same experience I did. That was quite a while ago though. It's been a long time since I messed with Xinerama. Maybe 3D w/ Xinerama has improved?

      Since then nVidia added a setting to TwinView which if enabled causes it to emulate Xinerama. With this enabled, if your desktop/window manager was aware of non-rectangle window dimensions under Xinerama it should be under TwinView just the same. I don't know about independent window rotation though. I haven't looked for that feature. NVidia did add a lot of config options to TwinView a little while back. It might be in there.

      If you have the same 3D compromise I did and you haven't read the TwinView readme files in a while you might want to check it out. Or, maybe not.

    7. Re:Read the original post closely by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      That would be pretty difficult when I undock the laptop and take it home at night. I always turn it off before undocking so it shouldn't be the undocking that causes it to lose it's settings.

    8. Re:Read the original post closely by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      No, NVidia driver. What I didn't state is that I do have one of my monitors rotated on it's side. It isn't like Windows is randomly flipping my screen. I would suspect it was either a joke from a coworker or a worm (probably the first) if it was doing that. What it's doing is forgetting my preference and going back to normal, which for me, with my monitor physically rotated already is not normal.

    9. Re:Read the original post closely by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      No, they got those starting as part of a free power user pack from Microsoft for Windows98. It's been available in some form ever since. Of course... it was available elsewhere first...

  77. Re:xinerama and xrandr by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

    Believe or not, if you use a win32 box as an X-Terminal via xmingw or cygwin/X, configured in no-root (floating window mode), and let win32 handle the dual monitors... You really get the best of both worlds.

    I stumbled on this solution a couple of years ago, and although my primary setup is a Sun with two separate displays (no xinerama), I like it quite a lot.

    Also, windows has a nifty target when you click the control key so you can find that lost mouse pointer. Unnecessary with only two monitors, but once you have 3 or 4 it's a godsend.

    --

    Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
  78. KDE/Gnome are 'classical' windows managers? by JungleBoy · · Score: 1

    "...but I'd rather go with 'classical' window managers, like Openbox/Gnome/KDE..."

    Seriously? You think KDE and Gnome are 'classical' window managers? Neither of them is a window manager. They don't call themselves window managers. They might include a window manager, but that's not what they are. Classical window managers are things like TWM, FVWM, Window Maker, Fluxbox, Blackbox, Enlightenment, Afterstep.


    Gumpy old Linux guy.

    --
    "You never know when some crazed rodent with cold feet might be running loose in your pants."
    -Calvin
  79. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Hatta · · Score: 1

    What happens when you change a virtual desktop on the left monitor? Does it also change on the right? That's what happens in my experience. Maybe twinview has this fixed, but that's only a solution for those with nvidia cards.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  80. Re:xinerama and xrandr by morgauxo · · Score: 1

    Informative? Really? He wants multiple Desktop sessions, one for each monitor. Xinerama and XRandR do not provide this. They provide a single Desktop session across two monitors. The difference is subtle but the original poster already acknowledged the single desktop option and the whole point was not to do that.

  81. This is a first by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Smug answers from Windows users AND smug answers from Linux users - and neither group seems to actually understand the questions the poster is asking!

    He wants independent desktops, guys. All these silly "Jus use Windows 7, dummy" and "Use Xinerama, idiot" responders are not grasping that fundamental point - you're all thinking of one large desktop that spans multiple monitors. Basically you're confusing desktops with viewports.

    Unfortunately I don't know the answer either - but I do think I at least understand the question...

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:This is a first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It seems as if he wants independent switching of display-specific desktops. This may have its uses for sure.

      However, I think I would prefer a more confusing variant: A set of desktops, and each screen can select one of those desktops to show individually. All screens could even show the same desktop if all select the same, but this case wouldn't usually be useful.

      But then today's applications are self-contained window-less (say, eclipse) and you end up with one-desktop=one-application, then simply moving the application-windows is quite the same as moving desktops.

    2. Re:This is a first by hduff · · Score: 1

      He wants independent desktops, guys.

      What he wants is independent X servers and an X client that can move between the servers. Something like the console app 'screen' for X.

      There is such an app under development, but I can't recall the name and it was awkward to use. It was really intended to leave a GUI app running on a remote computer after the remote login was closed.

      Having used dual displays in Linux for many years, I've found it easier and more effective to span the monitors with xinerama and manually set the size of an apps' window to fill the physical display and edit the menu entry to always open the app in one or the other displays. You can't use the window "maximize" function, but "minimize" and "restore" work as advertised.

      --
      "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
    3. Re:This is a first by Super+Jamie · · Score: 1

      Either you misunderstand the question, or the OP misunderstands the capabilities of the X root window and display limitations.

      Anyway, I ran like this for a long time, first with two monitors then with three. I tried several solutions and ended up writing an ugly hack for some X library which allowed me to specify viewports in a config file. Eventually that broke due to changes to multiple monitor code further upstream, so I ditched my two 17" screens and got a better videocard and a massive 24" LCD - problem solved.

      I haven't experienced multiple monitors on ATI under Linux, but at least with nVidia's pathetic dedication to the platform (and insultingly stubborn tech support) it was a painful experience and I wouldn't recommend trying.

    4. Re:This is a first by smallfries · · Score: 2, Informative

      No - he doesn't understand what he wants because he has freely intermixed the terms desktop and workspace in the question. This has quite rightly confused the crap out of both sides of the never-ending windows-vs-linux death-match on slashdot.

      It sounds like he wants independent workspace flipping on both screens, while dragging windows between. This is not hard to do, but by mentioning desktops he has confused everyone. The majority of the posts above are telling him that you cannot transfer windows between independent X screens (true, but irrelevant).

      What he actually wants is a standard spanning X display (probably Xinerama) with a custom workspace flipper that groups the windows according to which logical display they are on. It's been a few years since I tried this and my memory is vauge; I would guess that the workspace flipper in Blackbox does this. If not, there are plenty of suggestions in other threads that sound plausible.

      Your point was nearly correct: he wants independent workspaces, not desktops, or viewports, nor monitors. Personally I would tell him to get over the whole workspace thing and just use Expose on OS-X hooked up to keyboard shortcuts, but that is not the answer that he is looking for.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
  82. Why Not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Hell, I did. Now I can run OS X, Linux, and Windows on the same box, natively, or in VM's. Plus the quality of the hardware is tough to beat.

    PS. Nice subject line. Noob.

    1. Re:Why Not? by koreaman · · Score: 1

      How do you define/measure "quality"?

    2. Re:Why Not? by cyclopropene · · Score: 3, Funny

      How do you define/measure "quality"?

      By the price.

      --
      Shouldn't you be doing something useful?
    3. Re:Why Not? by smash · · Score: 1
      Well, as a PC user of some 21 years (amiga before that), I recently bought a Mac (mini). It is high quality when measured by the metrics of

      aesthetic design - it looks cool

      build quality - it feels sturdy, well made and has no sharp edges or flimsy bits

      it is virtually silent

      it puts out FAR less heat than any PC i've had this decade

      Its cheap, it runs anything I throw at it (no games, admittedly, i've got a pre-nvidia model) and just sits in the corner, quite happily.

      I'm not buying PC hardware again, unless its a purpose built box that can't be done by something like a mini... The mini will run PC operating systems if i need to, and the hardware is just so much nicer to actually operate.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  83. even jwm supports all of this and only ~100kb by technosaurus · · Score: 1

    I find it really hard to believe that the bloated desktop environments do not have the same capability that the minimal jwm (joe's window manager) has, but maybe so. In jwm just right click on the top of the window and send it to whatever "desktop" you want. It is not even limited to 2 desktops/monitors and jwm is available in every distro from TinyCore and Puppy(default wm) to Ubuntu and Suse.

    Here is a thread to on the Puppy forum to use jwm as your complete desktop environment.
    http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=51200/

    And jwm's homepage
    http://joewing.net/programs/jwm/

  84. Re: by anglophobe_0 · · Score: 1

    Fedora's dual-monitor setup is even easier...you don't have to press an awful keystroke combination like "Windows-P". Besides, the OP isn't asking how to set up dual-monitor. He's asking how to set up a separate workspace on each monitor, something that should not be out of reach with X's new multi-input functionality, something I've not heard of in the Windows or Mac world. BTW, I'm using an Intel IGP, not an nvidia card. It might not work great on an ATI card, but...well...it might if ATI had anywhere near decent linux support.

  85. Re: by anglophobe_0 · · Score: 1

    I use multiple monitors on my linux laptop with an Intel IGP. And, like others have said, that's not what the OP is asking about anyway. Don't spread FUD, please.

  86. What's the problem with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    using people in /. to do the search for you? You only answer to show off anyway.

  87. All Hail the Idiot Who Summons the Google Warrior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has anybody else noticed that when you "google" a problem, you might get an answer and if your really lucky, it the answer you need.

      A good portion of the "answers" are from script kiddies or cut, pasted from older distros or answers that leaves you more confounded. Like googling the "perfect fedora 12 desktop" on
      the latest ASUS boards with Nividia controllers. Go ahead and try it, then ask dear Falko why isn't there any display after the initial load? Looks like it time to "google" that problem as well,
    but damn! You knocked out your computer what are you going to do?

    A. "Well I have a duel-boot microsoft system" or "I'll use the little ole microsoft computer over here in the computer" In which case you are a hertic scum and still a noob!

    or

    B. "No problem, I'll call the local LUG" or open the old maunels. In which case you are a zealot scum still living in his moms basement!

    In either case it will lead you to the solution of, "No display, because the drivers haven't been written"

    So what do you do?

    You could post on the craigslist Linux forms, but isn't that using yourself for chum in a shark tank? You could also post where the intelligent people are! Usually that Slashdot, but not today

  88. Personally, I'm not into chair tossing, but... by killmenow · · Score: 1

    I use Windows 7 on my work desktop. I have dual monitors. I use UltraMon and get basically the setup requester is looking for: separate desktops that I can drag (or quickly hit the "move to other monitor" button) between screens.

    I also use nomachine which tunnels compressed X sessions over SSH to remotely manage Linux servers in far away places and VirtualBox to run local Linux VMs.

    It's not that hard to set up.

  89. Maximizing on Multiple Monitors by Yobgod+Ababua · · Score: 1

    >> With the one large desktop when you maximize a window it fills both monitors and things might size oddly if your monitors aren't the same size/resolution

    > That's true and it does not depend on which operating system you're using.

    It's absolutely not true. I'm currently on Centos5 with three monitors arranged (via Xinerama) as one very large desktop.
    Maximizing an app causes it to completely fill the leftmost monitor that it currently occupies, NOT the entire multi-monitor desktop.

    >> Windows multiple monitors also supports having separate monitors where you can maximize a window on a single display, but you can move windows
    >> between the monitors or even span multiple monitors. Is this setup possible to do under Linux?

    This appears to be the default behavior using Xinerama, no fancy tricks required

    1. Re:Maximizing on Multiple Monitors by mangu · · Score: 1

      Maximizing an app causes it to completely fill the leftmost monitor that it currently occupies, NOT the entire multi-monitor desktop.

      Sorry if I didn't make myself clear, but what I meant is that the fact that the display might size oddly if the monitors aren't the same resolution does not depend on the OS.

    2. Re:Maximizing on Multiple Monitors by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 1

      Maximizing an app causes it to completely fill the leftmost monitor that it currently occupies, NOT the entire multi-monitor desktop.

      That has nothing to do with Xinerama, it just means that your window manager handles multiple displays properly. Most of them have this support by now but a few don't.

      I'm running xmonad and the multi-monitor support is brilliant. I'm not sure if it's worth the trouble to customize though.

  90. xmonad and gnome/kde can live together by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I spent months trying to do the same thing with a normal window manager but I never found a way that worked well. xmove sounded promising but I couldn't get it to run. Now I use xmonad and it behaves exactly the way I want. You can set it up with window decorations and run it in Gnome and whatever else you want to do. It's really not as big of a leap as you think it is. If you're scared of the "tiling" aspect, you can set every workspace to floating and it will never do any tiling.

  91. KDE4 by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 1

    I basically have that with KDE4 and a dual-head Nvidia card. I have it set to "span", but when I maximize, it only maximizes to the current window. If I really wanted, I could setup two instances of kicker, so that I would have the KDE menu, apps, etc on each screen. The only thing I don't think I can do is have independent virtual desktops - that is, have the left screen on desktop #1 and the right screen on desktop #3.

  92. Re: by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    Buy a mac

    No don't. Frankly, compared to Linux/X11, Macs suck at virtual desktops. They also suck at the interaction between mutli-monitor support and virtual desktops. Unless of course you have tried many methods and prefer the Mac method to all of them.

    Seeing as you do appear to be fanboyish I find that unlikely.

    And whay kind of a bloody useless comment was that anyway. EVEN if it is better on a mac (it certainly is not for me), there are plenty of reasons to prefer Linux to OSX, especially for people who visit this site. "Buy a Mac" is about as useless a response to "how do I do X under Linux" as "switch to Linux" is to "How do I do X on a Mac".

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  93. Ultramon for Windows by Maxwell · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ultramon is not crap, and it does exactly what the OP wants.

    So the question becomes: Is there a Linux tool like Ultramon?

    1. Re:Ultramon for Windows by gregmac · · Score: 1

      It's unnecessary. I ran KDE for a long time with multiple monitors, and it just works. You can add as many panels as you want (equivalent to windows task bar), plus there's no stupid limitations on what goes where.. so you can have an application menu on both, a clock only on second monitor, an 'favourites' launcher on the second... heck you can add another panel at the top of the screen that just shows notification icons.

      In that context, Ultramon looks like a poor hack, and the fact Windows STILL can't natively even have more than one taskbar is just sad.

      On that topic, I'm now using DisplayFusion on my multi-monitor Windows desktops, and I really recommend it.

      --
      Speak before you think
    2. Re:Ultramon for Windows by Hylandr · · Score: 1

      Yes there is. I did exactly what the OP is posting about as early as 2003.

      That was in the days of X11 before the split to XORG. I will have to experiment again, but as long as you get an NVIDIA card with good supported drivers you shouldn't have a problem. Do a google search for the configuration settings. they exist * Without special software *

      - Dan.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    3. Re:Ultramon for Windows by Unequivocal · · Score: 1

      I used this virtual desktop for years on Windows - it worked flawlessly for me:

      http://www.xdesksoftware.com/

      So I think there are tools out there to do at least that part of what OP wants in Windows. Now whether Windows is the right answer - who knows.

    4. Re:Ultramon for Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ultramon doesn't appear to allow for virtual desktops or viewports which is a HUGE portion of what he's asking for...

  94. Re:xinerama and xrandr by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    Touche.

    Xinerama and Xrandr work great for configuring multiple monitors.

    Those systems say nothing about virtual desktops. Perhaps it is you who should not only use google as you suggest with almost religious fervour, but also read the results coming from google.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  95. Re:xinerama and xrandr by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

    No... what the OP wants, and what I want, is to be able to switch workspaces on each monitor independently.

    Say on the left monitor I have some log files being monitored with tail. On the right monitor I have some reference material in one workspace, and some programming stuff in another. I want to keep an eye on the logs while still being able to switch between the two workspaces on the right monitor.

    I can simulate this with "pin this window to all workspaces", and running with TwinView on both monitors. But now suppose I'd like to swap freely between monitoring two things on the left monitor in separate workspaces - suddenly that solution no longer works.

    So now, I need separate X screens for each monitor so I get separate workspaces per monitor.

    Now let's suppose I've started a long-running process on my right-monitor programming workspace, and I want to move it to another workspace on the left monitor so I can check on its progress later without interrupting whatever I'm doing on the right monitor. Having separate X screens prevents me from doing that.

    Basically I want the flexibility of having separate workspaces per-monitor, without the restriction of tying new windows to whatever X screen it was created on.

  96. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "OP wants two monitors with their own separate workspaces, while still being able to drag windows between them."

    I'm using xinerama + xrandr to achieve just that on kde 4.3 (on this very computer I'm using right now)

  97. Re:xinerama and xrandr by user317 · · Score: 1

    If its using the same X session (the same user login), then this is possible. I have 2 monitors, both running 2 different "deskstops". The wm lets me switch workspaces on each one seperatly. xmonad so does enlightenment 17. I bet there are a few more wms that can do this as well, those are just the two that i've tried.

    BTW, i can't believe this made it to the front page, its really a question that just belongs to your favorite distro's forums. Since we are on the topic, does anyone know how to get printers working in linux :)?

    --
    me fail english? thats unpossible
  98. Re:xinerama and xrandr by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

    Could you explain how you set that up? Last time I tried, I tested half a dozen permutations of configuration settings and never got it to work as I've described.

    Granted, I was using Gnome - maybe KDE has exposed some options that Gnome hasn't - but this should be an X configuration thing, and I've seen no method of doing it.

    Can I see a screenshot? I'm curious if we're talking about the same thing.

  99. TwinView + Xinerama by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

    I'd say your best bet is to use an NVIDIA card with dual outputs, TwinView enabled, and let NVIDIA's implementation of Xinerama take care of the per-monitor fullscreen stuff for you (most apps I've come across are Xinerama aware...with the notable exception of games, in which you have to get creative with your X config file to get it to fullscreen only on a single display correctly). You won't have the ability to control your virtual desktops on a per-monitor basis, but I think that feature pales in comparison to being able to move stuff freely between both monitors.

  100. What's the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm doing it right now. If you can stomach binary drivers, nVidia's is at least as good as the Windows nVidia driver. Although it runs in "TwinView" (it acts as one large screen), both compiz and kdewm support it brilliantly. KDE (kcontrol [3.x] and ksystemsettings [4.x]) recognises that your screens are different, and many compiz plugins have explicit multiple-monitor handling. For example, "Workspace Wall" lets you have the animations for workspace switching separately on each screen or as if they're one large screen, and most plugins with overlays let you choose which screen to display on (either the one with cursor, the one with active window, or both, or primary). The only thing to watch out for is using Enhanced Zoom Desktop (nb; this doesn't affect Zoom Desktop plugin) near the screen boundary - because it zooms in on only one screen, sometimes the cursor "jumps" to the other screen; the workaround for this is to zoom away from the boundary and then pan towards it. Also, remember to install ccsm (apt-package-name='compizconfig-settings-manager') to customise compiz effects (you'd be nuts not to).

    You'll also need Nvidia Settings Manager (apt-package-name='nvidia-settings' - remember to enable non-free repositories). Just install, run as root/sudo, set it up as you want in the "X Server Display Configuration" menu (second from top), and then remember to click "Save to X Configuration File" once you're finished. You can add a thing that takes away the nVidia splash logo on X-startup, but I like to keep it so I know that I'm not using the open-source driver (and it only goes for about a second). The other thing you need to watch out for is that the binary driver tends to leak memory, but I only have 2GB on this machine and I can usually stay out of the swap, so it's not so bad.

    Relevant information:

    • nVidia 9500GT (173.14.09 binary driver)
    • Linux Debian "Lenny" 5.03, x86_84, 2.6.26-2-amd64 generic kernel
    • KDE 3.5.10
    • Compiz (whichever version is in the repos)

    I've also tried it with KDE 4.x (4.1, 4.2, 4.3), and Kubuntu (7.10, 8.04, 8.10, 9.04, 9.10), and it works just as well there.

  101. It works in Big Desktop mode with ATI driver by jml75 · · Score: 1

    What you want wirks fine with Big Desktop using the ATI propriatairy driver and VirtualBox VM in full screen in one monitor.

  102. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In addition, KDE4 doesn't even handle the separate X screens option at all. Plasma can only run on a single desktop. So, Xinerama and Twinview work, but separate X sessions don't. You'd think for a "workstation" class DE that this would have been built into the core of Plasma and the desktop manager. However, from what I've been able to glean from various forums / postings is that it isn't easily added in.

  103. Exactly! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is exactly my preferred work environment, I'm surprised more people don't know about it or try it.

    I have a 1900x1200 screen on my laptop and a side monitor of 1600x1200. I don't ever need to maximize an application across both monitors ... either monitor is big enough for a single app. What I find useful is that I can have several applications running on one monitor, each in its own workspace, and several 'adjunct' applications on the other monitor, each of those in their own workspace. This allows me to quickly mix and match reference material or browsers to whatever is relevant to the task at hand.

    For example:
    I'm a software developer, and I often have many browser windows open to API references, google searches, blog postings, whatever. I will also have a database administration tool, an development IDE, two or three remote desktop sessions, and maybe a couple of non-work things - Spotify or an SSH-tunneled browser session in a separate browser. My day consists of developing and debugging in Eclipse, and rotating among several workspaces on the other monitor to support my development and debugging activities. I find the described X setup to be very efficient; once everything is running, I don't have to go hunting for windows or maximize/minimize other running applications. I just hot-key among the workspaces and easily maintain mental context for the task at hand. If someone comes in and needs a question answered, I don't have to clear the screen -- I just hot-key to an empty workspace and help them with what they are after.

    The big win here is retaining the ability to cut-and-paste among applications while being able to 'pin' an application to a monitor. That is, I can leave Eclipse up on monitor 1, and then flip among the workspaces on monitor 2 while I look for whatever information I need. I don't lose my train of thought because Eclipse on monitor 1 is always visible, even as I flip among 5 or 10 different browser windows or applications on monitor 2.

    If you aren't a developer, maybe you don't understand. But I'm sure other developers understand the use case ... many times, you may have to push 10 things on your mental stack while you research a problem, and it is easy to lose context. Being able to pin an application on one monitor and then quickly flip through several other applications on the other monitor is a huge productivity win. It always surprises me that more Linux people don't know about this method of using X; it drives me nuts to go to another developer's machine and watch them minimize and/or alt-tab through 30 browser windows and applications when they are trying to do something, or flip back and forth among the same 2 workspaces 16 times in a row because Xinerama has 'trapped' the IDE on their 2nd monitor to a different workspace than the one displaying their reference material. There is a better way.

    Having said all that ... I have often wished for the exact capability requested by the OP. There are times when it would be convenient to be able to drag a window from one monitor to the other. As demonstrated by the 'clever' first poster, this setup is often misinterpreted as Xinerama or xrandr or some combination thereof, when actually it is just as the OP described. 'Albanach' has posted the only thing that looks helpful or relevant so far ... I don't see the point of asking "Have you investigated any of these before 'asking /.'?" though, it makes it look like Albanach is trying to be cool or look smart or something ... I guess ... but I am certainly glad that the OP posted the question. I think I tried Xmove but couldn't get it to work, and it sounds like Xpra may not be much better, but I'll try 'em again.

    If anyone else understands the issue and has additional suggestions, please advise.

  104. Maybe try Xnest? by ericberm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For testing purposes, on a dual monitor twinview setup, I've fired up Xnest with geometry that matches the resolution of one of my monitors to give me the feel of 2 X sessions running at once.

    Xnest -geometry 1920x1200 -query localhost :0

    I know this doesn't exactly answer the question nor solve the problem of moving windows across X servers, but depending on why you are trying to run 2 separate X's, perhaps this could work. I find the Xnest is great for trying to debug users dot file problems or creating global X settings.

    I also seem to remember a way to share just the graphics of a particular application between two remote X servers (i.e. display just firefox on a remote machine), but can't remember the exact command; this was back in the sgi days. At any rate, if you want to just see the same app running on both X sessions, perhaps something like that could work well if you use localhost.

    Hope that helps, but like I said it doesn't sound exactly like what you are looking for.

  105. Re:xinerama and xrandr by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

    It's not a distro question, it's a WM question.

    Your solution boils down to "use a different window manager", which might be fine, or might not. I may try XMonad at some point, but I'm sure you're aware that switching window managers requires leaving one's comfort zone for an extended period of time, which of course reduces productivity...

    The OP only seems silly to you because you already knew of a solution; clearly, other people think they know the solution but really don't (by claiming xinerama+xrandr solves it), and others were not aware of anything like that.

    I've googled this subject on more than one occasion, and found nothing useful, just people's blog posts complaining that they can't figure it out either. Clearly, asking slashdot is a viable solution, as evidenced by your own post.

    For an OS designed around having multiple workspaces (even on GUI-less systems, we've got multiple virtual terminals), you'd think they'd design this right into every window manager.

  106. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I did that with nvidia cards and xinerama. when i maximasie one window it will only maximise over one screen and not span both.
    I can drag windows from one screen to the other. i cant however run separate window managers but i se no point in that.

  107. AwesomeWM (and others of the genre) handle this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great question! Just that use case problem has been toying around in my mind for years but after ten+ years of using X with multiple monitors did I actually make it happen.

    My chosen solution was to use AwesomeWM. http://awesome.naquadah.org/

    It is both a capable tiling AND floating window manager that handles multiple monitors more gracefully than anything I've ever used before, including effective separate virtual desktops for each monitor (or linked if you prefer). In fact you can have some desktops linked and some independent. The cost of getting your feet wet is pretty high because you have to script your own setup, but the investment is worth it. Once you get your mind around it the possibilities are both endless and precise.

  108. Re:xinerama and xrandr by MrMr · · Score: 1

    http://www.google.com/search?q=multiple+display+X11
    Let me think.
    You want 'multiple displays on X11' and you need a clue for three keywords?
    Nah. Too hard.

  109. Re:Understanding/Answering the question by KharmaWidow · · Score: 1

    LOL - you have just pointed out the problem with "googling it..." 96.11/100 answers to "how do I do it with set ABC" contain "You dummy, do it with set EFG"

    Personally - on OSX (I know, irony) is that I would love a set up were I can switch monitor A + computer A, monitor B f+ computer B; to monitor B + computer A, monitor A + computer B — in a single click or hardware switch.

  110. Short solution... by sbeckstead · · Score: 0, Troll

    Get a Mac.

  111. Re: by Mitsoid · · Score: 1

    Was not meant to be flamebait.. i was actually interested due to my experiences with windows 7 dual-monitor setups..

    i'm taking a course in UNIX this semester and was planning on doing a dual-monitor setup for a unix box for fun...

    (and I do have an nVidia video card, referencing a reply to this post)

  112. Why not multiple startx sessions? by stakovahflow · · Score: 1

    I primarily just use console sessions...

    I just had an idea...

    *WATCH OUT!!!! It's a BAD IDEA*

    How about using a shell script to "startx -- :1 " & "su username startx -- :2" for dual X sessions?

    You'd control them by Ctrl-Alt-F7 & Ctrl-Alt-F8, etc..

    I've not tried it, yet, but you should be able to at least have the ability to have common files, even if running dual instances of X...

    I'll try testing this out when I get home...
    open a screen session and type the first,
    startx wmaker -- 1
    disconnect screen & open another screen session,
    startx fluxbox -- 2
    disconnect from screen

    or something like that?

    It's a thought...
    Maybe, just maybe, it could work...

    I'm sure it's a bad idea, but it's an idea, without just a single WM and two monitors, etc...

    --Stak

    --
    Holy happy hippy crap!
    1. Re:Why not multiple startx sessions? by nullchar · · Score: 1

      You are on the right track... you are describing something similar to "Multiseat X".

      Read more here: http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html

      Unfortunately, if you just have a dual-head video card, I believe you need to run xnest or something similar to have separate X sessions on two monitors. However, having two video cards is easy.

      I had multiseat working in Ubuntu 8.04, and it's working now in 9.04. I only had to modify xorg.conf and gdm.conf. (Though it did take several hours to get all the usb devices worked out, as well as the console-kit sessions.)

      I have two monitors on a single pcie nvidia card as Seat0, and a single monitor on a second pcie nvidia card as Seat1. Two usb keyboards, and two usb mice. One computer.

      If I want to connect all 3 monitors, I login (as two different users) to both seats, and run synergy.

  113. Re:Gentoo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems like a lot of masturbating going on here. But then, this is Slashdot...

  114. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Gerzel · · Score: 1

    He did. These are the two solutions he is talking about and neither meets his needs. I know I have the same problem.

  115. Re:dual monitor by koreaman · · Score: 1

    I use XMonad and was thinking the same thing as soon as I started reading the summary. Unfortunately the poster specifically claims to want a "traditional" DE setup, rather than a lightweight tiling WM. I've heard of using XMonad as the WM for Gnome, but I'm not sure how easy it is to set up or how well it works.

    My advice to the OP is: give XMonad a try. Who knows, maybe after a few days using it you won't want to go back...

  116. Re:xinerama and xrandr by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

    It's not about running separate window managers, it's about having a separate set of workspaces for each monitor, while still being able to drag windows between monitors.

    What you've described is just one of the non-desired alternatives listed by the OP.

  117. e16 by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    apt-get install e16

    This window manager may be old fashioned but it still has by far the most flexible as well as responsive virtual desktop to be found in modern software, period.

  118. Re:xinerama and xrandr by alexhs · · Score: 1

    "-1 Doesn't really know what xinerama+xrandr does"

    My bet is that and "-1 Doesn't understand the question because poster OS / default Linux distribution setup doesn't do that and poster can't think of more flexibility"

    There's a flaw in X where you can't move windows between screens. That you can't move them between displays makes sense (from :1.0 to :2.0 for example), but between screens (from :0.1 to :0.2 for example) it should be allowed.

    Some tools try to get around that limitation (Xpra, xmove, mentioned in other posts, that I didn't know of, so the thread is useful ;) )

    Then there's that technical difficulty about windows crossing screen boundaries :

    Virtual workspace are only simulated by the window manager by mapping or unmapping windows.
    When a window crosses screen boundaries and you change your workspace on one screen, you get an interesting case because X doesn't allow you to map half a window.

    So you have two options :
    - You can move from one screen to another screen with a WM option, but no dragging allowed between screens. Some applications like Gimp can do that (View->Move to screen)

    - A WM could implement independant workspaces in xinerama mode (I think DR17 does just that), and have some special set of rules for windows crossing screens (and workspaces) boundaries (like always shown, or tie with the workspace where most of the windows is located)

    --
    I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
  119. Xorg.conf by wolf1oo · · Score: 1

    I imagine you could probably do some black magic in the xorg configuration file. Upon glancing through the man pages, I think you can set up multiple "screens" in the "ServerLayout" section. The screens themselves would only differ in the "Monitor" setting, where you could point it to each different monitor. But they can use the same graphics card. I'm not positive, but this may produce the results that you are going for. It may be better than any programs to send X applications between two separate X servers. Hope this helps!

  120. Example xorg.conf supporting four monitor by bakaorg · · Score: 1

    This is an xorg.conf which supports four screen display, two per
    PCI card. Note that not all X11 drivers support non-xinerama
    mode (certainly with one card, possibly even with multiple
    cards). Specifcally the Intel driver people explicitly removed
    the working functionality and refuse to believe that anyone
    actually wants this

    Section "ServerLayout"
    Identifier "Default"
    Screen 0 "Screen Samsung NV1 CRT"
    Screen 1 "Screen Samsung NV1 DVI" RightOf "Screen Samsung NV1 CRT"
    Screen 2 "Screen Samsung NV2 CRT" RightOf "Screen Samsung NV1 DVI"
    Screen 3 "Screen Samsung NV2 DVI" RightOf "Screen Samsung NV2 CRT"
    InputDevice "Mouse-MX510" "CorePointer"
    InputDevice "Keyboard1" "CoreKeyboard"
    EndSection

    Section "InputDevice"
    Identifier "Keyboard1"
    Driver "kbd"
    Option "XkbModel" "pc104"
    Option "XkbLayout" "us"
    EndSection

    Section "InputDevice"
    Identifier "Mouse-basic"
    Driver "mouse"
    Option "Protcol" "IMPS/2"
    Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
    Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5 6 7"
    Option "Emulate3Buttons" "yes"
    EndSection

    Section "InputDevice"
    Identifier "Mouse-MX510"
    Driver "evdev"
    Option "Device" "/dev/input/event3"
    Option "Buttons" "10"
    Option "ZAxisMapping" "9 10"
    Option "Name" "Logitech USB-PS/2 Optical Mouse"
    Option "Resolution" "800"
    Option "Emulate3Buttons" "no"
    EndSection

    Section "Monitor"
    Identifier "Samsung204LCD"
    VendorName "Samsung"
    ModelName "SyncMaster 204T"
    HorizSync 30.0 - 75.0
    VertRefresh 60.0 - 60.0
    DisplaySize 411 311
    Option "dpms"
    EndSection

    Section "Monitor"
    Identifier "Samsung226LCD"
    VendorName "Samsung"
    ModelName "SyncMaster 226BW"
    HorizSync 30.0 - 75.0
    VertRefresh 60.0 - 60.0
    Option "dpms"
    EndSection

    Section "Device"
    Identifier "nvidia1-crt"
    Driver "nvidia"
    VendorName "nVidia Corporation"
    BoardName "NV44A [GeForce 6200]"
    VideoRam 262144
    BusID "PCI:3:1:0"
    screen 0
    Option "DPMS" "true"
    Option "RandRRotation" "true"
    EndSection

    Section "Device"
    Identifier "nvidia1-dfp"
    Driver "nvidia"
    VendorName "nVidia Corporation"
    BoardName "NV44A [GeForce 6200]"
    BusID "PCI:3:1:0"
    screen 1
    Option "DPMS" "true"
    Option "RandRRotation" "true"
    EndSection

    Sectio

    1. Re:Example xorg.conf supporting four monitor by sundru · · Score: 1

      I agree with the guy who posted the xorg.conf above, i have a similiar setup where i have 2 monitors hooked to a single graphics card (single head) have xinerama disabled, and have a config entry in XOrg.cong which says leftof / rightof the monitor identifiers. This is enough to achieve what the poster requested. Maximize a window will maximize to one screen only. -S

  121. Re:Enlightenment +1 -1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well you're lucky, as a xfce user I and some friends decided to give e17 a try, not one of us lasted more than a week without complete window manager freeze up. As for freezing X, last time that happened the fault was on the nvidia open source drivers.

  122. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Sancho · · Score: 1

    So what happens if you have an application window spread across your two hypothetical desktops, and then you switch virtual desktops on one but not the other?

    I don't think that virtual desktops really work well as a metaphor in this case. Hacking in support for the feature you want would probably be a major kludge.

  123. does nvidia hardware with two monitor ports work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you tried using two monitors hooked up to one nvidia card? I ask because in WindowsXP with some nvidia cards that have dual ports, you have an option similar to what you are requesting. Each monitor has it's own space--if you maximize a window, it will maximize just on that screen, and, you can move windows between screens. It's like a dual desktop without stretching or some such if I remember right...

    Just that maybe nvdia has similar options for Linux with that hardware.

  124. iTALC by technosaurus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I had enquired about this during early KDE4 development - more specifically being able to share individual virtual desktops with one user per virtual desktop. This was for a school setting so that a teacher could help students directly from the desktop. This would have drastically reduced system requirements for a classroom setting, but basically the response was NO! what a waste of effort - that is useless. Fortunately iTALC provides most of this functionality but has a larger footprint than I was looking for, however it is probably suitable to your purposes.
    (student=1 workspace)(teacher=all/any workspaces) ... Linux kernel 2.6.33 will bring kernel shared memory & I too can use iTALC

    http://italc.sourceforge.net//

  125. Re:xinerama and xrandr by jimshatt · · Score: 1

    It's the 202nd decade (CE), actually

  126. Re:xinerama and xrandr by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

    I don't see the point of spreading an application across two physical monitors.

    For the use style I'm describing here, you wouldn't want any windows spread across both monitors.

    There's no need to make it do *everything*, just certain sets of things. There's no real reason X shouldn't be able to move a window between screens.

  127. Fedora Multiseat by celticmonkey · · Score: 1

    The closest thing I can think of is Fedora's multi-seat project:
    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Multiseat

    It allows one computer with multiple displays to have multiple X sessions. Unfortunately it doesn't ship with the latest release. And I don't think it supports sliding an application window from one session to another.

    1. Re:Fedora Multiseat by nullchar · · Score: 1

      You can run multiseat anywhere with a recent xorg (not just fedora). I run multiseat on Ubuntu 9.04; only had to edit xorg.conf and gdm.conf. Though I do have two video cards.

      You are correct, you cannot move windows between separate X sessions. But you could use synergy to access both seats with the same keyboard/mouse.

      Read more about generic multiseat here:
      http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html

  128. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > I need something in the middle — a separate workspace for each screen, so that I can have independent virtual desktops on each screen, but still have the ability to move applications between monitors (no need to strech one app across both of them).

    It's best to state a complete scenario. Yours is missing the reasons why you would want to have such a configuration. Maybe people would strive harder if they knew the reason -- or give an alternative solution which does the same effect with a conventional two-screen single workspace (for instance).

    That said, the old fvwm (and possibly also afterstep) differentiated the concept of workspaces and virtual desktops. Maybe some further investigation could help... or not.

    1. Re:Why? by crimperman · · Score: 1

      Well one reason I have dual setup is that I am developing something which spec says should be designed for a minimum 1440x900 in mind. My laptop can only manage 1280 so I have a second monitor on dual-head and use it to design the app to make good use of the larger desktop size.

  129. Re:dual monitor by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

    I use XMonad and was thinking the same thing as soon as I started reading the summary. Unfortunately the poster specifically claims to want a "traditional" DE setup, rather than a lightweight tiling WM. I've heard of using XMonad as the WM for Gnome, but I'm not sure how easy it is to set up or how well it works.

    It's easy to set up and works extremely well, but you have to be willing to hack Haskell to configure the thing once it's up and running, and you have to be happy with a tiling WM.

    That said, at the most basic, you just have to install xmonad somehow (apt-get, hackage, etc), create a Gnome desktop file for it (here's an example... just edit the path to xmonad and copy it to ~/.local/share/applications/xmonad.desktop), and then use gconf-editor to change this key:

    /desktop/gnome/session/required_components/windowmanager

    to xmonad. Logout, log back in, and enjoy!

  130. Re: by pydev · · Score: 1

    Windows 7 dual-monitor setup is simple because Windows 7 doesn't even have virtual desktops. That kind of trivial setup also works easily on Linux.

  131. Re: by pydev · · Score: 1

    Get a Mac. It's damn easy to use multiple monitors with it

    Yeah, I love how I have to navigate the mouse between the two screens just to use the menu bar. Keeps my wrists well-exercised.

  132. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Tordre · · Score: 0

    Bing it instead :S

  133. So I must be hallucinating ... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

    > Get a Mac. It's damn easy to use multiple monitors with it. Don't even bother under Linux unless you have an nVidia card.

    So my ancient ATI card isn't "really" pushing pixels to twin 26" displays?

    Or my older computer - 3 displays w. 2 ati cards?

    1. Re:So I must be hallucinating ... by The+Mighty+Buzzard · · Score: 1

      So my ancient ATI card isn't "really" pushing pixels to twin 26" displays?

      Nope, that's the pixel fairy.

      --
      Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
    2. Re:So I must be hallucinating ... by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      I've got 4 1920x1080 displays on my Linux box, works fine. Except nvidia's stupid drivers don't support compositing when in true Xinerama mode though(twinview does, but it only does dual head), so no wobbly windows oh well no big loss there.

      (I could use xserver-xgl to hack around it, but the project was officially abandoned)

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  134. Synergy by Fuzzy+Eric · · Score: 1

    I use Synergy ( http://synergy2.sourceforge.net/ ) to share one keyboard and mouse among several computers' displays. This should allow you to share one keyboard and mouse among multiple X servers running on your machine (and provide the opportunity for future expansion). It can even be used to do nonintuitive things like placing the "screen" of a VM (visible in a window on one of your screens) on an edge of one of your physical screens. (I'm still not sure that was a good idea.)

  135. Virtual desktops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do you enable multiple desktops on Windows without 3rd party software?

    With the Microsoft Virtual Desktop Manager powertoy. Works well enough.

    I like the OP's idea, which if I understand it correctly is the ability to set either monitor independently to any of the available virtual desktops.

  136. It's called Zaphod mode by Chris+Pimlott · · Score: 2, Informative

    The latter option mentioned in the summary - each monitor being a distinct X session - is sometimes called Zaphod mode.

    I have opted for it myself, but the downside of not being able to drag windows is sometimes a real pain. You can mitigate this to some degree for text programs using screen or dtach. I am interested in trying out xpra, which promises to be like 'screen for x-windows', but I haven't had time yet.

    Another issue is that some programs, like Firefox, don't like to run multiple instances. So if you fire it up on one session while it's running on the other, it will try to connect to the existing instance but fail because its on a different session. I work around this with a small script that detects what screen firefox is running on and prepends the appropriate DISPLAY variable.

  137. Synergy: good idea, horrible implementation by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

    I'd recommend going with x2x, if you have two X servers and nothing more.

    The idea behind Synergy is really good. The execution is piss-poor.

    Say I'm on one machine and type the compose key sequence for "aring" (å). Synergy looks in a hard-coded table for equivalences and decides to send (IIRC) [compose key, a, *]. Fine, except that doesn't work on my other machine. And it doesn't read ~/.XCompose at all, so all my nice greek letters and weird math symbols don't get tunnelled over :(

    Well, you could of course use the new under-construction version. But it doesn't have clipboard support. And the configuration file structure is completely undocumented (use the source). And it consists of a bunch of programs you have to run in concert, with no instruction as to how.

    Compare with x2x: $ ssh otherbox "x2x -east -from localhost:10 -to :0" &. Go. It does nearly everything right, as far as I'm concerned.

    The only thing I'd miss is having x2x suitable for gaming; synergy lets you hit scroll lock to "capture yourself" on the display you're currently on, and it switches to sending fake relative (rather than absolute) motion events in that case.

    Just a friendly warning. Consider using x2x if it solves the right problem; if it doesn't, synergy doesn't either, and if it does, it does it better than synergy in most respects.

  138. 6 Monitors - Ubuntu 8.04 - Compiz Fusion - XGL NVI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    6 Monitors - Ubuntu 8.04 - Compiz Fusion - XGL NVIDIA Working!
    http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=884161

    im running 3 monitors (24' 1920*1080) on kubuntu 9.10 kde4.3 with effects.

  139. Mac can do all this, even with Linux in a VM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look for a distribution of Linux in a small form factor and based on DirectFB.

    Take a look into SaWMan ( http://directfb.org/index.php?path=Platform%2FSaWMan ) to see if it will work for you.

    There's so much Open Source application footprint that re-implements simulated system calls in application space if it's ever displaced from system.

    It all works, and lets you move to other consoles by taking the Display environment of the host system to Xmove it to where you want to work from.

  140. 6 Monitors - Compiz Fusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    6 Monitors - Ubuntu 8.04 - Compiz Fusion - XGL NVIDIA Working!

    http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=884161

    Im running kubuntu 9.10, kde4.3, 3 mointors (24 inch 1920*1080) with full effects.

  141. XFCE + nVidia by thunderbee · · Score: 1

    But you didn't really research this did you? I have this very setup (one low-end nvidia card running the binary blob, 2 screens, each running a standalone workspace on a single session).
    I googled it and had it setup in maybe 1 hour, research included.
    In xorg you define two devices that are actually the same video card.
    You define the two monitors.
    You define two screens, each using its own device and monitor.
    There you go.
    I use XFCE, but I guess it would work with other WMs.

    --
    In my opinion, Scientology is a cult you should avoid.
  142. Avatar? by shallow+monkey · · Score: 1

    Did you watch Avatar a few too many times and now want to glide applications from one display to another whilst walking around the link lab?

    --
    My son loves the freaky blue dudes.

  143. Semi-proprietray but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We got something a bit different working at our place. We run on Solaris. 8 then ported to 10. One workstation (Ultra 25/45), with two screens side by side with two mice and two keyboards, two operators doing complementary functions. But the mice can move across both screens and manipulate objects created by the other session. And drag them back to the home screen if need be. If one user session goes down the other still has access to all objects, unless the machine has to be restarted, which is rare. A new user can just jump in and pick up where the other left off.

    We don't really market it to the outside, but it makes extensive use of functionality found in the Solaris API. Some custom stuff by us, but not a whole lot.

    If you live in the southwest US, there is a very good chance you've been affected by this system. Hopefully for the good :)

  144. Stop. Take a Step Back. by coaxial · · Score: 1

    What is you want to do. Running some exotic X config isn't a goal, it's a very specific tactic. The fact that you haven't found anything like this, but stuff that is close, but not close enough, should make you pause.

    What's your use case? Is it this: http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1528666&cid=30942320
    Forget the "multiple X sessions." Again, that's a tactic. What behavior are you looking for? It sounds like you just want a virtual desktop pager for each monitor.

    It's been a while, but I imagine you could hack something like Sawfish and Sawfish-Pager to do what you want. You just have to hack up some lisp, which would be good for you. ;)

  145. Re:xinerama and xrandr by ThinkOfaNumber · · Score: 1

    xinerama + xrandr does not solve the question posed by the OP.

    Yes it does.

    ... or a separate screen on each monitor which does not allow moving windows between screens).

    OP wants two monitors with their own separate workspaces,

    Xinerama.

    while still being able to drag windows between them.

    Xinerama

    In other words, OP wants to be able to transfer running applications between separate X screens,

    No he doesn't. You implied separate X screens. The OP just wanted separate virtual desktop switching.

    which to my knowledge is not currently possible (or, if it's possible, the functionality is not exposed in Gnome or KDE).

    Xinerama

    This isn't "+1 Insightful", it's "-1 Didn't bother reading the OP" (or "-1 Doesn't really know what xinerama+xrandr does").

    There are two types of xinerama. X xinerama, and nvidia xinerama. nvidia's xinerama is provided so that nvidia twinview (which fools X into thinking you only have one monitor) doesn't make windows maximise across two screens and dialogs pop up in the centre. You can use the original X xinerama without using nvidia's twinview which gives you separate virtual desktops and everything the OP wants. X sees the two monitors and uses it's own xinerama.

    xinerama is understood by metacity, compiz, wine, tvtime, mplayer, xscreensaver, and a whole host of other programs. Even if they don't, it's usually sufficient for the window manager to handle it.

  146. Re:xinerama and xrandr by data2 · · Score: 0

    I know that the OP said he wanted to use a "traditional" WM, but for those willing to accept something else, I have another suggestion: Xmonad. I have been using it for way over a year now, and it works like a charm in this setup.

    XMonad is a Tiling Window Manager written in Haskell. There are quite a few extensions, and it's not as hard to configure as one might think. There are enough example configs out there.

  147. Re: Credenza? by Frankenshteen · · Score: 1

    Could one of those USB mini monitors be configured to do this in linux?

    --
    "It's a doughnut stuffed with M&M's. That way when you finish the doughnut, you don't have to eat any M&M's."
  148. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

    Pedant-fail, dude. CE began with year 1. The first decade (applying the Gregorian calendar all the way back to year one) was from 1/1/1 to 12/31/10. The 202nd decade begins with the first day of 2011.

    --
    Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
  149. Re:xinerama and xrandr by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

    Perhaps you can explain to me how to configure Xinerama such that each monitor has its own set of virtual desktops, but still allows windows to be moved from one monitor to the other.

    I have spent countless hours trying to do exactly that. If it's as simple as you say it is, surely you can provide an example configuration file?

    But before you do, consider the following problems:

    Xinerama has the limitation that all monitors must be the same color depth. This is not always acceptable - for example, one might wish to run a fullscreen game on one monitor that runs at 8-bit color depth, while leaving the other monitors at 24-bit color depth. Xinerama does not allow you to do this.

    Xinerama does not enable separate virtual desktops per-monitor. In fact, the whole point of Xinerama is to merge multiple X screens into a single virtual desktop, which is exactly the opposite of what you're describing!

    Are you still going to try to tell me Xinerama does what I'm describing?

    Oh, and you claimed:

    You implied separate X screens. The OP just wanted separate virtual desktop switching.

    Please explain how to enable separate virtual desktop switching per-monitor without running a separate X screen on each monitor. (This is the whole point of the OP's question - if this is possible at all, it's not easy to do, and there's no documentation on it. Feel free to point me to some.)

    And, to drive my point home further, I'll quote the OP:

    I need something in the middle — a separate workspace for each screen, so that I can have independent virtual desktops on each screen, but still have the ability to move applications between monitors (no need to strech one app across both of them).

    (Emphasis mine.) I have described exactly what the OP described.

  150. We need dynamic layout changes in xorg by mandelbr0t · · Score: 1

    I've opted for the large desktop option in general. This is better than the alternative since it requires less technical know-how and screwing around in the terminal. I use the following script to switch between the two display modes:

    #!/bin/sh

    if [ "$1" = "" ]; then
    echo "No display mode given"
    fi
    if [ "$1" = "Media" ]; then
    cp -f /etc/X11/xorg.conf.Media /etc/X11/xorg.conf
    fi
    if [ "$1" = "Default" ]; then
    cp -f /etc/X11/xorg.conf.Default /etc/X11/xorg.conf
    fi
    if [ /etc/X11/xorg.conf -nt /etc/X11/displaymode-stamp ]; then
    touch /etc/X11/displaymode-stamp
    /etc/init.d/gdm restart
    fi

    I have two custom application launchers on my panel, one for each of the following commands:

    gksudo /etc/gdm/set-display-mode Default

    gksudo /etc/gdm/set-display-mode Media

    This generally works well. However, all the caveats posted above regarding the differences in resolution between the two displays apply: XRANDR does not work with my multi-screen display, so compiz effects are reduced to their minimum, and many applications do not work correctly as they rely on XRANDR.

    I used to have the two commands above on the gdm login screen, but Ubuntu 9.10 dropped support for custom commands in the gdm greeter. The custom launchers are a usable hack. MPlayer is set up to automatically play video in fullscreen on the television display. The real solution, however, is to get dynamic layout switching into xorg. I'm not sure of the technical barriers, but having to log everyone out just to change screen layouts seems like overkill. With laptop media centers becoming more commonplace, I look forward to this feature, and hope that everyone agrees that it is the best solution to this particular problem.

    --
    "Please describe the scientific nature of the 'whammy'" - Agent Scully
  151. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Tacvek · · Score: 1

    Logically speaking, the functionality desired is quite possible for a windows manager. Take an x screen, and draw a line down the center. Have the Window manager forbid applications from crossing the line, so they are constrained to their half of the screen. But allow apps to be dragged between both halfs. Now implement virtual desktops on each half, which are independent of each other.

    All of that is quite feasible for a window manager to do. Now the last step is to change this so that the split automatically occurs at the shared edge of two monitors. Still quite possible.

    I suspect most exiting window manages could have this functionality hacked in within a few days, if they don't already have support for the basic concept, but are just failing to expose it.

    --
    Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
  152. Re:xinerama and xrandr by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    heck, just "head" with safe seach off gets one decapitation and porn

    I'm horrified at thought what "decapitation porn" would summon

  153. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well, it would be an extension of what compiz can do where you drag an application to the edge of the screen and it 'flips' to hte next desktop

  154. four monitors for audio/video post by BabaG1 · · Score: 1

    as a 'casual' user, this kind of thing has been a nightmare for me. i tripleboot osx, xp, and 64studio in my audio/video suite. i'd love to start migrating to linux and 64studio for a lot of my work but it's been extremely difficult to find info on how to match the system under linux to what i have set up in both xp and osx. i use four monitors, three tied together to display as a single, extremely wide, monitor via a matrox triplehead2go. this makes the three monitors appear to the system as a single monitor. it was fast and easy to set up in both xp and osx. the fourth monitor is on the second port of my dualhead ati card and sits above the other three. i use it to display video for either video editing or the picture when i'm editing/mixing audio for film/video post. i've never gotten the setup to match what i have in xp or osx and have, pretty much, had to give up on linux for my work for this reason. this is a very interesting thread to me and i look forward to investigating some of the tips posted. thanks, babag1

  155. Re:xinerama and xrandr by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

    Compiz is just displaying the existing multiple workspace concept in a different way. It's still not moving windows between X screens.

  156. Re: by BitZtream · · Score: 1

    You can do what he says he's got and what he's asking for in OS X 10.5 or newer. I don't really see the point of duping the menubar though.

    Of course, as has already been stated, you can do it in X with a proper setup or in Windows as well.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  157. xmonad + KDE = awesome by fusiongyro · · Score: 1

    This may not be exactly what you want, but you can actually run XMonad as the WM on top of KDE or GNOME. It comes with a configuration so you still have the Kicker wherever you put it. XMonad also can float arbitrary windows, either programmatically by their name or class, or manually by dragging them out of the tiles. I've been using XMonad for about three days, with KDE at work, and I like it tremendously; prior to this my only real experience with tiling WMs was with Ion/Pwm, which apparently intentionally does not support Xinerama in the core, though there is a plugin for it. Tuomo is about the whiniest programmer on the planet though. Something about Finnish programmers... ;)

    Another thing to consider, though I'm not sure how doable this is in actuality, would be some kind of X proxy to launch your apps in, and then just run two X sessions, one for each display, and manually migrate them through the proxy when you need to. This, if it can be done, would be completely WM/DE agnostic.

  158. Re:Gentoo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ... but you are the one watching. Which is worse?

  159. Re: by nschubach · · Score: 1

    After reading this post, I imagine four monitors arranged in a square all facing out and on each monitor a face of the "compiz/beryl cube" where one person working on one desktop could pass their paper to another desktop and have someone else look at it. This would all be running from one PC...

    You could even have someone remote in with a single monitor and rotate the cube to see what each person is doing.

    I don't know how it would be done, but I like the idea!

    --
    Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  160. xmonad by jesboat · · Score: 1

    xmonad does what you want with desktops my default. Each of my monitors is bound to one specific workspace at a time; I can switch either monitor independently to any workspace, or manually stretch windows across the gap in between.

    You can use xmonad as the window manager for GNOME.

    It'll require a little bit of tweaking to make it look normal, though (you'll need to add window decorations, and configure it to make windows floating by default), or you could learn the keyboard shortcuts and use tiling, which sounds like it may work better with the way you want to think about screens anyway. (It sounds terrible, I know, but it's remarkably effective.)

  161. Re:if you are running a Nvidia card.... by duguk · · Score: 1

    That link just describes the two alternatives mentioned in the OP. It doesn't even address the question posed by the OP.

    In other words, your link describes two monitors sharing a workspace. OP wants two monitors with separate workspaces, while still being able to drag windows between them.

    What I can't understand is whats the difference between twinview/xineorama while duplicating the menu/taskbar, and what the article poster wants?

  162. Re:if you are running a Nvidia card.... by duguk · · Score: 1

    That link just describes the two alternatives mentioned in the OP. It doesn't even address the question posed by the OP.

    In other words, your link describes two monitors sharing a workspace. OP wants two monitors with separate workspaces, while still being able to drag windows between them.

    What I can't understand is whats the difference between twinview/xineorama while duplicating the menu/taskbar, and what the article poster wants?

    Replying to self... Sorry, realised he wants virtual desktops seperatly using Xineorama/Twinview. iirc Enlightenment WM does keep each screen seperate, including alt+tab, and does to virtual desktops the way he wants.

  163. Re:if you are running a Nvidia card.... by duguk · · Score: 1

    Replying to self... Sorry, realised he wants virtual desktops seperatly using Xineorama/Twinview. iirc Enlightenment WM does keep each screen seperate, including alt+tab, and does to virtual desktops the way he wants.

    Oh, or install Compiz, and try:

    "Desktop" area --> Desktop Cube --> "General" Tab and untick "One Big Cube" in "Multi Output Mode".

    (afraid I can't test it myself easily)

  164. Re:xinerama and xrandr by 3.1415926535 · · Score: 1

    It's not a flaw in X, the problem is that screens can have vastly different capabilities, e.g. one could be running at depth 24 and one at depth 8. That's not usually a problem these days, but the bigger issue is that they could also be running on vastly different drivers. For example, trying to move an OpenGL window from an NVIDIA screen to a screen running the VESA driver just plain isn't going to work.

    This fundamental disconnect between screens is exactly what Xinerama is designed to fix. However, like you said, window managers often rely on windows not being able to move between screens to *implement* virtual desktops. With most implementations, they're fundamentally tied together. A window manager *could* implement virtual desktops in a way that allowed you to switch them independently, but nobody's bothered to implement it.

  165. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know I don't remember for the life of me how I did this on my old desktop box, but I did it. When I hit Maximize on windows it only filled the one screen. I believe I was using KDE and perhaps a stupidly old ATI driver and xinerama. This was the ubuntu 8.x days. The hardware itself seemed to be malfunctioning as I'd occasionally get a 4x64 line that did inverse colours. Either way, I know it is possible!

  166. 2 Girls 1 Cup -- here's how by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just Google for . . . Oh, wait! Did not read article . . .

  167. Multiple Desktops && Multiple X Servers? by SavvyPlayer · · Score: 1

    A variation on this theme, how about displaying an additional desktop from the current user session within a nested X server (a-la Xephyr)? Granted we don't yet have hardware acceleration in Xephyr, but all in good time...

  168. Re: by peragrin · · Score: 1

    Actually I have tried them all. OSX is the ONLY desktop OS that allows HOT SWAP for monitors. that right you can unplug a vga, dvi, or display monitor and plug in another one and have the desktop resize itself without having to restart X or reboot the computer. It has been that way since at least OS X I never did try it with an OS 9 machine but then i never owned one of them.

    try hot swapping X one day and unless you have carefully set it up correct before hand it crashes hard. OS X it doesn't care.

    I have many gripes about apples controlling nature, and some of the weird limitations they impose and other than not having native network gui like X it is my preferred desktop.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  169. Re:xinerama and xrandr by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

    That's only half the picture. Maximizing windows only filling one physical monitor is easy - that's what Xinerama does.

    The hard part is making each physical monitor end up with its own independent set of virtual desktops.

  170. Re:Stop. Take a Step Back. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See this comment for the use case:

    http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1528666&cid=30940992

    Here is a post from another reader that gets it:

    http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1528666&cid=30942734

  171. Xmonad by chthonicdaemon · · Score: 1

    This is one of the front-page features of xmonad, which appears to be able to play with a desktop as well

    --
    Languages aren't inherently fast -- implementations are efficient
  172. Re:Stop. Take a Step Back. by coaxial · · Score: 1

    Thanks for the links.

    http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1528666&cid=30940992

    As the guy said "If the reason you want to switch workspaces individually is that you don't have enough flexibility in your workspaces (like you only have four per monitor), then you're solving the wrong problem."

    http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1528666&cid=3094273

    Like this guy said, just mark the app that has to be everywhere as "viewable on all desktops" and be done with it. That can be done today with any decent pager.

    Honestly, I think the OP just fixated on a solution instead of what behavior he wanted. Just mark something as viewable as everywhere, and be done with it. Or perhaps just have hot keys set up to switch between apps, but his proposed solution, just doesn't exist. There are other ways to get similar behavior.

  173. Re:if you are running a Nvidia card.... by green1 · · Score: 1

    here's what I have at home, and it drives me nuts.

    I have 1 monitor, and 1 TV hooked up, the TV spends most of it's time off, and depending on various things may or may not be plugged in when the computer boots up.
    I currently have things set up as 1 large desktop as I want to be able to drag things between the screens (so separate Xsessions is out of the question)
    I don't need a second task bar.

    If the TV is unplugged when the computer boots up, the computer sees 1 desktop the size of my monitor. if the TV is plugged in when the computer boots up, the computer sees 1 desktop the combined size of the TV and the monitor.

    Here's where my problem lies: If I boot the computer with the TV plugged in, and then turn off the TV, most of my windows still insist on opening on the TV, even though it's off. If the TV was not plugged in when I boot up, most of my windows insist on opening with their upper left corner at the bottom edge of my main screen.

    I just can't get windows to open on the screen where I want them to!

    I want a different virtual desktop on each monitor, it would make everything extremely easy. As is, everything is a royal pain to work with.

  174. Why? by dave87656 · · Score: 1

    Actually, since I set up dual monitors at one point, but found that it was so easy and quick to switch between virtual desktops that I didn't need it and it was a waste of deskspace and energy. The only reason I can think of now it either to impress people with multiple monitors or because you are monitoring events on separate screens where you need to see multiple events as they happen.

  175. Re: by AgNO3 · · Score: 1

    learn the hotkeys?

    --
    OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink :-(
  176. xmove by Pf0tzenpfritz · · Score: 1

    you don't need a special WM for that. Plain old GNOME, configured with two screens (not Xinerama and no "additional" Xsession - you'll start one session with both screens active from GDM) and a small app called xmove will do the trick moving windows from one (physical) screen to the other. I have definitely configured this a dozen times on Linux and Solaris machines with NVidia and SUN video adapters.

    --
    Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!
  177. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you cannot have applications spanning monitors in that case, that's the difference between the two cases.

    The GP is right, the poster wants a window manager that can manage changing virtual desktops separately on each display. But he also wants a traditional WM...

  178. Re:xinerama and xrandr by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

    Tasmanians?

  179. How about sticky apps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not exactly the same, but:

    How about making the applications "sticky" so if you change virtualdesktop the second screen stays intact.

  180. Re:4 Screens - one world, different desktops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe he has in mind what I've wanted to do.

    I want to be able to have one set of desktops or cube, but to be able to view that set of desktops on different monitors. For example, desktops 1 and 2 are displayed on monitor 1 and 2 respectively. Then be able to change monitor 2 to look at desktop 1, and see the same thing, or desktop 4, etc. No stretched desktops, not separate servers, but different VIEWS to the server. I tried to find something to do this recently, but found no decent answers. Anyone seen anything like this?

    I thought I had done this before using xinerama, but it's been a long since then. When I tried recently, xinerama has been depreciated, by Xrandr, however I could not get it to work.

  181. Re: by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    MacOS supported multiple monitors on Mac classics. That may have been with some rather hefty drivers from Radius, but it worked before many other systems.

    As for X, you're living in the rapidly fading past. Any reasonably modern installation with Intel works great. I have a eee 900 on which I hot swap a monitor on an almost daily basis. It works well with NVidia cards as well, using nvidias tool. The setup is even easier now since xorg supports configuration free startup if you want it.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  182. If all else fails, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ask this guy. He knows everything about the X Window System.

  183. A picture is more worth than a thousand words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://quadhead.istheshit.net/

  184. Re:xinerama and xrandr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't you get the memo? To correct the mistake, I rewrote the history to start at year 0 already in 1984.

  185. Re: by Jaruzel · · Score: 1

    Windows Devs: Please stop using MSI installers. I hate having to find the install files to remove programs.

    That's not MSI per-se but a badly built install table. Blame the mechanic, not the tools.

    When you install an application via MSI, the MSIEXEC process stores a cached copy of the application installation db (not the files, just their position and information) in a sub folder under windows. This cache copy SHOULD be all windows needs to uninstall the application. Ergo, in well behaved MSI installs, you do NOT need the original install files (just uninstall the app via Add/Remove Programs).

    However, because MSI allows for extensive custom scripting, a lot of devs add extra checks into their install routines, some of which would probe for the existence of the install files (even during an uninstall, which is dumb obviously).

    Hope this explanation helped.

    -Jar

    --
    Together, We Can Make Slashdot Better. I Do NOT Mod ACs. - Check Me Out
  186. Re:Stop. Take a Step Back. by smallfries · · Score: 1

    No. I used to use the setup that your first link describes for many years. It is no what the OP was asking for. It is his idea of a "best setup", but it does not solve the problem that the OP has.

    Coaxial's post is bang on the money in answering the original question.

    --
    Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
  187. Re:Stop. Take a Step Back. by smallfries · · Score: 1

    While the AC makes the point that there are alternative solutions that other people prefer, I think your first answer was bang on the money for the actual question posed.

    --
    Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
  188. e17 + xrandr! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm quite happy with enlightenment and my intel card that uses xrandr.
    works fine, handle virtuals desktops on each screens (not like this sucky gnome)

  189. Re:Google (intentional troll) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gee, if Google is giving you too much information, have you tried Bing?

  190. Re:Gentoo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The one who masturbates while watching

  191. No Problem! by unixfan · · Score: 1

    My set up has four monitors and ten virtual desktops, with specific functions/applications on each. For example, kmail is always on #10. On monitors 1 and 4 I have some key things, like IM and other things that I monitor. The content is visible on all virtual desktops (for those monitors). This allows me to switch desktops and always see the same content on monitor 1 and 4.

    I have two video cards which supports two monitors each. Use KDE 4.2, nvidia binary drivers for 3D acceleration and Xinerama, where they are all separate X screens. When I maximize it stays on the monitor I am at. I can drag a window to any monitor, and resize across all.

    nVidia's X Server Settings utility allows me to easily configure the set up, and I can save the result to xorg.conf.

    When you save you need to save to your own directory since you as a user should not have write access to /etc/X11. Then copy the file manually and set root as the owner. Restart X and voila! Lots of desktop space and freedom to use it as you please.

  192. mark parent redundant by heson · · Score: 1

    He wasn't asking for a frekkken googling, he was asking for working solutions. Have you tried xmove? did it work well? no is the answer one of those questions.

  193. Thanks by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

    I'm currently looking for a X client for Windows. I'll give Xming a try.

  194. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Take a look at Xdmx http://dmx.sourceforge.net/ - which combines multiple X servers (on separate machines, even) into a single, tiled, desktop.

  195. Re: by pydev · · Score: 1

    Ah, user-friendliness Mac style.

    No, thanks; for heavy-duty computing, I just use a better OS.

    OS X is fine for iTunes.

  196. Two Accounts by Vengeful+weenie · · Score: 1

    Create two account with the same UID. Log in on both accounts (you can set them to auto-login you lazy person.) Viola!

  197. No Machine by ClashTheBunny · · Score: 1

    NoMachine has this capability. You can run individual applications, disconnect, and reconnect them on a different X session or computer. I even set up the web based client that allowed me to tunnel into my running session over an HTTP proxy via SSH without installing any application.

  198. Re:xinerama and xrandr by jimshatt · · Score: 1

    Yes, you're right. I wish it was next year already, and you would've written 201st decade nonetheless, and I would have been right... If only.

  199. XMONAD does it, but it's a tiling WM by SparkGapTransmitter · · Score: 1

    I use the xmonad window manager, which does exactly what you want. The thing that will disqualify it in this case is that it is a tiling window manager. I use two displays. Each display is independent, but windows can be
    moved between displays, or span displays. I can switch to another workspace on one display, without
    affecting the other display. Any workspace can be shown on any display.

    If KDE does this now, as others seem to indicate, I might consider switching to it.

  200. Seems Easy Enough to Me by rdnetto · · Score: 1

    I have a dual monitor setup and on Ubuntu I get that behaviour out of the box. Each screen is treated as a seperate workspace, so it's simple enough to move windows between them. As a caveat I do use the NVidia propriety drivers, so I don't know if that makes a difference.

    --
    Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
  201. Compiz Fusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe from my understanding of the question, the simplest and most utilitarian answer would be Compiz Fusion. You can set it up
    with N number of desktops, apply the cube widget, and just spin it around to what ever desktop you currently need. I use this with
    dual 19"s and my productivity has really improved.

    -AC

  202. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My Mac sucks

    I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

    In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.

    I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 300 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.

    Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

  203. Compiz should add support for this by khanyisa · · Score: 1

    I tried to suggest this on IRC last year:

    Conversation with #compiz-fusion at Tue 03 Mar 2009 12:12:07 PM SAST on davidfraser@irc.freenode.net (irc)
    (12:12:43 PM) davidfraser: I'm trying to get compiz to switch my Viewports independently for two screens - the mmmode setting seems to have no effect
    (12:13:00 PM) davidfraser: I'm using Xrandr - do I need to rather configure multiple monitors in my xorg.conf to make this work?
    (12:21:34 PM) maniac103: davidfraser: you need separate X screens (separate screen sections in xorg.conf), otherwise it's not possible
    (12:21:50 PM) davidfraser: thanks maniac103
    (12:22:12 PM) ***davidfraser thinks this is suboptimal, particularly for laptops where screens are attached and removed mid-session
    (12:34:55 PM) crdlb: davidfraser: regardless, xrandr-output-specific viewport movement would be total crack
    (12:56:40 PM) davidfraser: crdlb: Why do you say xrandr-output-specific viewport movement would be total crack? Methinks it would totally rock
    (12:57:23 PM) adamk_: It would be one massive hack to implement.
    (12:57:41 PM) davidfraser: That's true...
    (12:58:15 PM) adamk_: Well what developer wants to constantly maintain a nasty hack moving forward?
    (01:02:40 PM) davidfraser: OK the question is is it a desirable feature - if so perhaps more APIs etc need to be added to X to make it feasible in a non-hacky way
    (01:09:52 PM) adamk_: I don't like it in e17, so I doubt I'd like it in compiz. I'm quite sure others would feel differently.
    (01:09:56 PM) adamk_: So get coding then :-)
    (01:13:52 PM) davidfraser: :-)

  204. Compiz output settings! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You need to set it up w/ twinview as one big monitor then setup your outputs in compiz,
    this gives you the best of both worlds.

  205. It's in the title! by lejerdemayn · · Score: 1

    2 Displays and 2 Workspaces With Linux and X?

  206. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    heh... man... if that's been haunting you for, say, 15 years, you have different issues to worry about ;-)