KDE Multi-Monitor Control Getting An Overhaul

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

KDE Multi-Monitor Control Getting An Overhaul

Posted by Unknown on Thursday September 27, 2012 @07:32AM from the the-gnus-smiled-upon-us-this-day dept.

Multi-monitor support on Free systems has always been a pain (even after RANDR made it a lot less of a pain). GNOME2 had a great feature: you only had to configure a given pair of displays once and it would do-the-right-thing and remember their configuration. But if you wanted to mirror displays of different resolutions, you were out of luck. KDE handled the latter case, but infuriatingly enough doesn't remember or restore configurations like GNOME2 did, and worse yet requires manual intervention before disconnecting a display. But, now that's all changing: "As some of you might have noticed, display management in KDE is not really something we could be proud of. It does not work as expected, it lacks some features and it’s not really maintained. Time to change it, don’t you think? ... Alex has written the libkscreen library that provides information about available/connected/enabled outputs and notifications about their changes. He also intends to write a KDED daemon that would listen for these events and depending on connected monitors (every monitor can be uniquely identified by it’s EDID) it would load specific configuration. For example, docking your notebook into a docking station at work would automatically turn on a second monitor and place it left of the notebook screen (or whatever you configure the first time you do it). Undocking the notebook and connecting a data projector in a meeting room would automatically set clone mode etc. etc." Additionally, the dock applet and monitor configuration UI have been overhauled allowing for quickly setting common configurations ("extend display to the {right,left,top,bottom}" / "clone") directly from the desktop, and direct manipulation of the monitor positions if you do end up needing to use the configuration program (article has a video and screenshots).

144 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

In Other News by sexconker · 2012-09-27 07:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

In other news, readers demand to know when Slashdot is getting getting an editor.
1. Re:In Other News by stonecutter2 · 2012-09-27 07:40 · Score: 1
  
  I see what you're getting getting at, there.
2. Re:In Other News by G3E9 · 2012-09-27 07:49 · Score: 1
  
  "KDE Multi-Monitor Control Getting" can be complicated application.
Window maker had it years ago by cod3r_ · 2012-09-27 07:39 · Score: 0

True story.
1. Re:Window maker had it years ago by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 23:45 · Score: 1
  
  Microsoft Windows had it over a decade ago.
  True story.
Finally! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 07:40 · Score: 1, Interesting

Finally! I use KDE at work every day and this is the one major thing that makes me hesitate always when I need to disconnect my computer from a dock. Especially when there are three use cases that are always encountered: desktop monitor, projector, and just the plain laptop screen without any external monitors.
1. Re:Finally! by anomaly256 · 2012-09-27 09:39 · Score: 2
  
  I know your pain, I feel it too when moving my laptop around between meetings and my desk frequently. Can't use Gnome any more, fluxbox is of course awesome but sometimes a little too minimal. KDE is great, except for this multi-monitor config issue. Sorry someone modded this 'flamebait' (seriously?)
2. Re:Finally! by Sussurros · 2012-09-27 12:14 · Score: 2
  
  I don't understand. When I plug in an extra monitor on my Fedora with KDE it is automatically recognised and configured, even when the monitors are different resolutions. All I have to do is to choose to extend my desktop onto it and chase up wallpaper for it.
  
  Of course unplugging a monitor without first moving all windows defaults away from it can cause problems that can be hard to resolve. Yeah, I begin to see the problem, but this certainly isn't just a KDE issue.I remember the same problems with another much more popular and rather less gracious OS back when I used to use Microsoft's offering.
  
  --
  I said - don't look Ethel!..., but it was too late..., she'd already looked.
3. Re:Finally! by anomaly256 · 2012-09-27 14:46 · Score: 2
  
  It's not that the monitor isn't detected and used by default, it's that it forgets the setting you specified the last time you had that monitor plugged in. Further more, the 'Multiple Display' setting item always says it doesn't detect that you are using multiple displays, even when they are listed in the monitor arrangement window. KDM also sometimes shows it's login window half on one monitor half on the other.
  
  Also also, if your monitors arent' the same size, a small window that appears on the smaller monitor can be off the screen because the virtual desktop is rectangular and you have no way of moving it apart from the right click menu on the toolbar - not the end of the world but very annoying all the same, just as all these quirks are
4. Re:Finally! by Sussurros · 2012-09-27 18:05 · Score: 1
  
  On my system it isn't like that. There are two monitors, one of which never changes which is 1920x1080, and one which varies.which is usually either 1920x1080 or 1920x1200. Everytime I log in it checks the monitor setup and sets it accordingly. About one boot in 400 it will get in wrong and a quick log out and back in is required. I've certainlyt never seen the login window split between the two monitors.
  
  There is no dead zone on the smaller monitor when different resolutions are used. The smaller or equal monitor is always the main monitor and that may be of importance.
  Wallpaper cannot be strecthed across the two monitors. If I want that then I cut the image into two parts and assign them separately.
  Second video adapters do not work if I want to add a third monitor.
  Panels and desktop icons can only be set on the main display
  
  I have not had the problems you describe with my KDE setup and I've never edited my conf files manually. It has all just worked, but it is only this year that I've dared to use monitors of different resolutions. I love KDE and my only regret is that it took the self-immolations of Canonical and Gnome to push me to discover it.
  
  --
  I said - don't look Ethel!..., but it was too late..., she'd already looked.
5. Re:Finally! by anomaly256 · 2012-09-27 18:27 · Score: 1
  
  What version of KDE is that? And on what distro? This is very different from what I see in kde 4.8.5 where wallpaper is always stretched across both monitors (and looks horrible in the process), the taskbar and panels are across both etc as well. It essentially becomes one big desktop with a deadzone around the smaller monitor. If I maximize a window it'll go across both monitors including the dead zone which is of course 99/100 times not what is wanted
6. Re:Finally! by Sussurros · 2012-09-28 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  I'm using the standard Fedora distro with KDE, the version is whatever version of KDE comes with Fedora and kde.org says it should be 4.8. I can't actually maximise a window across monitors on it, I could make a very large window that imitates it but not by maximising it. Now that I recall, KDE on Kubuntu is nowhere near as graceful on the same system although it does work really well on my laptop.
  
  --
  I said - don't look Ethel!..., but it was too late..., she'd already looked.
Getting Getting by wcrowe · 2012-09-27 07:46 · Score: 0

Is the medi medi cation cation taking effect effect yet yet?

--
Proverbs 21:19
I agree agree by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 07:47 · Score: 0

Honestly.
But this is Linux by CubicleZombie · 2012-09-27 07:47 · Score: 5, Funny

You're supposed to know how to hack your xconfig with vi. Setting up two displays is supposed to hurt.

--
:wq
1. Re:But this is Linux by serviscope_minor · 2012-09-27 09:23 · Score: 2
  
  Obviously you're being sarcastic, but the correct response would be to tell people to use xrandr by hand. Editing the config file requires you to (a) have one and (b) restart X.
  I use arandr these days. It does a good enough job.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
2. Re:But this is Linux by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 22:49 · Score: 0
  
  http://xkcd.com/963/
3. Re:But this is Linux by ericcc65 · 2012-09-28 02:31 · Score: 2
  
  You're supposed to know how to hack your xconfig with vi. Setting up two displays is supposed to hurt.
  Don't be ridiculous, you're allowed to use vim in this day and age.
Vanilla version please.... by ModernGeek · 2012-09-27 07:49 · Score: 3, Interesting

I'd like to see more vanilla versions of this software. Open Source Software has become almost as bad as the commercial counter parts in wanting to wrap everything up as one big GUI package. I don't want a bunch of bologna to download and run to configure dual monitors if I want to use a very lightweight window manager, or setup an embedded solution such as a kiosk.

One of the original and cool ideas of open source was to allow hackers to dive into the utilities and do really cool things with them that they aren't meant to achieve. A multi monitor control system that is tied into a blob of libraries doesn't sound appealing to me. I'll take a 32KB application that has an /optional/ GUI front end over this junk any day.

--
Sig: I stole this sig.
1. Re:Vanilla version please.... by jonnythan · 2012-09-27 08:00 · Score: 2
  
  Here's the other side of open source: "write it yourself."
2. Re:Vanilla version please.... by skids · 2012-09-27 08:10 · Score: 1
  
  Boy, you don't know how good you have it these days, to complain about that. Now you have dbus/hald standardizing things. Back when I was walking to school uphill both ways, we were lucky to have an EDID versus probing ID0-4 pins directly, and you'd be editing XConfig to set your VGA MMIO window base.
  Anyway, while I agree the "yet another library" thing gets old, it is my impression that the display system configuration gets pretty intimate with the desktop suite, and any generic library for configuring the display system would just spawn the need for another such library in which to specify the proper behaviors the desktop system should engage in during changes. As such be glad it's a library, and not just hand edited into a monolithic codebase.
  
  --
  Someone had to do it.
3. Re:Vanilla version please.... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 08:16 · Score: 0
  
  Anyway, while I agree the "yet another library" thing gets old, it is my impression that the display system configuration gets pretty intimate with the desktop suite, and any generic library for configuring the display system would just spawn the need for another such library in which to specify the proper behaviors the desktop system should engage in during changes. As such be glad it's a library, and not just hand edited into a monolithic codebase.
  XRANDR. It's all you need -- a daemon watching EDIDs and speaking XRANDR.
4. Re:Vanilla version please.... by serviscope_minor · 2012-09-27 09:29 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I'd like to see more vanilla versions of this software.
  Well sure.
  Here's the protocol extension: http://www.x.org/releases/X11R7.5/doc/randrproto/randrproto.txt
  Here's the xlib API:
  http://xcb.freedesktop.org/manual/group__XCB__RandR__API.html
  Here's the command line tool:
  http://linux.die.net/man/1/xrandr
  And here are a bunch of GUI wrappers:
  http://christian.amsuess.com/tools/arandr/
  http://wiki.lxde.org/en/LXRandR
  Which would you like?
  Open Source Software has become almost as bad as the commercial counter parts in wanting to wrap everything up as one big GUI package. I don't want a bunch of bologna to download and run to configure dual monitors if I want to use a very lightweight window manager, or setup an embedded solution such as a kiosk.
  Some times yes, but this isn't one of those cases. It's one of the nice really well designed parts, and not only that but any of those tools will work with any system. They modify the monitor layout, X sends a RANDR XEvent to the window manager and everything just works.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
5. Re:Vanilla version please.... by drainbramage · 2012-09-27 10:02 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  XRANDR. It's all you need -- a daemon watching EDIDs and speaking XRANDR.
  And an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.
  Ah, amongst the things you need.....
  
  --
  No brain, no pain.
6. Re:Vanilla version please.... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 12:41 · Score: 0
  
  Unless a monitor make the slightest mistake in reporting EDID, then it is hell to get it to work in single or multiple displays. Not impossible, but a stiff breeze would mess up my xorg.conf
7. Re:Vanilla version please.... by dargaud · 2012-09-27 22:00 · Score: 1
  
  There's also a simple command line app that can switch between X11 configurations easily. You set up the different configurations you want (laptop on the go, projector, multi monitor, etc, memorize them and then recall them when you need). I won't be much more informative that that because I don't remember the name of the app !
  
  --
  Non-Linux Penguins ?
8. Re:Vanilla version please.... by gshegosh · 2012-09-27 22:17 · Score: 2
  
  $ ls -lAh /usr/bin/disper -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1,3K pa 19 2011 /usr/bin/disper
  Is 1,3K app good enough for you? Disper is also great when configured for Meta+Fn keys in KDE, I have a simple way of switching display modes almost as good as the one on Windows 7.
9. Re:Vanilla version please.... by serviscope_minor · 2012-09-27 22:44 · Score: 1
  
  There's also a simple command line app that can switch between X11 configurations easily. You set up the different configurations you want (laptop on the go, projector, multi monitor, etc, memorize them and then recall them when you need). I won't be much more informative that that because I don't remember the name of the app !
  There's also the option to add:
  alias 'xrandr --blah' setup_monitor_projector
  alish 'xrandr --foo' setup_monitor_internal_only
  etc, or put each line in a file in ~/bin and chmod +x it.
  Not that I do. I usually type ^Rxrand and scowl if it's gone from my history and I have to type it in by hand.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
Just Free Systems by danbert8 · 2012-09-27 07:49 · Score: 0

I don't think Windows handles multiple monitors very well either. It's not just free operating systems, it's all operating systems. 3rd party utilities are the only thing that come close to making multiple monitors behave well.

--
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
1. Re:Just Free Systems by SJHillman · 2012-09-27 07:55 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Windows XP did multi-monitors fairly well. Windows 7 handles it excellently. I have five monitors and when replacing one of the video cards, I changed which monitors were plugged into which card. As soon as Windows 7 booted, it automatically corrected for switching the cables around so that the monitors were all exactly as they were when I powered down the system in spite of every monitor being plugged into a different card and port.
  Not to say Win7 isn't lacking some features, but nothing free or cheap software like Ultramon doesn't fix (IE: fine-tuning relative positions, multi-monitor wallpaper, taskbar across all monitors), but the essential parts of multi-monitors are handled very well.
2. Re:Just Free Systems by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 08:04 · Score: 0
  
  Try doing it with a laptop with the laptop's screen closed. All kinds of fun can occur. My favorite time was a dual monitor display with the right screen being on both monitors. When you click to change monitor settings it would appear on the left monitor (which wasn't displayed).
3. Re:Just Free Systems by kelemvor4 · 2012-09-27 08:21 · Score: 0, Redundant
  
  I use a dock with my Win7 laptop and connect to an external monitor. It works perfectly for me, I don't even have to do anything other than connect the laptop to the dock.
4. Re:Just Free Systems by TemporalBeing · 2012-09-27 08:25 · Score: 2
  
  Windows XP did multi-monitors fairly well. Windows 7 handles it excellently. I have five monitors and when replacing one of the video cards, I changed which monitors were plugged into which card. As soon as Windows 7 booted, it automatically corrected for switching the cables around so that the monitors were all exactly as they were when I powered down the system in spite of every monitor being plugged into a different card and port.
  Not to say Win7 isn't lacking some features, but nothing free or cheap software like Ultramon doesn't fix (IE: fine-tuning relative positions, multi-monitor wallpaper, taskbar across all monitors), but the essential parts of multi-monitors are handled very well.
  How well Windows supported it was largely up to how well the video card drivers supported it. Some systems required rebooting in order to get it to recognize the additional monitor; others would work without a problem. It was typically consistent for any given driver, but very hit-and-miss between video cards/driver versions.
  
  --
  Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
5. Re:Just Free Systems by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 10:15 · Score: 0
  
  Indeed. One frustrating issue I have with Windows 7 is that my second monitor is connected to a KVM switch and when I switch to my Linux box and back to W7 only one monitor is active. I have to manually detect displays in W7 for it to go back to normal.
6. Re:Just Free Systems by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 15:20 · Score: 1
  
  Indeed. One frustrating issue I have with Windows 7 is that my second monitor is connected to a KVM switch and when I switch to my Linux box and back to W7 only one monitor is active. I have to manually detect displays in W7 for it to go back to normal.
  You need to get yourself a better KVM switch, that passes through the EDID information.
7. Re:Just Free Systems by drsmithy · 2012-09-27 19:12 · Score: 1
  
  How well Windows supported it was largely up to how well the video card drivers supported it. Some systems required rebooting in order to get it to recognize the additional monitor; others would work without a problem. It was typically consistent for any given driver, but very hit-and-miss between video cards/driver versions.
  Before Windows 2000, yes. Since then, what you describe would be extremely unusual.
8. Re:Just Free Systems by TemporalBeing · 2012-09-28 01:59 · Score: 1
  
  How well Windows supported it was largely up to how well the video card drivers supported it. Some systems required rebooting in order to get it to recognize the additional monitor; others would work without a problem. It was typically consistent for any given driver, but very hit-and-miss between video cards/driver versions.
  Before Windows 2000, yes. Since then, what you describe would be extremely unusual.
  I had that problem on a number of WinXP systems, so no it's still very much the norm. Now may be the Video driver rewrite for Vista corrected some of that for Vista and Win7, and now Win8. Microsoft has been slowly building in proper multi-monitor support, but even with what they provide there still a lot of details left to the video card drivers.
  
  --
  Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
9. Re:Just Free Systems by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-28 05:17 · Score: 0
  
  Windows 98 did multiple monitors pretty well. Why is Linux 13 years late on such a basic feature? We demanded multiple monitors in OpenOffice.org's presentation program, and it took a ridiculous amount of time for them to implement it, too. Why does it take so long for Linux to implement such simple features that a large percentage of users rely on?
year of the linux! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 07:50 · Score: 0, Insightful

geez, someone remind me why linux hasn't taken off yet? oh yeah, because every bit of setup and configuration is a pain in the ass.
1. Re:year of the linux! by Scutter · 2012-09-27 08:15 · Score: 2
  
  I was confused by the whole "refuses to remember or restore configurations" thing. WTF? This is 2012. EVERYONE has multiple monitors. How is it in any way acceptable that the OS refuses to remember your monitor config?
  
  --
  
  "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
2. Re:year of the linux! by Urza9814 · 2012-09-27 08:25 · Score: 1
  
  I was confused by the whole 'multiple monitors are a pain' thing. I've been running KDE for close to a decade and for the past couple years multi-monitor support has never been a problem. Of course, I'll admit, mostly when I'm using multiple monitors I'm cloning the display to watch a movie or something...but I plug it in, it mirrors. I unplug it, it disconnects. What's so hard there?
3. Re:year of the linux! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 11:22 · Score: 0, Interesting
  
  This is 2012 and yet a lot of the free software refuse to handle the space character in the file name and/or path.
  I am not talking about small one developer jobs. See Eclipse projects for example. On Windows, the main program directories have space and these free software sticks out like a sore thumb on their own at the root level.
  If they failed for something as simple as string handling, multiple monitors are beyond them.
4. Re:year of the linux! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 21:27 · Score: 0
  
  Also, how come we can go to the Moon but can't make my feet smell good?
Win 7 by SJHillman · 2012-09-27 07:51 · Score: 5, Insightful

And here Windows 7 handles five monitors using three different resolutions flawlessly. Thanks to Ultramon, they line up seamlessly in spite of also being different sizes and being at different physical elevations. It's one of the more major things that has kept me on Windows - I look forward to Linux being able to do the same.
1. Re:Win 7 by Osgeld · 2012-09-27 07:55 · Score: 1
  
  heh, XP handled it pretty well too though not as automatic
2. Re:Win 7 by mcgrew · 2012-09-27 08:02 · Score: 2
  
  Linux had multi-monitor support years before Windows did.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
3. Re:Win 7 by checho4 · 2012-09-27 08:09 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  It doesn't matter what had it first. I just want to use whatever currently has it best.
4. Re:Win 7 by Scutter · 2012-09-27 08:16 · Score: 1
  
  According to the OP, it has multi-monitor support, but things like actually remembering the configuration you apply is inexplicably beyond its capabilities.
  
  --
  
  "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
5. Re:Win 7 by houghi · 2012-09-27 08:17 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  XFCE user here. 3 different monitors of different sizes. 2 different video cards. No Xinerama and no seperate X screens, so I can switch workspaces on the other screens individually. Others who would like Xinerama can have that as well. I have connected 4 monitors as well. I can line them up any way I like. e.g. with 4, ---, L, +, T, reversed T. Space in between or connected.
  The limit in screens is pure hardware. Adding cards would mean the ability to adding monitors.
  I will soon be adding a 4th monitor and am looking at adding another video card and 2 more monitors.
  Yep, it does not work in KDE or in GNOME how _I_ want it to run in the 5 minutes I tried, because it seems that they both handle things as one big screen (in any order) and I want my separate X sessions. Otherwise that would be working too.
  Screen-shot from an older setup. The image is from 2006. Two identical screens there. http://houghi.org/shots/dualscreen.jpg
  I have been doing multiple screens since around 1998. All with GUI software to make it easy for me and no manual editing of xorg.conf. All in Linux.
  
  --
  Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
6. Re:Win 7 by JK_the_Slacker · 2012-09-27 08:21 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Congratulations, Windows 7 with specialized third-party software handles multiple monitors flawlessly!
  
  --
  I'm waiting for a "-1 somepeoplejustshouldn'tgetmodprivileges" meta-moderation.
7. Re:Win 7 by tlhIngan · 2012-09-27 08:21 · Score: 1
  
  Linux had multi-monitor support years before Windows did.
  MacOS had it before Linux I believe...
  Supposedly it dates back to the Macintosh II which supported multiple monitors.
  Then again, DOS might be the very first use...
8. Re:Win 7 by TemporalBeing · 2012-09-27 08:29 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  According to the OP, it has multi-monitor support, but things like actually remembering the configuration you apply is inexplicably beyond its capabilities.
  It remembers the configuration until you change the configuration. That is, with a desktop where you have several monitors connected all the time it won't be an issue. But with a laptop where you may have an external monitor part of the time then it is an issue whenever you switch between laptop only mode, and laptop plus external monitor mode. What's most annoying is when you have the external display as the primary; when you disconnect it the multi-monitor dialog prompting on to reconfigure shows up on the external monitor, not the only remaining monitor - so you're kind of screwed. Currently I make it a point to reconfigure to clone mode before undocking my laptop.
  
  --
  Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
9. Re:Win 7 by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 08:36 · Score: 0
  
  XP here at work and I have exactly this issue. Well, my docked configuration is two external monitors, but yeah, it keeps putting the right one on the left side and vise-versa. As such I tend to just not undock my computer unless I really need to.
10. Re:Win 7 by dballanc · 2012-09-27 08:39 · Score: 1
  
  It's nice to be able to drag things around, and unless I'm remembering incorrectly separate x sessions are just that. If you open a window on display Y it stays on display Y. Back when I was first using dual monitors I had them set that way and things were a bit quirky. Firefox wouldn't open on one dislay if it was already open on another, there were a few other apps that didn't play nice either. I'm currently on two monitors via twinview and a third via synergy on a different machine (which is a bit like a separate x session), and while it is functional - that third screen doesn't get used for much because it's not possible to drag a window over to primary (easier to read) screen for some work and then toss the window back to the side when I'm done with it.
11. Re:Win 7 by jimicus · 2012-09-27 08:52 · Score: 1
  
  This is technically true. However, I haven't forgotten the hours it took me to hand-edit my XFree86.conf long after it had become unnecessary to do so for single-monitor configurations.
  When I finally got a configuration I was happy with, I found that I had to be very careful to keep hold of that configuration file no matter what else I did - whether it was upgrading or moving to a different distribution altogether. It was the only way to be sure I could get it to work again.
  It was having to go through this same dance every time I wanted to use a new peripheral that drove me away from desktop linux. Granted, most of those issues have long since evaporated - but it's disappointing to learn that some still exist.
12. Re:Win 7 by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 08:55 · Score: 0
  
  Did they? Years? The grass is so long out there, I don't remember. W98 had multiple-monitor support. KDE 1.0 was only released in 98, Gnome 1.0 in 99. Linux desktop suites were just getting started.
  Pretty darn certain I ran multi-monitors on W95 OSR2 with a third-party app. Not "default built-in" for sure, but Linux in those days was something you put together with parts too.
  So, what years were you talking about?
13. Re:Win 7 by washu_k · 2012-09-27 08:56 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Then again, DOS might be the very first use...
  DOS did have multi monitor support from day 1, but not in the way we think of it today. You could combine a CGA card (or later EGA, VGA, etc) with an MDA (monochrome, text only) card. The idea was to use the MDA for high resolution (at the time) text and the CGA for low res graphics. Software had to be specifically written for it, but it was possible. Later, some DOS debuggers could use the MDA as a debug output separate from the main screen.
14. Re:Win 7 by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 09:01 · Score: 0
  
  I've never had a problem with 7, but whenever XP booted up the wrong way, I'd end up swapping the monitor cables which would work a few more months until XP decided to change them again.
  X's support for multiple monitors is actually awesome but that power requires wading knee deep into the X configuration file and hoping you live to tell the tale. Utilities like this will definitely help in the desktop world.
15. Re:Win 7 by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 09:01 · Score: 0
  
  Bullshit. X didn't get multi-monitor until Xinerama in 1998 which was years after you could do multi-monitor in Windows. Yes it was only "officially added to Windows in Win98, but there were options to get it long before then with third party options from companies like Matrox. These options existed since at least 1995 if not earlier. Also, the Macintosh II had multi-monitor support in 1987. So crowing about Linux getting it 12 years later is somewhat hilarious.
  Basically, your claim is bogus.
16. Re:Win 7 by Osgeld · 2012-09-27 09:08 · Score: 1
  
  My 86 mac SE came had a external monitor port and a radius card installed when I rescued it from the recyclers, so yea, its been around on Mac's for a while
17. Re:Win 7 by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 09:15 · Score: 0
  
  Sorry to nitpick, but the Mac SE was released in 1987. I believe the first external display for the Mac was the Radius Full Page Display, which was introduced in '86 and used some sort of daughtercard arrangement (the Plus didn't have an expansion slot).
18. Re:Win 7 by dlenmn · 2012-09-27 09:27 · Score: 3
  
  It remembers the configuration until you restart.
  FTFY
19. Re:Win 7 by Artifakt · 2012-09-27 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  Hell, Win 98 SE handled it pretty well, though again not as automatic. I used 3rd party software to get more transparancy effects on 98, but didn't bother with it for multiple monitor configuration. Admittedly, I was only running 3 monitors and never tested it to see if it could really handle the promised 9.
  
  --
  Who is John Cabal?
20. Re:Win 7 by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 09:45 · Score: 0
  
  Try setting different wallpapers on each monitor on Windows...
21. Re:Win 7 by SJHillman · 2012-09-27 10:08 · Score: 2
  
  Go re-read my post. Windows handles it flawlessly and 3rd party software adds in even more features to account for my fairly non-standard setup of different size monitors with different resolutions that are not on a flat surface.
22. Re:Win 7 by Osgeld · 2012-09-27 10:12 · Score: 1
  
  yea I used to run 3 on 98 as well, my then brand new 21 inch LCD, and 2 15 inch crt's on either side ... I was into digital video editing at that point
23. Re:Win 7 by JK_the_Slacker · 2012-09-27 11:28 · Score: 1
  
  If it doesn't handle your use case (which isn't really all that non-standard - the most common use-case for multiple monitors is laptops with external monitors) without third-party software, it's not really flawless.
  
  --
  I'm waiting for a "-1 somepeoplejustshouldn'tgetmodprivileges" meta-moderation.
24. Re:Win 7 by xaxa · 2012-09-27 11:55 · Score: 2
  
  KDE handles my monitor setup OK -- one large widescreen monitor, one rotated-right smaller monitor, and they don't line up.
  This is connected to a laptop (VGA and HDMI), and the laptop monitor can't be used at the same time (doesn't work on Windows either). The problem at present is if I disconnect it and plug in to a projector. I actually have two usernames set up with different monitor configurations; since I disconnect it so rarely this was the easiest solution.
  My colleagues have the same equipment but use Windows 7, and they had trouble getting everything set up correctly. Oddly, they mostly had different problems to each other.
  Linux works 80%, in this case, 100% of the time.
  Windows works 100%, but only 80% of the time.
25. Re:Win 7 by Malvineous · 2012-09-27 12:07 · Score: 2
  
  I'm using Linux with four monitors at four different resolutions, and they all line up seamlessly, even at different vertical elevations. Linux is able to do this just as well as Windows (in fact I would say better than Windows, if you have to download a third party program like Ultramon to get it to work properly), the only difference is that Windows/Ultramon gives you a GUI, while most Linux users are satisfied with editing configuration files, because that's what they're used to and comfortable with.
  It always makes me laugh when people say Linux will never make it on the desktop because it's too hard, yet being hard is one of Linux's strong points. Windows is supposed to be easy, but have you seen the quality of the average post in a Windows support forum? Giving Linux a high barrier to entry automatically excludes so many of those people, avoiding the forums getting clogged up with so many simple requests people could easily solve themselves.
  It's like requiring a degree when you apply for a job. You might never need to use the degree itself in your work, but having one generally implies you have a certain set of basic skills.
  I have often heard it said that there should be some kind of license you need before you're allowed to use a computer. Well there's your license - the ability to use Linux.
26. Re:Win 7 by siride · 2012-09-27 12:22 · Score: 2
  
  Xinerama may not have come about until 1998, but multiple screen support was built into X from the beginning. That's where the whole :0.0, :0.1, etc. business comes from.
27. Re:Win 7 by siride · 2012-09-27 12:23 · Score: 1
  
  It works fine for me. I use a second monitor at home and at work and it remembers the settings for both without any extra work on my part.
28. Re:Win 7 by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 12:44 · Score: 0
  
  Meh. This isn't 1986. I don't really care to be a "whiz kid" elitist. If that's what gets your rocks off, so be it. But it's a petty metric to live your life by. So be as geek as you wanna be... I'll have friends, a family life and a good job.
29. Re:Win 7 by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 15:47 · Score: 0
  
  I particularly don't care to edit config files when I'm trying to get my laptop to work for a presentation.
  Thanks for proving the old adage, "Linux is free only if your time is worth nothing"
30. Re:Win 7 by jimbo · 2012-09-27 17:25 · Score: 2
  
  I'm a very capable Linux user, have been using it since it came on 22 floppies. For a long time I enjoyed all the tinkering.
  Priorities have changed, I've dropped it in favour of Mac because I have more important things to spend my time on.
31. Re:Win 7 by rastos1 · 2012-09-27 21:21 · Score: 2
  
  Strange. Recently I connected a TV over HDMI to my Slackware machine. The TV has a lower resolution. On 1st boot the system has recognized automatically the new output device and set it up as mirror of the monitor and selected the same, low, resolution on both. When I went into Settings in KDE 4.8.5, I could nicely set up any configuration I wanted - the same or different resolution to both, the relative position, mirror or extending the desktop area ... Once set up and stored with "Save as default" it remembers the configuration. When booting up the KDM probably goes with auto-detected default - i.e. low resolution and mirror. That could probably require fixing in xorg.conf. I did not bother. But once I log in, the displays are configured correctly.
  TL;DR it works for me. Perfectly.
32. Re:Win 7 by Malvineous · 2012-09-27 22:40 · Score: 1
  
  Case in point - those who get tired of the config files and other differences move on. Those who are left behind, continue to enjoy the config files. I would put the case forward though that anyone who finds it time consuming or doesn't enjoy it, was never really suited to Linux in the first place. Those of us who can't live without the control that an open source OS like Linux provides could never settle for anything else, and for us, we're so familiar with it that we can do things faster than with other OSes (so I too "have more important things to spend my time on" which for me means I use Linux rather than Mac or Windows, both of which I find infuriatingly limited.)
  But really, it's no different to anything else - some people like to design their own circuits and solder the components on themselves, others prefer to buy ready-made devices. Some people like to cook, others like to buy ready-made meals. Each to their own.
  I would also say (in reference to the computer license) that even though you use a Mac now, your years on Linux would still make you an excellent problem solver, even under MacOS.
33. Re:Win 7 by Malvineous · 2012-09-27 22:44 · Score: 2
  
  So why do people still cook their own food when you can just buy ready made meals? Lots of people enjoy the process as much as the end product, and Linux users are no different.
  Besides, Linux has never been about "free" in cost or time. It has been "free" as in the freedom to use it how you see fit. If you don't like the time it takes, you're free not to use it. Nobody said it was easy. But just because it doesn't work for you, it doesn't mean it's useless for everybody.
34. Re:Win 7 by Malvineous · 2012-09-27 22:53 · Score: 1
  
  It's not really about being elitist. It's about excluding those people who can't be bothered to try, but expect you to put in as much effort as it takes so they don't have to. Most people in general are willing to help someone who is trying, but very few people like freeloaders. This is no different. If you could somehow exclude the types of people who aren't prepared to put in any effort, and only have a community of people who are willing to help each other, that community would be a great place. Because it takes some amount of effort to use Linux (albeit not very much) it automatically excludes a lot of those type of undesirable, demanding people.
35. Re:Win 7 by Ash+Vince · 2012-09-28 00:49 · Score: 1
  
  It might have had support for multi monitors, but it was far more awkward to setup and was never quite as good.
  I have been hooked on multi monitor setups since I had a Matrix g550 a few years back. Newly released Windows XP as it was in those days just dealt with it all beautifully.
  Linux on the other hand used to be a bit more quirky, certainly under Gnome. You could use both monitors as a single desktop but if you did the maximise button would insist on maximising everything across both monitors instead of just the one the application was running on. It also centered every new application launched on the join between the two monitors instead of letting you designate one as a primary monitor.
  If you chose to keep them as separate desktops then they ended up completely separate and there was no way to drag an application between them using the mouse.
  The fact is that while Linux might have had multi-monitor support first Windows XP actually made it useful.
  
  --
  I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
36. Re:Win 7 by Sussurros · 2012-09-28 03:16 · Score: 2
  
  Yes, I used to have that setup for debug mode in TurboPascal. One day I plugged the MDA monitor into the EGA port and vice versa by mistake. When I turned it on the monitor started squealing, the cat rocketed out of the room, and I just managed to rip out all the power cords before monitor's internals burst into flame. I can still remember the ghastly smell as if it was yesterday, not the smell of cooking electronics at all, closer to but different from cooking car tyres.
  
  --
  I said - don't look Ethel!..., but it was too late..., she'd already looked.
37. Re:Win 7 by Blaskowicz · 2012-09-29 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  I got this set up with two monitors currently, because my graphics card has one output fried so I used two graphics cards. It was a surprise to see the new X session come up on the left (my secondary) with default panel settings (even more default than the distro itself). This is on linux mint 13 mate, which is effectively ubuntu 12.04 with gnome 2, so my distro is not too unusual.
  Not being able to even move a terminal window and not having same desktop configuration etc. made me give it up after I couldn't force myself. I made a search about Xinerama and was confused, I wondered if it's deprecated, there's now RandR. There's xdmx but it would be like wrapping my display in a virtual xorg server or something. So, I would have to write a full xorg.conf while trying to use deprecated software with the help of outdated guides, or try weird thing, with no guarantee of success. Windows 98SE supported multiple monitors on different cards, I did it ten years ago and you could click a checkbox to extend desktop. I also failed to get 100Hz refresh despite modifying xorg.conf the old way then trying to deal with xrandr, but that's another thing.
38. Re:Win 7 by Blaskowicz · 2012-09-29 03:14 · Score: 1
  
  "the only difference is that Windows/Ultramon gives you a GUI, while most Linux users are satisfied with editing configuration files, because that's what they're used to and comfortable with. "
  The difference is Windows has a GUI that doesn't change for 15 years, things like "system", "device manager" and resolution dialog are virtually the same across versions. But Linux, one day you find out xorg.conf is "deprecated" and you shouldn't use it. But it's a lie, you can still modify it. Another day, you find out it doesn't even exist anymore! It's still a lie, as the system is generating one for itself each time (it was already doing this last time as xorg.conf only contained bullshit like "configured screen"). Stuff changes and gets encapsulated in "dynamic" layers, so what you knew doesn't work anymore and the thing got a lot more complex.
  So here is it, what you fought to learn a year or two before is now worthless so you're a noob again, you just pray things work and it's okay. Until you come across a machine you really can't use in the state it is (maybe VESA, or no display) so you learn about X -configure and you can work again! But six monthes later you want to do something such as add a display mode, you generate it with gtf, you put in in the xorg.conf and it doesn't work because it's been moved to "RandR". you need to use "xrandr". but, there's no /etc/randr or /etc/xrandr or something like that in /etc/X11! so you try commands until one doesn't fail, great, xrandr has been told of a new mode, now how do you set it? I sadly gave up. Hell, I was considered an alpha linux guru when I used to do these xorg.conf things.
39. Re:Win 7 by Malvineous · 2012-09-29 12:18 · Score: 1
  
  Well it's certainly true that things change often under Linux, but most of the time the progress is good so it's worth learning something new. Like I said before, if you have to "fight" to learn it, then I would say you're not really part of Linux's target audience. Most people who enjoy using Linux find that sort of thing generally takes little effort, so it's not really much of a problem. Personally I would rather have things change and improve until they're really good, even if it means I have to learn something new myself. Learning is good.
  As a side note, I know it was only an example but I'm not really sure what you mean by the xorg.conf issues. I am still using a custom xorg conf today with the latest version of Xorg. Perhaps the distribution you chose decided to do things differently? You can't really blame Linux for something your chosen distribution did differently to others.
  And it goes both ways too. Since Windows 7 I can't find anything in Control Panel any more (where has "Add/remove programs" gone?), my DOS games no longer work, Internet Explorer and Windows Explorer lost half their features when the menu bars were removed, etc. Apparently Windows 8 changes even more. I still can't find half the functionality since it was obscured by the Office "ribbon." You might complain about Linux changing, but believe me, as someone who has to "fight" to learn how to do things in a GUI, Windows changes just as much.
My ubuntu 12.04 does it now by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 07:54 · Score: 0

When I disconnect the external monitor, it automagically moves APP windows and panes to laptop monitor, that is configured as secondary screen. When I replug the monitor, APP windows that previously where on it, return to it, as do the panes...
1. Re:My ubuntu 12.04 does it now by LifesABeach · 2012-09-27 08:01 · Score: 1
  
  It would be nice if Gnome, or KDE could handle the USB Monitor issue. I have some BVU195's and I'd love to plug them in and get something other than green screens.
2. Re:My ubuntu 12.04 does it now by TemporalBeing · 2012-09-27 08:31 · Score: 1
  
  When I disconnect the external monitor, it automagically moves APP windows and panes to laptop monitor, that is configured as secondary screen. When I replug the monitor, APP windows that previously where on it, return to it, as do the panes...
  I'm running 12.04 Kubuntu and no, it doesn't work properly when I undock my laptop; and yes, I keep the external monitor (DVI) as the primary and "to the left of" the internal monitor (LVDS).
  
  --
  Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
Pathetic by oldhack · 2012-09-27 07:57 · Score: 3, Insightful

They waste all these time mucking with icons, reorganizing menu accesses, and other such superfluous "human interaction" nonsense, but never got around to supporting something as basic as multiple displays.
It's why you're better off to wait for jesus to return than the mythical "year of linux desktop".

--
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
1. Re:Pathetic by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 08:09 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I've used multiple monitors with KDE for around six years now. Basic multi-screen functionality has been around for ages. They're improving it, not introducing it.
2. Re:Pathetic by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 08:24 · Score: 0
  
  They waste all these time mucking with icons, reorganizing menu accesses, and other such superfluous "human interaction" nonsense, but never got around to supporting something as basic as multiple displays.
  "Basic"?
  Methinks you've been hanging around people with a very odd definition of "basic" if, to you, it means people who have eight hojillion monitors active at all times...
3. Re:Pathetic by Urza9814 · 2012-09-27 08:27 · Score: 2
  
  Do you not understand the meaning of the phrase 'getting an overhaul' or did you not even bother to read the _title_ fully before posting?
4. Re:Pathetic by seandiggity · 2012-09-27 08:35 · Score: 2
  
  It's why you're better off to wait for jesus to return than the mythical "year of linux desktop".
  You should RTFM before posting this heresy. man revelation states that the mark of the beast is linux kernel 6.6.6, which predates the Second Coming of Christ. Older print manuals invoked kernel 6.1.6, but that turned out to be an error with a possessed dot matrix printer.
  
  --
  Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-rms
5. Re:Pathetic by couchslug · 2012-09-27 09:21 · Score: 2
  
  The "artists" who insist on wanking with gaudy UI trifles need to be LARTed into weeping pulps.
  They don't care about users. At all.
  
  --
  "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
6. Re:Pathetic by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 12:26 · Score: 0
  
  It's why you're better off to wait for jesus to return than the mythical "year of linux desktop".
  Jesus has been using Debian GNU/Linux on His desktops for years.
7. Re:Pathetic by superdana · 2012-09-27 15:11 · Score: 1
  
  His point is that *it should already have been overhauled*, but instead people have been dicking around with icons and other meaningless bullshit.
8. Re:Pathetic by Urza9814 · 2012-09-27 23:42 · Score: 1
  
  As someone who uses dual monitors on KDE fairly frequently, this kinda seems like 'meaningless bullshit' as well to me. Multiple monitors already worked just fine.
  So my point was that the OP seemed to essentially say 'rather than improving these things that already work, they should improve this other thing that already works'.
9. Re:Pathetic by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-28 01:00 · Score: 0
  
  The expertise level required to reorganize menu accesses, and other such superfluous "human interaction" nonsense is entirely different than the one required to setup multiple monitors. You are essentially complaining that interior decorators are wasting their time redecorating living rooms but never get around to redesign the structural sytem of the appartment building. No shit, an interior decorator isn't a structural engineeer.
Please rename the post by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 07:59 · Score: 0

to..
KDE Getting Multi-Monitor Control
About time by killmenow · 2012-09-27 08:02 · Score: 1

I run LMDE with three monitors driven by two ATI/AMD Radeon cards. I use the fglrx proprietary catalyst driver largely because I have difficulty getting all three monitors going without it.

Unfortunately, I am now quite familiar with my xorg.conf file.

My point: Linux multi-monitor support is one area where it has dragged behind Windows and it's about time somebody started seriously working on it.
TwinView by loufoque · 2012-09-27 08:06 · Score: 2

nvidia-settings
Detect Displays
Click on newly-detected display and select "TwinView" and "Clone Displays".
Click apply.
Done, works with all window managers.
1. Re:TwinView by ilikenwf · 2012-09-27 08:10 · Score: 1
  
  Use Nouveau - the nvidia blob sucks.
  
  Then, it's standard randr calls, and it's easy...oh, and XFCE has had standard dual monitor support for a while now, although it doesn't always place nice with nouveau/randr until you actually setup screen 2 and above as other screens. Otherwise, it just clones the primary's output.
2. Re:TwinView by mspring · 2012-09-27 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  Still too many clicks.
  Unable to store a successful config and reproduce it with a single hot key.
  After long time fiddling with nv-control-dpy and xrandr I have a somewhat working solution, which crashes the X server every time I go from my home config to my office config.
3. Re:TwinView by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 08:51 · Score: 0
  
  yeah what about desktop stretch/multi workspace? tha'ts always been a bitch with nvidia's driver.
4. Re:TwinView by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 09:01 · Score: 0
  
  Done, that is, unless you really hate clone, more than your hatred of MS and Apple combined.
  Thank god, nvidia settings can handle span just as easily. It came right when we tossed xorg.conf.
5. Re:TwinView by Osgeld · 2012-09-27 09:10 · Score: 1
  
  yea, but then your geforce 560TI runs as fast as a MX420
6. Re:TwinView by agm · 2012-09-27 09:42 · Score: 2
  
  Yes. Now try getting that to work with 3 monitors. TwinView is only for spanning two monitors, even if your graphics card has 4 outputs. You cannot get KDE to provide a single desktop experience across 3 monitors with TwinView, and Xinerama is going the way of the Dodo and is very slow. I have a triple head setup working with KDE but the only way is to have TwinView on the left two as a single X screen, and the right monitor is another X screen running an independant instance of KDE. Works for my workflow, but a single unified desktop it is not.
7. Re:TwinView by TuringCheck · 2012-09-27 10:41 · Score: 1
  
  Too bad my nvidia can't scale the cloned image therefore making the cloned mode useless...
  Many applications are also behaving pretty bad - like displaying a popup on another monitor than the main application window. Surprisingly, Windows applications running in wine deal nicely with multiple monitors.
8. Re:TwinView by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 14:11 · Score: 1
  
  Too bad my nvidia can't scale the cloned image therefore making the cloned mode useless...
  Sure it can. Use the RandR 1.2 scaling options or the ViewPortIn / ViewPortOut metamode thingies.
Year of the Linux desktop? by trevc · 2012-09-27 08:08 · Score: 1

Finally, the last piece needed to get Linux onto the desktop!
1. Re:Year of the Linux desktop? by OneAhead · 2012-09-28 15:11 · Score: 1
  
  +1 acrid humor.
They're really working hard now! by RocketRabbit · 2012-09-27 08:17 · Score: 1

Considering that Macintoshes have had these features for over a quarter century, this is great news.
1. Re:They're really working hard now! by Urza9814 · 2012-09-27 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  Linux has as well; the 'news' here is that now, how you set it up will be dependent on your DM rather than your graphics card driver. Unless you want to do it the old way.
  In terms of functionality this is _entirely_ redundant. It's just making things a bit easier to find I suppose.
2. Re:They're really working hard now! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 10:14 · Score: 0
  
  Eh? XRANDR is dependent on neither your dungeon master, window manager, desktop environment, or whatever else "DM" might stand for, nor on your graphics card driver (unless it's one of the archaic closed-source ones that doesn't support it at all). It's an X extension that any client can connect to.
  I believe both big overbearing desktop environments already supplied a rather crappy client to do it, but sane users used a third-party client that saves configurations (I used one for awhile, but the name escapes me), a collection of manually-executed scripts calling xrandr(1) (I've got three of these in a panel now, for docked w/ monitor, projector, and laptop only), or (for those who are hackish enough to do it, and yet patient enough to put up with the CADT-model development) a collection of scripts to do it automatically with hotplug, udev, or whatever incompatible hardware detection and configuration system of the day (been there, done that, won't get fooled again).
  What this will do is:
  * if you exclusively use kde, it "fixes" this problem using method 3, only it will be some poor K schmuck's problem to rewrite all the magic next time someone says "Hey, let's rewrite everything from scratch!". Which, I guess, is his problem, so good.
  * if you do not use kde, accomplishes nothing, and reduces motivation for people to actually fix the problem with further enhancements to the desktop-agnostic third-party clients. (but that's ok, because people who don't use kde don't matter!)
  * If you switch back and forth between kde and other desktop environments (perhaps multiple users on a family computer), and you have a custom automated script setup; now when you're in KDE, this will interfere with them. (but that's ok, because everyone should be using kde, not switching back and forth -- and when some perpetual-v0.8 programmer breaks your scripts again, are you gonna rewrite them, or switch to KDE fulltime?)
  If GNOME is like the republicans, KDE is like the democrats. They want to give you the illusion of a two-way choice, and you could make an argument that one is slightly the lesser of two evils, but the real solution is to ditch big-desktop authoritarianism altogether.
Great to hear by mike_toscano · 2012-09-27 08:30 · Score: 1

Really glad to see this fixed up. It will be a great day when my external screen is the way it should be when I fire up and dock my laptop in the morning. Long over-due.

Mike
1. Re:Great to hear by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 10:25 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, it'll be a great day when you learn to write, what, five lines? of shell script in your .xinitrc (or local equivalent). Definitely long overdue.
  The problem they're trying to solve, the one that everyone (except you and ubuntu users, I guess) doesn't solve by themselves if they run linux on a laptop, is not detecting and selecting a configuration when you start your session (or at any other given time, even at the click of a button), that's ridiculously simple. The problem is switching back and forth between states when cables get (un)plugged.
  And even that wouldn't be a problem if the Linux development menagerie could settle on a single hotplug system so people could write a few scripts to solve the problem and not have it break next year when they roll out the shiny! new! (incompatible) replacement system, and everyone could use their own version of those scripts. But with how often those people break stuff for shits and giggles, there's just no point investing the effort.
Multihead still sucks by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 08:43 · Score: 0

Good multihead support should be on kernel level. This allows multihead not needing the X-server.
If I remember my Inside Macintosh well... by swb · 2012-09-27 09:00 · Score: 1

...the original Mac had the basis for this designed in from the beginning. The Mac had a graphics region (65k x 65k pixels) larger than the display region. The window was a display port on this region.
1. Re:If I remember my Inside Macintosh well... by mspohr · 2012-09-27 09:33 · Score: 2
  
  And it still puts the menu for every window at the top of one monitor... often a long distance from the window itself.
  Why don't they fix this? Now that Steve has gone, can we challenge some of his idiosyncrasies?
  
  --
  I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
2. Re:If I remember my Inside Macintosh well... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 10:25 · Score: 0
  
  Now that Steve has gone
  O ye of little faith!
3. Re:If I remember my Inside Macintosh well... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 10:55 · Score: 0
  
  Might make sense for a side-by-side configuration (and there are, or have been, third-party haxies to facilitate this).
  But if you've got one monitor below the other (eg a laptop in front of an external display), a strip of menu bar in the middle of a contiguous desktop doesn't make sense (and is a pretty tough target to hit).
  As for why the menu bar is at the top of the screen instead of the top of each window, that was absolutely the right decision.
  If you don't believe me, look up Fitts's Law.
4. Re:If I remember my Inside Macintosh well... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 17:44 · Score: 0
  
  As for why the menu bar is at the top of the screen instead of the top of each window, that was absolutely the right decision.
  If you don't believe me, look up Fitts's Law.
  It was the right decision at the time, yes, but it's not so hot now.
  If you don't believe me, look up Fitts's Law.
  It states that acquisition time is a function of the ratio of distance to the center of the target over the size of the target. (If, as commonly suggested, we are to truly treat an edge target as "infinite", surely the distance to the center is also infinite!) In reality, the effective size of a 15" 1280x800 screen edge and a 30" 2560x1600 screen edge is the same, but the distance from a random point to the edge increases --and that's before considering arrays; I know a guy with three screens set up 4800x2560.
  Also note that Fitts's Law applies to a single dimension, but menu bar contains multiple menus, only two of which may be at an edge in both directions (left and right corners), while the others do require substantial accuracy horizontally -- thus even if the ridiculous claim of infinite size normal to the edge is maintained, time must still grow with screen size.
  Menubar at the top doesn't scale -- pie menus, gestures, and similar are where it's at for modern huge screens and arrays thereof..
Nouveau doesnt support CUDA by voss · 2012-09-27 09:07 · Score: 1

If it supported Opencl that would be a start.
We got back to the linux pain point, graphics. by chadruva · 2012-09-27 09:34 · Score: 2

While is nice to have better control over this features we need to first get them working reliably, I still can't get KDE to start with max the laptop monitor max resolution, it will always go back to a 1280x768 and I have to change it manually.
In the end we get back to the same old problem with Linux graphics, driver support. I remember back a couple of years having a nvidia card with the binary blob, most stuff worked as I wanted but screen adjusting and multimonitor had to be done via nvidia tools, but in the end of the day it works. Now I have an ATI card and I cannot get multimonitor working properly even with its own tools, on a more powerful card with more memory.
For quite a while I think there has been no real interest on doing this overhaul as most of those features would not work releably on most systems.

--
C-x C-c
Source Code by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 09:38 · Score: 0

Where can I get the source code to libkscreen? I can't find it on github. Link?
Cloning diplays with different resolutions by notandor · 2012-09-27 09:41 · Score: 2

In all these years of Linux usage I still have not been able to do clone a display while having different resolutions. Is this actually possible?

I want to present slides on a presentation monitor, which is connected to my Thinkpad (nvidia, binary driver) via VGA cable. At the same time, I want to see the slides on the notebook screen during the presentation. So the screen has to be cloned.

However, the native resolution of the notebook and second (big) monitor differs. For instance, the notebook is 1600x900, the external presentation monitor is 1920x1080. Is there a way to produce the signal in 1920x1080 on the second monitor, and at the same time clone the screen on the notebook screen in another resolution?
1. Re:Cloning diplays with different resolutions by TuringCheck · 2012-09-27 10:59 · Score: 1
  
  The scaling of cloned outputs depends mainly on hardware. Cheap laptop cards usually don't incorporate a rescaler.
  If you output to VGA you can use the rescaler built into the monitor. Sadly, this doesn't work with most flat panels on digital outputs - they lack a rescaler because they assume the video card will match their resolution.
kde and gnome users don't know what they are doing by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 10:03 · Score: 0

Been using multi-monitor for many many years.
Setup xorg.conf or xfree86.conf and done. What the hell is so hard about that.
Now you windows noobs who think you are l33t since you installed dual boot linux, and are running gnome or kde, fuck you, if you can't figure out something as fucking simple as a couple lines in your xorg.conf file.
And shit, you can whip up a little shell script that auto adds and removes monitors, as it detects they are connected and disconnected with xrandr in a couple minutes-- fucking simple.
Different resolutions-- so? Always has worked for me.
My experience with multiple monitor by phorm · 2012-09-27 10:14 · Score: 1

Well, I'm using KDE with two monitors right now. (left/right configuration). However, I configured these with the Radeon tool which works well with little fuss. Ditto with multiple monitors on Nvidia (the vendor tool works nicely).
My biggest complaint about multiple displays on KDE is what happens if you have a transient display (not always connected). When I have my laptop at my work-desk, I connect to a bigger monitor and have dual-head. However, if I don't disable the dual-head before using the laptop without a secondary display, baaaad things happen and I usually end up with a desktop that's stuffing new windows onto a monitor that doesn't exist.
Mind you, I think this might be at least partially problem with the vendor driver, but the WM should be smart enough to figure out that a monitor no longer exists as well.
Good news by Erikderzweite · 2012-09-27 10:29 · Score: 1

Filed a few bugs in my time, nice of them to take notice.
TFS mentions only GNOME2. How is the multi-monitor status on other DEs nowadays? XFCE, GNOME3, MATE etc.? Cinnamon would still be the same as GNOME2, right?
Only like by kiriath · 2012-09-27 10:35 · Score: 1

10 years too late?
1. Re:Only like by Christopher+Fritz · 2012-09-27 12:41 · Score: 1
  
  I've had two monitors for over a year now, and KDE's always recognized if I unplug one and plug one back in. It always remembers and restores my configuration. No messing with xorg.conf (I don't even have an xorg.conf file), and no playing RandR, twinview, etc.
  I have no doubt that there are issues out there, but multiple monitors works flawlessly with my one video card and two matching monitors on KDE 4.9. But, as I say, I've only had two monitors for about a year or so, meaning I can't speaking for the years before then.
2. Re:Only like by kiriath · 2012-09-27 13:07 · Score: 1
  
  It has become loads better in recent years.
  Back in the day it wasn't even really worth trying... you could do it, but it was a pain... it didn't work with some drivers, if each screen had a high resolution you couldn't run it at it's native resolution with some cards.
  All in all, I'm glad it is improving... it seems to me though that this should have been a priority long ago when both Windows and OS X handled dual monitors with ridiculous ease.
It's not that hard by eyegone · 2012-09-27 11:45 · Score: 2

man xrandr

--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
1. Re:It's not that hard by anomaly256 · 2012-09-27 14:49 · Score: 1
  
  So far from the point as to be completely irrelevant, but I still appreciate the effort, even if your motives and intent were possibly questionable
Support for four monitors on 2 different cards? by Nimey · 2012-09-27 12:04 · Score: 1

My work machine has four (yes) monitors, two on a Radeon 7000 series and two on the Intel IGP. Win7 works mostly[1] flawlessly, but Mint will only see the two Intel-powered monitors by default. I'm given to understand that I can get all four going, but it'd involve writing a custon xorg.conf and I can't be bothered since I'm usually in Win7 because that's what I have to support.
[1] fairly often the Intel driver will crash and be automatically restarted on resume from sleep.

--
Hail Eris, full of mischief...

E pluribus sanguinem
1. Re:Support for four monitors on 2 different cards? by Anssi55 · 2012-09-27 16:23 · Score: 1
  
  AFAIK single desktop expanded to monitors on different cards is not supported by X.org server. I think you should be able to get them grouped as two X screens, but that would prevent windows from being moved between them.
Macs.. just work by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 12:22 · Score: 0

Macs have supported multiple monitors since what, 1988 or so? That just work/easily configurable/reconfigurable..
1. Re:Macs.. just work by gl4ss · 2012-09-27 19:17 · Score: 1
  
  Macs have supported multiple monitors since what, 1988 or so? That just work/easily configurable/reconfigurable..
  haha you're funny.
  (my macbook pro doesn't properly output to my 1920x1200 monitor).
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
That gnome2 "feature" was an evil and stupid hack by dbIII · 2012-09-27 15:01 · Score: 1

That "feature" was a trap just waiting for people to play with it and end up with a blank display on login
If a user used that tool to set a resolution that was not available to the hardware the only ways around it were to create a new user account for them and copy the files over or to log in remotely and fuck about with the braindead registry clone (only worse) that is gconf - think a MS Windows registry only without regedit and without any man pages for the obscure registry key manipulating software. Think of that and think of how you would talk someone through it on a poor quality phone line with no chance of remote login and you'll get some idea of how pissed off I was at this "feature".
Changing stuff in xorg settings like any sane application (nvidia-settings etc) does gives you a way back if the configuration is messed up. Hiding it in a registry key that is inaccessable without undocumented tools that are not even on the system by default is a failure of design. Whatever gnome idiot did that (and I know it was not Miguel) and then wandered off leaving unsupported shit behind should never have forced their stupid idea into the mainsteam and should have just left it all to xorg until they had a fully working implemention instead of just an incomplete and undocumented demo.
Does this mean... by Trogre · 2012-09-27 15:23 · Score: 1

... that my taskbar will finally start up on a deterministic screen, and no longer the crapshoot of Left-only, Right-only, or spanned-across-both every single time I log on?

--
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Welcome to 1999! EOM by xtracto · 2012-09-27 16:12 · Score: 1

EOM

--
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
Newsflash by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 23:23 · Score: 0

Newsflash: the "desktop" isn't even going to matter to people like you (consumers) in a few short years. Desktops will be used only by content producers, and everyone else (content consumers) will prefer tablets, where (ironically) linux already dominates.
spaces in paths by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 23:53 · Score: 0

That is one "feature" that is about as brain dead as it comes. White space is supposed to be a delimiter between words. I can see how on one level it seems more cool and "generalized" to be able to have arbitrary chars in file names, and indeed software should handle these cases correctly, but it is really an ugly hack. It breaks the clean, simple, and intuitively obvious way of telling when one identifier ends and another begins.
Writing software that correctly recognizes file names with spaces in them is an admirable adaptation to poor naming by users.
Actually putting white space into file names is a bad idea, and putting it into the names of main program directories is utterly stupid.