Slashdot Mirror


Xig Ad Campaign Slamming Xfree?

San Mehat wrote in to point us to a full-paged Accelerated-X ad that has taken to some old fashioned mudslinging. The most incriminating quotes are "Buckle Up. If you're still using that free X server that came with your linux distribution, well hazardous conditions lie ahead" and "When the X server 'falls over'--crashes--the entire operating system goes down and usually the user unfairly blames Linux itself'. What do you think?

423 comments

  1. Scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On my PII 400/128M with G400Max, Xfree beta 3.9.16 clearly outperforms Xi's latest offerings. Clearly FUD is their only avenue left. If you can't make better software, LIE.

  2. Re:Actually ... by MasterJ · · Score: 1

    i have never had xfree bring down my whole system and the only time when x has ever crashed at all is when i have been messing around trying to make quake3/kingpin/half-life/quake or any sort of 3d games work.

  3. Re:The X server isn't solely responsible for C&P by daviddennis · · Score: 2

    I suspect the problem is that emacs uses its own system for cut and paste that was basically grafted on to the original emacs keyboard commands. That probably doesn't play nice with whatever was built into X.

    Someone emailed me suggesting xemacs, which I do in fact use on my SGI workstation in the office, where it works great. But for some reason under Linux it comes up with this totally bizarre and unreadable colour combination (something like black on a dark blue or purple background). Even using xemacs' built-in colour change commands doesn't switch it - I think it might be some kind of X colour thing, but I'll be darned if I know what to do about it. I'm using KDE with SuSE Linux, I think version 6.1.

    D

    ----

  4. it is a lot faster... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Accelerated-X is a lot faster than XFree86, even with the Matrox G200 card. It wasn't so noticable at the lower resolutions, like 1024x768, but at 1920x1440, XFree86 goes really slowly when dragging windows around, so slow that I had to disable solid dragging. With Accelerated-X, I am once again able to drag solid windows around the screen and *FAST*.

  5. Re:Article text by stge · · Score: 1

    I used Accel-X some two years ago. I remember having quite a few problems with it, due to some shared libraries it installed over existing ones.

    On the other hand I've never had a problem with Xfree. Never crashed on my setup.

  6. Please people, it's just an ad! by marvinx · · Score: 3

    OK, I think we all have better things to do than complain about a lame ad. This post should really have been "What's better? Commercial X servers or XFree?" Let's just take a deep breath and realize that what the post is about is just tride and true commercial marketing. I think we're all smart enough to see through this fluff.

  7. What video card. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Xfree does have some issues with some cards, but so does accelX.. Like the Riva..

  8. Re:Is it really that unreliable? by Waldo · · Score: 1

    "It's a total bitch to configure, but aside from that...."



    Try /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/XF86Setup, it's so easy, it's scary.
  9. Re:Put up or shut up. by bradstew · · Score: 1

    I'm with you. They could at least charge a reasonable price for it.

  10. I almost bought one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    About a year and a half ago - they were the only ones who supported my Number 9 card with 4MB of ram. Turns out it was cheaper to return the Number 9 card and get a Matrox Mystique 4MB than to buy their X server anyway.
    Now I worry more about a commercial product's death or consumption by an evil entity than it's 'free' counterpart.

  11. Re:Netscape Crashing by Craig+Maloney · · Score: 1

    That may be true of the older versions of Netscape, but I've found that 4.7 glibc is pretty stable. (Read: I haven't had many problems with it)

  12. Re:Signal 11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you are getting Fatal Error 11, this might be similar to the Signal 11 that can happen when compiling the kernel. Maybe you have bad hardware...

    (Btw: Check out the signal 11 faq)

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

    Would you consider Linux stable if an application crash caused a kernel panic, but was otherwise fine?

  14. Re:Article text by Why2K · · Score: 1
    ...makes will make people who never heard of it check it out

    This is just silly... Every Linux distribution already comes with XF86 pre-installed, so there is no need for people to "check it out".

  15. X bringing down your display by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've never seen X actually lock up a box, but with my old ARk Logic 2000 video card (piece of shit),every so often the screen would turn colors and become unusable. At the time, i didn't have a network, so the only recourse was to hit the "reset" button. *Sometimes*, if i was lucky, i could use the magic sysrq keys to mount root as read only, and i wouldn't have to fsck when it came back up, but that was only 1/4 of the time. Since I got my s3 virge, though, i haven't had it crash once (i've had it running non-stop for the last 22 days, actually, running as a bg process on some long forgotten tty ;). Runs like a charm, now, methinks the video card was flakey.. Wouldn't use X at all w/ that old card, otherwise i'd never get past 7 days of uptime. -dilinger

    1. Re:X bringing down your display by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have the exact same problem. I have the same card, and sometimes after only a few minutes of X being up it screws up the screen. It is usually when I am in Netscape and I am scrolling quickly in a long page, but it sometimes happens just loading a page, or in other programs. It is like it loses track of where certain points on the screen should be. I think it is very unlikely that both our cards are damaged. It must be a bug in Xfree.

      It can get *really* annoying. Usually I can control-alt-backspace out of it, but sometimes a have to hit the reset button. I think sometimes it crashes about 12 times in the course of a week.

      David Cornette
      dcornett@isilzha.ne.mediaone.net

    2. Re:X bringing down your display by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I think it is very unlikely that both our cards are damaged. It must be a bug in Xfree." That's one possability, another is a badly designed card. I seem to remember ARK chips being used in early Packard Bells.

  16. A more posative responce... by syntax · · Score: 2

    This summer I got a new laptop, which neither XFree nor AcceleratedX managed to get X working on properly (despite using the correct settings and the card was said to be supported, a Trident Cygber 9388 I belive). I mailed the AcceleratedX people about it, and they said if I would loan them my laptop for a short while (they pay shipping both ways plus you get to keep some mega protective case) that they would both write the driver and give me a free copy of AcceleratedX. Their responce time was within minutes of me mailing it and they were very kind and informative. I do agree that in most cases you're better off with XFree (especially 4.0 that will have dedicated DGA mode or something similar!) or maybe good old console, but don't give them a bad rep for their customer service. Also, I might add, AcceleratedX has a MUCH MUCH better configuration interface than XFree; I constantly fuck up xf86config and find myself having to run it maybe 4 or 5 times until I have a configuration that is mistake free. I'd also like to point out on the stability issue, XFree crashes on me maybe twice a day; usually I just get so frustrated from near every app crashing nonstop I'll just stick to being a console jockey.

  17. Re:crash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, it's the way privledged I/O is mapped - it's an all or nothing deal. You can't give X just what it needs - you have to give it what it needs plus everything else.

  18. Re:entire operating system goes down?? by Daffy+Duck · · Score: 1
    Umm, what about CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE?

    What indeed? My X server crashes occasionally on my laptop (S3 Virge/MX chip), and locks up so tight I can't Ctrl-Alt-ANYTHING -- no killing the server, no switching to a text console, not even ctrl-alt-del to do a controlled shutdown. The only thing I can do is a 0V-suspend, which is useless because when I power it up again X is still locked. I assume the OS is still running, but without a network connection or an external terminal (which are rarely available on planes and trains), what good does that do me?

    My only choice is to power it down cold, and wait for fsck to clean up the mess on reboot. So it's functionally equivalent to an OS crash, and that sucks.

    Does anyone know a way to kill X when it has seized the keyboard?

  19. Xig's servers have worked perfectly for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to admit, Xig's servers have always worked just wonderfuly on my systems. X386 was never that tough to get running back in the day, but that was because there wasn't as much crazy video hardware floating around :-)

    A couple of years ago I said "Feh, heck with it" and just bought the Xig server. Ran great -- noticeably faster than XFree86 on my hardware. I'm using their laptop server today, with the same results. XFree just doesn't keep up. Granted I don't get the nifty features like DGA, but I don't have a need for them myself.

    I also have to point out that I've never had any significant Xig-spcific crashes.

  20. Re:Article text by belrick · · Score: 1

    I thinnk you misspelled "CD-ROM tray" as "cupholder". :-)

  21. Sorta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Depends on your card.. The thing that prompted this add though: Xfree 3.9.16 is *EASILY* faster then AccelX, at least on the G400 Max. I dont know why they harped on stability though, that is NOT Xi's strong point.

  22. Re:Actually ... by Raereth · · Score: 1

    What actually happened that time is that X seemingly froze in the process of switching from a console back into X. Whenever I hit ALT-F7, I would get a blank screen, but the process list said that X was still running. CTRL-ALT-BKSP wouldn't do anything at the blank screen, so all I could really think of to do was kill the processes from a console and restart X; I didn't have to reboot the system entirely.

  23. Great! But where's the source?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    To really compete in Linux, they must make their source code available. I'm not even saying make it "RMS" free.

    With the source(with whatever license), I can:
    Quickly fix bugs if I want.
    Recompile on whatever OS I have or upgrade to.
    Maintain the software if the owning company
    goes under.

    Without source code, This is very close to Software Renting. Your lease expires whenever you upgrade your OS, or switch hardwarde...

    So I'd rather send a check to XFree, than rent software.

  24. Re:wow... by A+Life+in+Hell · · Score: 1

    You havn't used windows NT on many different systems, have you?
    I deal with windows NT every day. Bad video drivers exist there just as often as on linux, if not MORE often.
    At least with linux you have a hope of recovery if the video fails tho :).
    Yes, there are points where NT has advantages. THis is not one of them.

    --
    Commodore 64, Loading up the dance floor!
  25. Re:Netscape Crashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wierd i used libc5 version on my glibc 2.1 machine (debian 2.2 aka potato) and it used to crash every time i tryed to acces freshmeat , since i switched to glibc version of netscape it stopped crashing when i try to acces freshmeat.....

  26. Re:What a better way to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well of course we trounce Windows. Windows actually sucks. Unlike XFree, with which the only problem I have had in 4 years is some sort of memory leak with the NVIDIA driver. After it runs for several hours it will use up all my swap (I have 64MB of RAM and 128MB of swap) and grind to a halt. This is even with nothing running except Enlightenment/GNOME, or I have also found it to happen with kwm/KDE, and fvwm. But I can kill the X server at this point and simply restart it, it does NOT bring down the system. As an aside, does anyone know a solution to that? I'm using RH6.0, and I updated to 3.3.5 XFree hoping that would fix it, but it didn't. Should I try 3.9.x, or shove an old Virge back in there (the Virge never, ever did this).

  27. Actually ... by AviN · · Score: 1

    ... X has never crashed Linux on my computer before. I think it may have froze the display once or twice, but it was always accessible via network.

    1. Re:Actually ... by ywl · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure whether you'll follow yours own thread but I'll reply anyway :). I had some similar experience but I would blame that on my hardware. I got some 64M of crappy RAM - stupid me. On another machine, the system behaves much, much better. But as the others have said, try ctrl-alt-backspace, ctrl-alt-del or telnet onto your machine from another computer and kill X.

    2. Re:Actually ... by BorgDrone · · Score: 1

      But what if your xserver locks up your keyboard (had this once or twice) the mouse worked and furtunately I could select system->reboot but what if you disabled this ???
      offcourse you could allways use a serial terminal, but if you don't have one, you're screwed!

      ---

    3. Re:Actually ... by Raereth · · Score: 1

      Other than the one crash where I had to manually kill the X processes, X usually doesn't freeze for me. The most common crash I get (which is, at times, more common for me than Win98 + netscape crashes on the same system) has to do with my mouse, so I'm guessing it's probably either a quirk with my laptop (Dell Inspiron 3200, with a built-in touchpad) or, as someone suggested to me, possibly GPM. Basically, when I try to switch from a console to X, I seem to have a one-in-ten or so chance of getting something like 'cannot open mouse: device busy' (can't remember the exact error), and then X exits with 'explicit kill or server shutdown', and I have to restart X, although the system itself is fine.

    4. Re:Actually ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I find it very scary that so many trivial problems exist with X, and haven't been fixed during its very long lifetime. Is X dying of old age?

      It's not clear from your post what the "trivial" problems are, or even that the crashes you mention are at all related to X. (They seem reminiscent of problems with the window manager and various X apps to me.) If these are all trivial fixes, I'd say toss out some patches! The XFree people would probably be most thankful.

    5. Re:Actually ... by Suydam · · Score: 2

      This is a big problem that needs more clarification. I've heard so many people say "X Crashed my system!" that it almost makes me sick. I would wager (IANAXP...err I am not an X programmer) that 90% or more of the problems people experience are really just the fault of some buggy program. FUD like this only makes it even harder for people to draw the line between XF86 as the problem causer and something else like the crap I wrote last week that always locks X when I start it. :)

      --


      Werd.
    6. Re:Actually ... by bmetzler · · Score: 2
      I've had X crash on me more times than I care to think about; it doesn't seem to like my laptop's mouse.

      This may be a stretch, but are you running gpm? If so, kill it and see if that helps take care of the crashes.

      -Brent
      --
    7. Re:Actually ... by spinkham · · Score: 1

      You have to remember how many things can go wrong that people can blame on the X server...
      gpm may not give up the mouse in switching from console to X, window manager may crash and you lose pager functionality, etc...
      I've never has an X crash, but I have had window manager crashes...

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    8. Re:Actually ... by Utter · · Score: 1

      No X has never crashed on me (three years that is). Of course I don't have a bleeding edge graphics card with my Matrox Mystique.

      The worst that has happened is that lesstif has stolen the keyboard input and the mouse (until they fixed the problem last year). I had to go to another computer and kill the Motif application. (It was DDD, just for the record)

      Actually, I can't even remember if Linux has ever crashed for ne. :) My NT box at work dies about once a week. :(

    9. Re:Actually ... by jnik · · Score: 1

      Even more than that: Control registers generally show up in the X memory footprint. I belive that Daryll said there's something like 48MB of control registers on the Banshee, for example.

    10. Re:Actually ... by handorf · · Score: 1

      You may want to take a look at VNC. Let me see if I've got the link handy... AH. here we are. Kind of like a PC-Anywhere/Screen thing for X. Take a look, I was VERY pleased, even though it's slower than penguin-poo over a slow connection.

      Enjoy!

      --
      -- IANAEG - I am not an elder god.
    11. Re:Actually ... by Jonathan+the+Nerd · · Score: 1
      How/where could I get a dumb terminal? My computer isn't connected to a network, and when the keyboard and mouse freeze (which has happened to me a few times in X), all I can do is reboot, even though Linux is still running in the background.

      --
      Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are not necessarily my own, as I've not yet had my medication today.
    12. Re:Actually ... by zifnab · · Score: 2

      > But what if your xserver locks up your keyboard?

      Different solutions are available. First, you can log from another system/machine/terminal and reboot it. But with the 2.2 kernels you can also use the Magic SysRq keys; Go to Raw mode, flush the buffers, remount the partitions read-only, and reboot. All of those operations are available even if X crashed and took the keyboard away from the apps. For more informations, read /usr/src/linux/Documentation/sysrq.txt.

      seb.
      --

      --
      Memory fault -- brain fried
    13. Re:Actually ... by Raereth · · Score: 1

      I am indeed running gpm, but I'm rather hesitant to kill it, since I use it quite a bit. Is there any other way to fix this, or perhaps something other than gpm that could let me cut and paste text between consoles?

      Oh, and as a side note, is it possible to select text in a console, cut or copy it, and then paste it into X?

    14. Re:Actually ... by Mawbid · · Score: 1

      Well, you could say that if an X client can bring down the X server, then either the X architecture isn't robust enough or the implementation is buggy.
      --

      --
      Fuck the system? Nah, you might catch something.
    15. Re:Actually ... by Rogain · · Score: 1

      Just make sure you kill gpm before you start X. You could make a wrapper script that greps gpm's pid and kill it (maybe gpm keeps a pidfile??) and kill it, then launch X. You can always restart it after you exit X.

      --
      The current Slashdot moderation system is made by gay communists!
    16. Re:Actually ... by Jeremy+Chatfield · · Score: 1

      A malicious or poorly written app can cause X Server problems with a very simple cause, memory exhaustion. X permits clients to store data in the X Server. When swap space is exhausted, the X Server dies, or the client does. Accelerated-X has a internal mechanism to send panic log files if the X Server crashes. Although this is usually directed to root@localhost, many customers do as we suggest and change the settings to bugs@xig.com. That way, we can monitor the causes of crashes and see if there is a pattern. The most common in the years that I've watched that list, are memory allocation failures. This is usually caused by someone running happily in 8bpp, increasing to 24bpp when Accelerated-X performance makes it possible, and failing to realise that graphical apps may now use 4X memory. Swap fills and either the app or X crashes when asked to allocate more memory. I'm not aware of any mechanism in X to report "memory limits near", though since X Servers are networkable, it is plausible that a client on a remote machine would be unable to determine free memory on the display system... Cheers, JeremyC.

      --
      Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
    17. Re:Actually ... by Jeremy+Chatfield · · Score: 1
      Use 'gpm -k' to kill the gpm. Should work on anything in the last two+ years.

      Cheers, JeremyC.

      --
      Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
    18. Re:Actually ... by magnetx · · Score: 1

      Even then it probably was not X's fault, it was probably faulty code in an app or wm.

    19. Re:Actually ... by Helge+Hafting · · Score: 1

      I am indeed running gpm, but I'm rather hesitant to kill it, since I use it quite a bit.

      Run it in repeater mode then (gpm -R) and have X get mouse input from /dev/gpmdata.

      This way gpm runs all the time. Working as usual on the consoles, forwarding mouse output to X whenever you switch to the GUI.

    20. Re:Actually ... by An+Ominous+Cowherd · · Score: 1

      gpm does indeed keep a pidfile if called in your inits, at least on all the distros I've used. You could call the shutdown portion of that init before starting X, though this might require root privileges. maybe set up xdm to start in rc.local, but set it up to be killable, call it from a script where the prior step is to stop gpm, the next step to start xdm, and the next to restart gpm.

    21. Re:Actually ... by ghjm · · Score: 1

      I know that people will disagree with this, but the X server is like the kernel in that it is supposed to be able to deal with *anything* that a misbehaving user application could throw at it. If you're non-root, there should be no possible code you could ever execute that crashes the kernel *or* the X server.

      So the best you can say is that if there's an app (cough...Netscape...cough) that crashes X all the time, then *both* the app and the X server have a bug.

      -Graham

    22. Re:Actually ... by Raereth · · Score: 2

      I've had X crash on me more times than I care to think about; it doesn't seem to like my laptop's mouse. Still, I've never once had it take down the OS with it; the worst scenario I've ever had was having to switch to a console and manually kill X-windows and every X process on the pid list.

    23. Re:Actually ... by QuMa · · Score: 1

      Ehmmm, I have had apps hang or kill my X server, (mainly xv), but shouldn't that still also be an XFree bug? Imho, the X server should not allow itself te be crashed.

      Still, that said, I love XFree.

    24. Re:Actually ... by QuMa · · Score: 1

      Have a look at the GPM manpage. You can have it write mouse data to a device (/dev/gpmdata iirc), that X can then read from.

    25. Re:Actually ... by QuMa · · Score: 1

      Tell me about it. According to top, my X is using 99.5% of my mem (On a banshee). :-)

    26. Re:Actually ... by Allnighterking · · Score: 1

      As for why 6.1 locks up with KDE I don't have an answer sorry. I run the same and don't get that at all. hmmmmmmm As for a way to get to your console ctrl-alt-f3 will drop you immediately to a login prompt without killing X (then you can just kill the parts causing problems and then use ctrl-alt-f7 to get back to X providing you didn't kill it all. As for a way to kill X without a reboot try ctrl-alt-backspace. Hope this helps. Give the guys at mandrake a shout. They have always been helpful with problems like this and they love to shoot bugs.

      --

      I'm sorry, I'm to tired to be witty at the moment so this message will have to do.

    27. Re:Actually ... by Wiseleo · · Score: 2

      A serial interface in other words?

      Get any computer... An 8088 with no harddisk will work and you only need 9600baud anyway, install something like Procomm on it and read the appropriate docs on how to setup your box for access via serial port. I would suggest a 286 with a 3.5" floppy though, easier to find a diskette compatible with it :). You'll also need a serial cable, probably the null modem variety.

      I think you'll find this solution better than hunting for a genuine dumb terminal.

      Where to find this junk? You're a nerd, you should know ;-) Fleamarkets are a good bet. You'll be looked at like an idiot for buying "useless junk", but they have never heard about people who don't need windows to get their work done.
      --
      Leonid S. Knyshov
      Network Administrator

      --
      Leonid S. Knyshov
      Find me on Quora :)
    28. Re:Actually ... by Cadaver · · Score: 1

      Try running gpm in repeater mode (gpm -R), and set X to use /dev/gpmdata for the mouse device, and MouseSystems for the mouse type.

      --
      I ate something that disagreed with me. Maybe I should have cooked him first.
    29. Re:Actually ... by Biolo · · Score: 1
      Still can't run java applets on Netscape for linux

      So it's not just me, one of my Redhat 6.0 systems does the same, even with an updated version of Netscape and every other possibly related package. I've been ripping out and replacing packages to try and sort it and been through every config file but to no avail, every time I go near a Java site Netscape bombs. I'm near to giving up and completely re-installing but it's a production system and frankly I can live with it. The system was a straight 6.0 install with the /home and /etc/password files patched in from an older system it was replacing. How common is this problem?

      Hehe - isn't there a version of IE for Linux? giggle, slap. Sorry, the men in white coats are coming for me.

      --
      Stealing a rhinoceros should not be attempted lightly.
    30. Re:Actually ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had X crash on me a few times. It locked up my display, and my system wouldn't respond. The only way to remedy the problem, was to restart without unmounting my root drive. Kinda screwed things up. I run KDE..so it could be that.

    31. Re:Actually ... by TyFoN · · Score: 1

      Hehe.. i have crashed my linux box 3 times
      in the past 5 years... every time due to
      a hardware faliure... X crashed sometimes in
      the past but with my tnt card i use the
      XFree86 from www.nvidia.com. It's rock stable.
      I've never had to press reset due to an X problem.

      TyFoN

    32. Re:Actually ... by kertaamo · · Score: 1

      Well I'm running Mandrake 6.1, a new installation on a clean disk. If I use KDE themes, X locks up good and solid at random. Usually when trying to move a window. I don't blame my hardware because this machine has been running different versions of RedHat for over a year with no problems.
      The net result of all this is just as bad as a Windows BSOD, and is really embarrasing in the face of all this "Linux is so stable" talk.
      So, does anyone else have this problem and or know how to fix it ? I would be happier if there was an easy emergency exit to a console, assuming anything is still running, how do I do that ?

      Actually what I want is some way to connect by boxe's Turbo button to some interrupt that would cause the kernel to kill X and return to the console !

      By the way this problem also exists in RedHat &.1

    33. Re:Actually ... by Allnighterking · · Score: 1

      Personally I couldn't agree more. XFree is as stable as a rock on my system (Mandrake 6.1 and XFree 3.3.5) Netscape now there is another problem altogether. Still can't run java applets on Netscape for linux (works fine in windblows not on Linux. I've never lost my mouse or my keyboard though. In fact I've found that crashing X or Linux takes some effort. My job entails trying to crash systems. A lot of what I've learned is that most of the time unstable systems come from unstable setup's or people trying to "outthink" Linus and his crew. What I've found is the following. Keep /root directory and the / directory at 60% or less capacity. If you do it really makes the system stable. One of the ways to do this is to make the /home directory act like it does in FreeBSD. Home is in /usr/home and the /home is just a symlink. Most of the instability I've encountered seems to lie in just this area. Nutscrape then becomes the only unstable element in what is otherwise a very stable system. Second, watch your hardware. Bleeding edge is by definition unstable. Many of the problems I encounter in testing has to do with the fact that the manuals etc on the hardware aren't matching the actual figures on some of the bleeding edge stuff (shure the two chips are the same under windows but the bios and linux see the real difference) Example AMD 450's have two different voltage settings 2.2 and 2.4 the manual doesn't recognize the lower setting. But it does make a difference in cpu performance if you get it wrong. Check your settings. Remembering just because you can change it doesn't mean you should. And if you do leave yourself a way to "unchange" what you did. It's a system not a standalone.

      --

      I'm sorry, I'm to tired to be witty at the moment so this message will have to do.

    34. Re:Actually ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Couldn't even CTRL-ALT-BKSP? I've heard of people restarting because X locked the screen, but these people were used to the world of Windows where locked screen=locked OS. They had never heard of CTRL-ALT-BKSP to kill the X server. It's a little nicer than reboot w/out unmounting.

      -_blueboy the AC...

    35. Re:Actually ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet Linux is still going in the background though. Try telnetting in and halting the machine. Or, if you don't have another computer, get any dumb terminal (free or almost free), and add that as a tty.

      If you are having lots of X problems, that will work. But, if you are running as root, well, then things can get ugly.

    36. Re:Actually ... by magi · · Score: 2
      If your X has never crashed, then you're a very lucky person. My XFree86 crashes maybe once every few weeks; I think it does that when some other app fills up the memory. Sometimes opening some menus halts the X, totally, with no way getting out except reset button.

      Well, even my Solaris OpenWindows (or whatever) has crashed maybe once a year, so the situation is not THAT much better with commercial servers.

      And crashing is not the only problem. XFree86 is severely bloated; typically some 25-30M, at least with the i740 server. The practical upper bit plane limit for this card is 16 (24 works badly, 32 doesn't work at all).

      And other problems: being able to change the number of bit planes is simple even in m$ Windows, although it too sometimes requires booting the machine. Having to restart X between changes is almost the same as rebooting, as all windows are lost. Changing the resolution of the X display also sucks. You get this awkward "virtual screen", that is awful to use. Even Windows has always handled this properly.

      XFree doesn't support session control in the same way that the new HotDesk does (I think); you can't just "suspend" the X as you can do with screen(1), and then move to another terminal and reattach the suspended X session there.

      Speaking about session control, KDE has some sort of trivial session control that saves the windows when you log out, and restarts them when you log in. Which, of course, is so buggy that it messes up everything if the machine or X crashes; then, it forgets all the window sizes and opens them in the first desktop.

      ...and so on...I find it very scary that so many trivial problems exist with X, and haven't been fixed during its very long lifetime. Is X dying of old age?

    37. Re:Actually ... by Score+Whore · · Score: 3
      XFree86 is severely bloated; typically some 25-30M, at least with the i740 server.


      One thing you may not be aware of re: bloat is that the mmapped video memory is included in the various reported sizes of the XFree86 process. I don't recall right off hand how much is allocated on the i740, but on the ET6000 16 MB is allocated, even though the chipset is physically limitted to a 4 MB frame buffer. This is because of the way that the hardware works.

      Many i740 cards have 8 MB frame buffers, and there is probably some slop in there for MMIO. So that is responsible for a lot of the apparent bloat.

      -sw
    38. Re:Actually ... by bcboy · · Score: 1

      I've had X die a hundred horrible deaths. If the machine isn't networked, it may as well have taken linux down, too, because there's no way to fix it except ctrl-alt-del. (When X is really gone ctrl-alt-backspace, etc. don't work.)

      Though it is nice that the filesystems gets unmounted, it's still pretty bogus that it leaves the machine in an unusable state.

      The last time this happen, I was running RedHat 6.0 & the /home partition filled up while editing a large image in the gimp. The gimp swap file in ~/.gimp choked on write, which led to an endless cascade of dialog boxes reporting the error. After a few thousand (X being unresponsive during this whole processes), X died completely.

      One might hope that errors in apps wouldn't bring down the X server....

      I wonder how AcceleratedX holds up in this condition. Anyone want to try this w/the gimp on AccelX? or code some other app to create windows until something chokes?

    39. Re:Actually ... by delmoi · · Score: 1

      that's like saying all those mac advocates going on about how 'stable' there non-memory protected OS was, beacuse it never crashed unless you ran a program!

      I can see how you could blame the app if it took over the entire screen (so you couldn't see anything else) and wouldn't quit. but if an APP can kill the entire X server, then the X server obviously has a bug.
      "Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"

      --

      ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
  28. Re:First post ? by chris_oat · · Score: 1

    i've also experienced this problem. netscape will lock uness i use the edit/paste command. if i say highlight text on a webpage and then try and paste it to an email (using netscape mail) using the middle mouse button, netscape will often choke.

    i think this is problem with netscape however as i have experienced the problem on several different unices and several different X servers.

  29. Session control by gwolf · · Score: 1

    XFree doesn't support session control in the same way that the new HotDesk does (I think); you can't just "suspend" the X as you can do with screen(1), and then move to another terminal and reattach the suspended X session there.

    Have you looked at VNC (Virtual Network Computing, http://www.orl.co.uk/vnc if I recall correctly)? It's GPL'd software, and lets you do what you are looking for - and with many different operating systems, both as servers and as clients.

  30. Re:Article text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i've seen this add in linux journal few weeks ago someone should email lj and ask them to stop publishing this crap add....

  31. Re:Impressions after using Accel-X for several yea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Before getting Accel-X, I did try Metro-X when it was bundled with RH. I wasn't all that impressed. Sure it was easy to install, but it wasn't very fast and it's support of the MIT-SHM extension wasn't stable enough to be usable. Maybe it has gotten a lot better since then.

    I can't argue with you about price though. Accel-X is good, but it is expensive. They could probably sell a lot more copies if they matched the price of Metro-X. I especially agree about the price differential between Accel-X for desktops and Accel-X for laptops. I don't own a laptop, but I know their price for laptop servers is highway robbery. If/when I do get a laptop, I'm going to make sure it is supported by XFree because there is no way I'm going to pay that much money for an X server, even if it is 100% bug free.

  32. Stupid licensing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the patch releases for AccelX had debugging symbols turned on.. (dont rember which) But it was obvious that they take code improvements from Xfree86.. Too bad new XFree code isn't put under an anti-assimlation license.

  33. Slashdotted already? by Mindwarp · · Score: 1

    Just gives me an html error when I try to view it.

    --
    The gift of death metal does not smile on the good looking.
    1. Re:Slashdotted already? by MoToMo · · Score: 1

      (attempted humor)
      Yeah, it seems that the whole machine crashed... Some problem with X...
      (/attempted humor)

      -Dan

  34. Re:Have you ever used the XIG servers?? by chandler · · Score: 1

    Actually, the ATI drivers work excellently on my 4MB Rage IIc PCI card. XFree has only crashed once on me, and that seemed to be Netscape's fault. @$#%# Motif!

    --

    Visit

  35. Utter nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The X server runs as root and has full access to the hardware on the system... it could happily walk all over kernel data structures

    This is utter nonsense. Every application, *EVERY* application, runs in "user" address space. The kernel runs in "system" address space. The kernel can (and must) copy information between user and system address spaces, but absolutely no user application can do the same.

    Modern CPUs don't only permit this, they require it via both MMUs and a 'ring' architecture. On an i386, the user applications live in ring 3 and the kernel lives in ring 0. IIRC, some opcodes used by the kernel become NOPs if executed outside of ring 0 (although I could be wrong, that might have been a proposal instead of an implemented feature.)

    Ditto access to the hardware. The kernel drivers can map the hardware into user space, but it's the kernel which enables it. No user application can seize control of hardware if the kernel doesn't explicitly grant it permission.

    If you patched the kernel, you could run it in ring 1 or 2 so it had more privileges than a user application, but less than the kernel, but you would *never* run the full X-server within the kernel itself. (The Xfb is more than enough.)

    Coyote-san on soon

  36. X stability by valdemar · · Score: 1

    I dont know that Accelerated X is any better in terms of overall design. I imagine that they are still running as root and directly talking to the hardware. The only way to get a really stable server in my opinion would be to have the kernel in charge of the video system, just like any other resource. The folks over at GGI are doing this and have an X server that runs on thier video drivers.

    1. Re:X stability by crm0922 · · Score: 1

      "I dont know that Accelerated X is any better in terms of overall design. I imagine that they are still running as root and directly talking to the hardware. The only way to get a really stable server in my opinion would be to have the kernel in charge of the video system, just like any other resource. The folks over at GGI are doing this and have an X server that runs on thier video drivers."

      Yeah...like some kind of Hardware Abstraction Layer would be a good idea. Sure, then the GUI could never crash the OS...yeah right, what good is HAL for NT if it still is ghettoed by all kinds of apps, and even by itself at times for hardware reasons. Netscape viewed the ferretsfirst pages properly on my little home IPMASQing linux box. (RH6.0 base)

      Chris

    2. Re:X stability by Wumpus · · Score: 1

      The only bulletproof way of running X would be to put an X terminal, complete with separate memory and CPU, in the box, and connect your keyboard and monitor to that. This way, if X crashes, you can just reboot it, and your main system (a high availability server, perhaps?) doesn't even know something happened. Take out the graphics code from the kernel, if you want stability, and take it out of the box altogether, if you want REAL stability.

    3. Re:X stability by Anonymous+Colin · · Score: 1

      Quite correct. Some PCI graphics cards have the cute ability to lock up the system if someone reads/writes the wrong address. It doesn't matter what mode the software is running, if it touches these areas, the CPU is halted forever. This happens because some designers didn't bother handling I/O to unused addresses, so the card never responds (ACKs) the PCI I/O and the PCI bus logic keeps the CPU halted. Yuck!

      If you have to keep the X-Server on the same CPU (as, let's face it, most people would want to), wouldn't the best way be to create a very thin kernel-level driver that mapped the card PCI memory area, and ONLY the card PCI memory area, into user space. The X-Server could call this once at start up and run forever in user mode.

  37. I run AccelX and Xfree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And to be honest, I see no difference. AccelX does not seem any faster.

  38. My experience with Accel X by Larry+Butler · · Score: 1

    That ad is really ugly. It reminds me of a political campaign ad. Even if it were true it would still be inexcusable. I bought a copy of Accel X about a year ago when I bought my laptop. I got a Digital HiNote 2000. It had a chipset that was only experimentally supported by Xfree (C&T 65554). Accel X was easy to install compared to XFree. However, it had a couple of problems. The worst was several fuzzy vertical lines each about ten pixels wide. It was pretty annoying, but The HiNote was not offically supported by Accel X anyway. So, just for the hell of it I tried the XFree server. Guess what. It worked perfectly. I did have to copy the timings out of the Accel X configuration files though. So basically I paid $100 (I think) for timings for my display. Here it is a year later and XFree configuation utilities have far surpassed anything that was available for anything a year ago. Larry

  39. XFree86 has never crashed on me by Splork · · Score: 1

    I've been using it since 2.1 and haven't had a problem with any version.

    Of course I buy my hardware with XFree86 in mind.
    I've use S3 86c801 and S3 Virge cards in the past.

    I only use Matrox cards these days (8mb Millennium 2s are cheap and the best 2D cards around!)

    I'm running the 3.9.16 "beta" these days.

    1. Re:XFree86 has never crashed on me by Nodatadj · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't put it past being bad hardware.
      So far in the past 2 weeks
      My gfx card has decided to kill itself
      and I've lost 32meg somehow.

    2. Re:XFree86 has never crashed on me by Nodatadj · · Score: 1

      I downloaded all 45meg of 3.9.16 source last night
      but it kept giving me loads of cc1 "Internal error #6"

      Glad I didn't download it on my 56K modem, universities are useful for something.

      iain - downloading 3.3.5 as he types

    3. Re:XFree86 has never crashed on me by timster · · Score: 1

      if you're getting internal compiler errors, then you're seeing either compiler bugs or signs of bad hardware.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
  40. X Crashes?? by BillyChildish · · Score: 1

    I think I had X crash once on me and I know it was something I messed up in the process..

  41. Re:Entire OS with it? Bullshit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree completely with the spirit of your post, but please don't use irregardless, because it's not a word.

  42. That is sick! by enterix · · Score: 1


    Xig is not as good as they think. Accelerated X did *not* work correctly on my laptop -- I got only 15 bit color! -- XFree do a pretty good job, I have never had problems with them.


    Back of with that commercial FUD crap!

    1. Re:That is sick! by enterix · · Score: 1

      Yes, 15-bits on Accelerated-X, while XFree could do normal 16-bits. Besides, AX was *really* unstable...

    2. Re:That is sick! by zook · · Score: 1

      15 bit? That _is_ sick!

  43. Re:wow... by Surak · · Score: 3

    So after all those posts saying that how Linux is so much more stable then NT, it is now that we can surmise that well, yeah, the box is more stable, but only if you have a second console to be able to telnet into with in the case that X locks up the display...

    You can also change to a virtual terminal to kill the X server, provided your keyboard isn't locked out, even if Ctrl-Alt-Backspace doesn't seem to work.

    Let's not forget that LOTS of people have networks at home now. Telnetting in isn't impossible...you don't even need a second Linux box. Although, you are correct in stating that if X crashes AND locks out your keyboard AND you can't telnet in, you're pretty well hosed.

    However, on my box, which is AMD K62 450 with a Riva 128 board, X quite rarely crashes. I had a few problems in the beginning when I didn't make a big enough swap partition, but after that, its smooth sailing. The only applications that can totally hose X on my system are Netscape and StarOffice, and in that case, I tend to place the blame on those applications, which are severely bloated and buggy.

    X doesn't use all the available memory on some video cards

    Well, in the case of XFree86, this is mostly due to the fact that good specs aren't available to the writers of the drivers, which often have to reverse engineer things to get a driver, or if there is no specific driver, the user is forced to use the SVGA server, which is pretty generic.

    However, to play devil's advocate here, I'll make the case that you should really pick hardware that works well with your chosen platform, not the other way around. Since software is the reason you're using the computer in the first place, the software must dictate what hardware you will run, and not the other way around. Macintosh fans can scream 'til their blue in the face that their hardware platform is somehow "superior" to my generic Intel-based box, but since the software I need doesn't run on Macintoshes, they'll never persuade me to change my hardware.

    The same holds true for peripherals. If you're using Linux, you're obviously not going to buy a winmodem. You can't fault Linux for not having winmodem support, you have to say well, since Linux doesn't support winmodems, I simply will choose not to buy one. If you follow the logic, then you'll have to say the same thing about video cards: if Linux (or in this case XFree86 in particular) doesn't support a given video card fully then it becomes obvious that you shouldn't buy that card until such support becomes available.

    X is a lot more pickey about what monitor it runs on.

    Not at all. If you're monitor isn't directly supported in the config files or by your favorite X configuration utility, you can always program the refresh rates yourself. X will work with ANY monitor your video card supports.

    X crashes leave Linux in an unuseable state

    Not always. Most of the time, if X crashes, I'm able to fix it.

    Kernel prevents X from accessing memory it needs in order to run..

    Well, if thats true, then that statement would apply to any X server, not just XFree86. However, a blanket statement such as this one is most certainly false. While I could forsee that in some instances, the kernel might not allow X to allocate memory, if this happened all the time X would be unusable. The fact that the majority of Linux users have no problem using X on standard configurations would seem to point to the contrary.





  44. Similar ad a year ago by nihilogos · · Score: 1

    Around May 1998 I saw an advertisment for Accelerated-X in LJ, with the same " ... that free X-server that came with your Linux distribution ... " - it waxed lyrical about Accelerated-X providing support for laptop hardware that XFree86 didn't. The whole theme of this one and the one before makes me think of marketing paradigms and mission statements and many companies whose names begin with M.

    --
    :wq
  45. Re:Not true by seizer · · Score: 1

    Hmm. It's not forbidden to mention other companies when mentioning factual data - say, price comparisons. I haven't seen the ad in question, but that's my guess at it. The law applies (I think) to making comments which are defamatory without basis. It would be fine to say that "AOL are cheaper than Compuserve" but not that "Compuserve are a ripoff". Both say the same thing, of course.

    Blah, whatever.

    --Remove SPAM from my address to mail me

  46. Re:such a critical piece should be open source by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
    In the ideal world, you'd contribute effort to the open source component,

    In the real world, not everybody on the planet who might use an X server is an X server wizard in a position to "contribute effort to the open source component".

  47. Speed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Part of it is NDA access, and the other that XFree has been using an older arch. However, it's been fixed in 3.9.x.. I benchmarked 3.9.16 on a PIII 500 and reached about 59 Xmarks. AccelX on the same computer only reaches 49 Xmarks. 3.3.5 only reaches about 25!

  48. But XiG contributes code to XFree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't they? I wouldn't be surprised if XiG if takes and contributes code to XFree. Ghostscript kind of works the same way - only the next to latest version is GPL'ed - there's ways for free and commercial software to co-exist productively. Anyway I bet if they do work with XFree.org the marketing department doesn't know about it ;-) I've found XiG servers to be marginally faster on things like video (with those television cards and the like) and slightly better on memory. There is a place for good commercial X server that runs on several different OSes (Solaris intel, FreeBSD - and other BSD's? - and Linux) and support lots of new hardware. I'd like to buy one shrink wrapped box and install the X server on all my solaris/freebsd/linux systems - no per seat charges and all that crap. For that I'd gladly pay 50$ ... but not $100 or with restricted licenses or forced upgrade$ when some new X app breaks the server. By the sounds of Xi's marketing dept. they need to learn more about OS and be better about niche marketing their products.

  49. Re:wow... by um...+Lucas · · Score: 2

    I'm not even attempting to imply anything about NT, just that it takes an article like this for Linux users to admit that, yes, there are some things that need to be worked on...

    I always read rambles about how Linux is uncrashable compared to NT, etc..., but then reading this one and seeing everyone voice up and say "Well, MY system doesn't work that way" or "When X crashes I'm completely frozen from my system, except i can still telnet into it"

    I think a system is only as capable as the person whose responsible to run it... Too often, that tidbit is left out of discussions around here.

  50. Re:wow... by ph43drus · · Score: 1
    Ok, first, I would like to say that I am a really experienced user/admin, and I admit Linux isn't perfect (my system is the most stable, but that is because I have a screwy CD-ROM drive), but in my humble experience, Linux handles all adverse situations better than NT. Period.

    First, X hasn't crashed on my computer once.

    Second, I have never seen X be picky about monitors (I've set it up on plenty of equipment). All you have to do is tweek the resolution, vert refresh and horizontal sync. The color depth is more or less up to your video card's capabilities. I've seen some rather impressive tools for dealing with the even more advanced settings in X (the SuSE tool, SaX, is incredibly good for doing all this tweeking).

    Now, that does sound a bit complex, but when I set up X, I was a relative newbie to the world of refresh rates and screen resolutions. I got X running with the desired settings within minutes of setting out to get it running. That was over a year ago. I'm very sure that SaX has been improved greatly in that year.

    Jeff

  51. Re:Accel X is not that stable either (offtopic) by chandler · · Score: 1

    Ok, my IMPS/2 will jump around on my screen when I switch VT's from console to X, and I get huge numbers of gpm: Error in protocol in my /var/log/messages. What am I doing wrong?

    --

    Visit

  52. Re:First post ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pasting from xterms into Netscape certainly doesn't work for me (though I can paste in the other direction). I am using Netscape 3, however.

  53. my X is bunk... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to never see Xfree crash, until lately... RedHat 6.0 distro - upgraded to 3.3.5 - no diff Netscape does it - I think it's killing my font server. If there was only a light, fast, free, STABLE browser out there... Article timed perfectly -- I'm using Lynx to type this while I d/l storm ;) Maybe it'll go away... bleargh... d00d 15 7h3r3 kRak f0r x-accel? ;) well, the form's out of lines - ihopesubmitworks!

    1. Re:my X is bunk... by TimH · · Score: 1

      I have not been very happy with RedHat 6.0. I don't know if this has to do with X or not, but my RedHat workstation at work locks up completely EVERY night. I had even taken it off the wire to see if it was because of an attack from outside. When she dies, she dies hard and I cannot connect to her from another machine. The problem could also be with the SMP support?? As soon as glibc 2.1 is included with the stable version of Debian, I am switching over. I had another Debian system here once before, that had long uptimes (months) for a workstation. She never broke, and X never crashed!

  54. One Word: MetroX by tarp · · Score: 1

    Metrolink is a much better company. They were one of the first commercial companies releasing Linux software (such as Motif ports), and they regularly contribute to XFree86 and other free software causes. Plus they don't charge astronomical prices for their X server.

  55. An early experience with Xig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    I used AcceleratedX with a Diamond Stealth 64 back in the RedHat 3.0.3 days. I had constant problems with font corruption when switching back and forth between the text console and X. From what I could understand of the debate, they Xig guys blamed it on the linux console code or something. TYPICAL BEHAVIOR OF NON-FREE SOFTWARE COMPANIES: BLAME SOMEBODY ELSE RATHER THAN FIXING THE PROBLEM IN A TIMELY FASHION.

    While their product claimed to be faster, it didn't feel faster, didn't surf the web, play games or mpegs faster, was less stable (IMO), and didn't keep up with the rapid pace of XFree development (unless you want to shell out $$ for a new server every 6 months).

    I also didn't like some of the evangelizing and exaggerated claims by Xig employees in USENET newsgroups.

    -rana

  56. This is nothing new by frohike · · Score: 4

    I've been on the XFree86 developer's list for quite some time, and apparently this is nothing new.

    Basically what's been said on the issue (since it's been brought up several times) is that the guy who started Xig (Thomas Roell I think it was?) is the one who wrote X386, which is the basis for XFree86 today. Apparently he is a bit miffed at the success of the project, and the apparent lack of success in getting ahead of it in his own project.

    This generally tends to inflame people who are working on free software that is generally of higher quality than the corresponding commercial software, but they are bashed for their free work. XFree86 4.0 will be worlds above Accel-X in performance, modularity, and features. The thing is, XFree knows this, and so does Xig. The XFree policy is not to sling mud back, and not to post any kind of benchmarks (which often don't make sense anyway), but to simply let the consumer decide what they want to use. We're writing XFree86 for ourselves, and if other people get a good bit of use out of it, then we've more than served our purpose.

    The main thing that companies like Xig and Metro-X have above XFree is that they can write proprietary drivers for cards where the manufacturers are too stingy with their specs to let the open source/free software people at it. At least Metro-X knows this, and they contribute code back and forth freely with XFree (including the new module loading system in XFree 4.0, which is pretty awesome).

    Don't get all hyped up about this. It's nothing new. It's sad that it's happening in the way it's happening, but just wait for XFree86 4.0 to come out, and there won't be much mud left to sling except that tired old FUD that most people try to use in commercial vs free software. As Linus Torvalds said, "talk is cheap".

  57. Who's the demographic here? by SomeoneElse · · Score: 2

    You know this wasn't too bright for the folks over at Xi. Let's look at who would buy this stuff. Anyone dealing with X servers HAS to know quite a bit by the nature of X windows; that has always been the case and from what I've seen in Xfree 4 will continue to remain the case. So let's establish one thing, that anyone who deals with 30 workstations all running X knows their stuff. It's something no amateur could do, period.

    Now that we've established that the people setting up UNIX (Or Linux in this case) workstations have to be knowledgable, most of these people will have worked with the various servers that come with Xfree 3.3 or whatever version is public and stable right now. From what I've seen throwing X at numerous S3, Trident, and Cirrus Logic chipsets the SVGA server has performed _flawlessly_, its only flaw being that on the older 2.0.x series it was none too speedy. On 2.2 the speed difference was dramatic enough to make this a non issue; I never got Xfree to crash regardless of the 3 video card manufactures above with 3 or 4 different chipsets from each. So now we've established that yes, Xfree, even if it is fairly large, is fairly stable as well and for standard apps its speed is fine. (My tests were on Pentium/200s, K5/133s, K6/200s, and PII/400s with the above video cards.)

    Now where does it leave this ad? You have a company proclaiming that free X servers suck to a bunch of people who know X fairly well and have probably been using free X servers for quite awhile. So where does that leave this ad? I believe it gets demoted to FUD, and we all know what we think of that...

    1. Re:Who's the demographic here? by DaveHowe · · Score: 1
      You know this wasn't too bright for the folks over at Xi. Let's look at who would buy this stuff. Anyone dealing with X servers HAS to know quite a bit by the nature of X windows; that has always been the case and from what I've seen in Xfree 4 will continue to remain the case. So let's establish one thing, that anyone who deals with 30 workstations all running X knows their stuff. It's something no amateur could do, period.
      problem is, the knowledgable Techie isn't the target audience of this sort of ad - it has exactly two targets:
      1. Senior (read PHB) Management - people who make purchasing decisions without consulting the Tech people expected to impliment them
      2. "Home Admin" people - those that are not technically clued, but have bought a commercial distro because it was the same price as a game, and they thought it would make them look cool to their friends. Where before, they would have seen an XFree86 crash and phoned DeadRat or Choosy's tech support lines for advice, a percentage will think "ah, it's that lousy free Xwindows at fault, I need the shiny, BETTER version."
      3. Both of the above groups probably consider the commerical distros "boughtware", and can't see the problem of buying another "boughtware" package to fix problems with the first - just look at sales for MS's win98>win98SE "upgrade".......

      4. --
      --
      -=DaveHowe=-
    2. Re:Who's the demographic here? by DaveHowe · · Score: 1
      You know this wasn't too bright for the folks over at Xi. Let's look at who would buy this stuff. Anyone dealing with X servers HAS to know quite a bit by the nature of X windows; that has always been the case and from what I've seen in Xfree 4 will continue to remain the case. So let's establish one thing, that anyone who deals with 30 workstations all running X knows their stuff. It's something no amateur could do, period.
      Problem is, the knowledgable Techie isn't the target audience of this sort of ad - it has exactly two targets:
      1. Senior (read PHB) Management - people who make purchasing decisions without consulting the Tech people expected to impliment them
      2. "Home Admin" people - those that are not technically clued, but have bought a commercial distro because it was the same price as a game, and they thought it would make them look cool to their friends. Where before, they would have seen an XFree86 crash and phoned DeadRat or Choosy's tech support lines for advice, a percentage will think "ah, it's that lousy free Xwindows at fault, I need the shiny, BETTER version."
      Both of the above groups probably consider the commerical distros "boughtware", and can't see the problem of buying another "boughtware" package to fix problems with the first - just look at sales for MS's win98>win98SE "upgrade".......

      (that'll teach me to preview before I post :+)
      --

      --
      -=DaveHowe=-
  58. If they sold their product for Javastations... by Mr.+Piccolo · · Score: 1

    it might get somewhere.

    My school put UltraPenguin on all its Javastations. Now you usually have to log in twice from the Javastations because the first time you log in, X goes down and restarts.

    Its incredibly annoying, so unless I want to use the school's paper, I usually log in from my Solaris box, do my work, then FTP all the files I want to print back to my system.

    P.S. While we're talking about crashing X servers, on x86, XSun (aka OpenWindows) crashes every time if you try to use Window Maker with a background image, if it's not been configured with --disable-shm. There is a patch for Solaris 2.6 that fixes the problem, but none for Solaris 7...

    --
    Glückwünsche, haben Sie Slashdot ermordet, indem Sie zum korporativen Druck beugten und Subskriptionen einlei
  59. Re:Competing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >The XFree project's goal is to produce "a freely
    >redistributable implementation of the X Window
    >System that runs on UNIX(R) and
    >UNIX-like operating systems (and OS/2)." Slamming
    >them in an ad campaign is kind of a cheap shot --
    >they're volunteers producing a
    >product because they think it's "The Right Thing
    >To Do", not to compete in a commercial
    >marketplace...
    So it's not OK to slam the stuff these guys are doing in their spare time, but it's all right to slam other stuff worked on by people whose livelihood depends on selling it? :) Competition is competition, FUD is FUD. The target is irrelevant.

  60. Re:Article text by Zurk · · Score: 1

    was that the retractable cup holder that sez compact disc on the front ?

  61. You're right.. Xig is NOT needed by most.... by GreyFauk · · Score: 1

    I've been using Linux for about 4 years now...

    I've used XFree86 for 98% of that time...

    Let's count the ways it's crashed, shall we?

    Number 5 BadBlocks on harddrive.. (Ok.. so this froze Linux completely.. so it doesn't really count)

    Number 4 CHEAP S3 variant cards... (no big surprise there)

    Number 3 Alpha software (yeah.. ok.. sometimes I just can't wait)

    Number 2 User stupidity :> hehehe... (my personal Favorite)

    And the number 1 source of the greatest number of crashes of XFree86??

    Gnome/Enlightenment

    I've had more crashes in the last 6 months than I've
    had in the previous 3 years... 4 of those required
    a hard reboot. All the ohters I fixed from telnet.

    OTOH... I have an ATI Xpert@Work and tried AX5.x
    and had nothing but problems... *shrug*
    Maybe it's not supported all that great (RH 6.0)
    but it wasn't worth the hassle. Just too wierd.
    It hung and crashed quite a bit.

    I like Xfree and I'll stick with it... XF86Setup is
    killer as well... (I've been using it for what? 4 years now? hehehe)

    --
    Friends don't let friends buy Compaq's. (Dell/Gateway... same same) You want a good computer? Build it yourself.
  62. Re:Laptop support by NovaX · · Score: 1

    Why didn't you (or did you?) try the tricks on the Linux Laptop pages? There's a solution for the Inspiron 7000 on the LT chip. Of course.. I've got the new media-P (I think they ran out of stock, so mine was a roll over). I still need to play more with xfree to get the tricks listed to work... its not fun getting Caldera at Linux World and than seeing the nice, pretty KDE desktop mangled and unusable.

    I've been tempted a few times to go download a demo of AccelX just because I followed the thread on the Inspiron / media-P off their site...

    --

    "Open Source?" - Press any key to continue
  63. Put up or shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GPL Accelerated-X. That's what I think.

    1. Re:Put up or shut up. by thopkins · · Score: 1

      $100 seems like a very reasonable price to me.

  64. SVGAlib with X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, I've never had a problem switching back and forth between SVGAlib Quake and XFree86. Unless you count getting fragged while checking your e-mail a problem :)

  65. Re:I don't like 'em too well, myself. by demon · · Score: 1

    I'm keeping my hopes high. I had the opportunity to take in Dirk Hohndel's presentation on XFree86 4.0, and I've since played with the current XFree86 4.0pre source release. It's coming along quite well - I had some minor things to deal with with the tdfx driver, but it's FAST. Fastfastfast. And this isn't a fully accelerated driver yet, either. (The final release will, from my understanding, have ALL drivers that can using the XAA interfaces.) There's no automated config-generation tool yet, but that will (of course) be remedied before the final release as well. And with multihead and GL/DRI support... these are features that XiG charges big bucks for.

    Get ready XiG. Your market may begin evaporating sooner than you'd like to believe.

    --

    Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
    Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
  66. Re:Is it really that unreliable? by Zurk · · Score: 1

    Xconfigurator with redhat is even easier and has autodetect.

  67. Re:Impressions after using Accel-X for several yea by Anonymous+Colin · · Score: 1

    Actually, there is one difference between laptops and desktops. The laptop has an LCD, while the desktop uses a CRT. (I know, this is changing, but it is close to a rule right now). CRT's are driven from a card via a DAC (Digitial to Analog Converter). This is told a small number of things - number of lines, number of Pixels per line, refresh rate, H-Blank, V-Blank interval timings and the mode is set.

    On LCDs there is only one mode and all the others have to be emulated in a way that doesn't look TOO ugly. No a priori reason why this should be more difficult than programming a DAC, but in practice it seems to be. This may justify a premium, but not 3x.

  68. I guess that's just part of doing business... by mike_markley · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it sucks. And in my humble opinion, they are full of shit. I don't think my X server at home has ever managed to bring down my entire box (and in the very rare cases where I put X on a server, it's never actually configured to display anything locally). But the truth of it is, that's the nature of competition. Let the bastards sling mud all they want, it's not like they're the first to do so. I just hope they don't expect any sympathy when they lose any support from the open source community that they may have had.

    --
    Mike Markley - *NIX Sysadmin and all-around geek - finger for PGP key
  69. accelX + debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i bought accX few months ago. i tryed it on my debian machines and it was really worthless. most programs stopped working, it didnt store libraries and fonts in right directories and dselect keept bitching about dependencies (it thought i didnt have X installed on my system) so my advice is DONT BUY ACCELX if you are running Debian

    1. Re:accelX + debian by craigly · · Score: 1

      To make xdm start, you just need to tell it to not look for a local XServer configuration. To do this, comment out the line in /etc/X11/xdm/xdm.options that says "check-local-xserver" and it should start up just fine. You also need to add an antry to /etc/X11/xdm/XServers telling it where to find your AccelX binary, something like:
      :0 local /usr/local/bin/XAccel :0 vt9 -bpp 16

      --
      craig
    2. Re:accelX + debian by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
      most programs stopped working, it didnt store libraries and fonts in right directories and dselect keept bitching about dependencies (it thought i didnt have X installed on my system)

      I don't seem to remember seeing those problems on my Debian partition at home, but I didn't install XiG's libraries - I bought it for the server, not for the client code (at the time, XFree86 didn't, as far as I know, contain support for the Number Nine Revolution IV-FP card; amusingly enough, I have XiG to thank for discovering that XFree86 later added support, as they had something on their Web site, as I remember, comparing Accelerated-X and XFree86 performance with that card), so I'm just using the XFree86 client code that came with Debian.

      Debian doesn't start up xdm on my home machine because it doesn't think XFree86 has been set up, but that's about the only place I've seen where Debian was unhappy about Accelerated-X.

  70. Re:Competing? by ralphclark · · Score: 1

    ...would as many people have been so
    likely to start using Linux on a regular basis if the only X server available was
    commercial and cost at least $100? I know I wouldn't have.




    Well I would. In fact I ran Coherent until I heard about Linux. Even then I never really ran X on a regular basis until KDE appeared.

    Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
    Thought exists only as an abstraction

  71. My crash story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    Yeah, I had X crash on me once. I was running about 5 or 6 screensavers on the root window. They were running fine. However, a comrade of mine, in the lab, decided he'd open an xeyes on my display at a resolution of 20,000 x 20,000. I saw a 21" pupil, and it wasn't following my mouse. Sure, we tried accessing it remotely, it was SLOW at first, but before we could shut it down, we got tired of waiting (1/2 hour) and just hit the reset switch.

    that's my story
    BTW, last post (for now). (I promise, i'll never do it again)

  72. Re:wow... by alhaz · · Score: 3

    Maybe what he's refering to there is that stock Linux kernels aren't capable of allocating large (like, 4-16 megs) contiguous physical chunks of memory.

    X doesn't need this, the gui doesn't need it generally speaking.

    It is however pretty helpful for some sorts of video streaming setups.

    Currently there's a BigPhysArea patch that allows you to remove a large physical area from the pool that the kernel draws from, which you can then use in a userland driver.

    It's certianly possible to advance the kernel to make this sort of thing possible, Linux isn't heavily video-oriented at the moment, But if you want bragging rights, compare X to the windowing system used in BeOS.

    The only reason NT's gui gets everything it wants is because it's inserted into the kernel. That's a gargantuan trade-off in terms of robustness, and certianly nothing to brag about.




    --
    This is just like television, only you can see much further.
  73. Re:wow... by ARRAY(0x0) · · Score: 1

    I can only recall 1 time in recent years that an X server has crashed on me. I was running MATLAB with an early KDE, and a certain action in MATLAB would take X down. This was very repeatable. (I wish I could say the same thing everytime NT has crashed on me -- the NT crashes can never be repeated and take NT down for the count.) In this case it would not crash Linux, just throw you out of X. Anyway, after upgrading to the latest rev of KDE at the time, it was fixed, and has never happened again.

    I have had great success and stability with the various XFree servers I have used (S3V, SVGA, and Mach64). And if I did have problems, I would expect them to be resolved in short order).

    Now keeping Netscape from crashing, that is another story. Of course, it has never brought down X on me.



  74. Re:General Reply by extrasolar · · Score: 2
    Microsoft did that for a reason. They figured, and quite rightly so, that one of the best way for a novice to feel safe using a computer is to make the mouse as responsive as possible. I often laugh when Windows crashes and I get a blank screen with the mouse cursor. I would say to my friends, "Windows has just crashed... but at least the mouse works."

    Compared to Windows, XFree's mouse cursor is unresponsive. You can just feel the difference when you use each for a period of time.

    --

  75. Netscape can do it. by Speed+Racer · · Score: 1

    I can consistently crash my Linux box by running Netscape and checking my IMAP mailbox. I can't Ctrl-Alt-Backspace, Alt-Fx or even telnet in from another machine on the subnet. Nothing but the Microsoft shuffle (pressing Reset) can bring it back. I don't blame XFree86 or Linux, this is definitely a Netscape problem.

    --
    Free Mac Mini. Yes, I'm
    1. Re:Netscape can do it. by Jeremy+Chatfield · · Score: 1
      The problem is probably your X Server, but could be the operating system. One way to find out, is to see if ay one else can correctly perform the operation. If they can, and you can't, the cause is probably that netscape aks sthe X Server to do something and the X Server fails.

      There are some things that can be done to deliberately mess up an X Server. IMO, running Netscape is no excuse for an X Server to crash or lock up.

      > Cheers, JeremyC.

      --
      Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
    2. Re:Netscape can do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be stupid. If non-root processes can stop telnetting in from going on, it's definitely a problem with some kernel or running-as-root part of the system.

  76. Re:Xig versus XFree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really? I have experience to the contrary. The last time I tested accelX, it was both slower and felt more buggy then Xfree with my matrox mystique. For this reason I decided to switch back to xfree. This was with AccelX 4.1, Is that maybe an ancient version now?

  77. Have you looked at GGI? by Static · · Score: 1
    AFAIK, that's the sort of thing the GGI folks are aiming for: an API which you can build anything graphical on - even other graphics libraries! - that talks to some kernal stuff and some non-kernel stuff.

    The goal is to have the kernel protect the display resources the same way it protects the disk, yet allow display drivers to work "under" than in user-space.

    Wade.

  78. Re:What a stab in the back. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Guys correct me if im wrong. ( sure someone will) but didn't Xig get there original code from XFree?

    Wrong way ;-) Thomas Rouell, founder of XiG, wrote the first X server for the x86 architecture. He donated the code to the MIT X project in 1991. I don't know how much of the original code is still in XFree though.

    Joe Louderback, too lazy to create an account
    jlouder@wfu.edu

  79. Re:Entire OS with it? Bullshit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, XFree has never "crashed" the system, but a lockup forces me to reboot once a week or so on a couple machines. Yes, I do telnet in and try to kill the X server using kill -9 this has no effect, as the X process seems to have stopped listening. It is definatelya pain in the ass. Also when X freezes on my system it takes the keyboard as well, so I cannot switch to a new session. This happens on a notebook and on a desktop (using both a K6-300 and Athlon 500) I am running Caldera 2.2 on the machines in question. It has frozen in different situations once or twice while using GIMP 1.0 a couple of time with 1.1 many times with netscape 4.6, and few time it happen while I was just editing a file with nEdit. This problem has plagued me a while. I have been tempted on many occasions to break down and get AccelX though I haven't yet. If anyone knows why I am having these problems please enlighten me (bphillips@unitedplanet.com).

  80. Why buy Xi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why? I certainly doubt that it is more stable than X. However, if it is easier to setup, faster and offers more features (i.e. how about anti-aliased fonts????) then I'd buy it.

  81. General Reply by chandler · · Score: 1
    In general, I'm not going to take such a harsh view - they're trying to get people to switch from XFree86 to AcceleratedX, and that's OK. I wouldn't mind if Sun put out an advertisement aimed towards switching people to Linux. (Still using that free OS that came with your computer? blah...) That doesn't mean that I'm going to switch to AccelX - applying Brian's Graphics Performance Test-O-Rama says:
    • Moving the mouse rapidly in Windows 95 uses around 29% of my CPU time.
    • Doing that in XFree uses around 1% of my CPU time. I actually have to be moving my mouse in a WordPerfect window with Shadow Cursor turned on to get anywhere near the Windows CPU usage.

    Now I can't test this with AccelX, but the point being, that I get respectable performance in XFree86 without using any commercial software. And it's only crashed once - and I'm certain that that's not Linux's fault (It screwed up my card state so that even on the console it looked funny - characters were wrong, but there. I had to do a "blind reboot" to fix the problem).
    Now, if I could just get rid of all of my commercial software...
    --

    Visit

    1. Re:General Reply by demon · · Score: 1

      Compared to Windows, XFree's mouse cursor is unresponsive. You can just feel the difference when you use each for a period of time.

      Yes, but only because Windows dedicates a separate process to the mouse pointer. If the system's locked itself down though, it doesn't matter if you can move the mouse pointer - locked is locked. (Even moreso with M$ products.)

      --

      Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
      Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
    2. Re:General Reply by pwhysall · · Score: 1

      I disagree.

      On all of the Linux boxes I run (2xDell OptiPlex GX1 (ATI Rage Pro), 1xK6-2 400 (Riva TNT)) the mouse is as responsive under XFree86 3.3.5 as it is under NT.

      It's all down to whether your card provides a hardware cursor.


      --

      --
      Peter
  82. Re:Xig versus XFree by warmi · · Score: 1

    Yes , most graphics card are supported under XFree but there is also issue of the quality of support. From my experience, I can tell you, AceelX server are always faster, sometimes bit more, sometimes a lot more, but consistently outperform XFree.
    That's good enough reason for me.

  83. They've been doing this for a LONG time by Vince · · Score: 1

    Look in past issues of Linux Journal, you'll see many similar ads from XiG trashing XFree.

  84. Re:I've had that happen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes. I've had Xfree crash on me too. It's happened, maybe, let's see...
    5 times in the last 8 years.

  85. The XFree team is "Closed",so quality is concerned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fill a bug report? You will never know if your report goes through. Want to join it? Well, although they claimed they are not 'closed', but you can never find the Right Door (tm)!
    All BSD develope team are more open than the XFree team.

  86. A redux of "The Road Ahead" ?! by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1




    Go to http://images.linux.com/xi_ad/ again, look at "entire.jpg" - the third image file of the page, - and now look carefully at the bottom right hand corner of your screen - that is, the lower LEFT hand corner of the "entire.jpg" image, - do you see a notebook?

    Now, look at the image on the notebook's screen.

    Don't you think the road-in-the-middle-of-nowhere-with-blue-sky-and-wh ite-cloud image looks remarkably similar to the picture they put on the cover of Bill Gates' "The Road Ahead" book, albeit without the mugshot of Mr. Gates?

    Is this a co-incidence, or is it a "planned" thing?

    Even the "white-cloud-with-blue-sky-background" thing looks remarably similar with the logo of a certain OS many of us rather forget?


    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  87. Laptop support by loom · · Score: 1

    When I first got my Dell Inspiron 7000 XFree didn't support the ATI Rage Pro LT chipset correctly, so I had to resort to trying out AccelX for laptops. While the performance seemed okay, I wasn't very happy with having a closed source commercial product running on my operating system.
    Anyway, about 1 month later XFree 3.3.5 came out that had correct support for my laptop! I was only TOO happy to get rid of the AccelX server and go back to the free world. I thought I'd be loosing performance but I didn't notice anything. And VMware started working correctly again too !
    I really think it's a shame XIG had to go that way, because I thought they had a niche that was acceptable, but trying to "feed" off XFree is just pushing it too far.

    Go XFree !

  88. oh god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop your whining about the ad. They're trying to advertise their product like every other company does. Why do you guys always have to freak out when someone does something *good* for the Linux community? Just because XFree86 is free doesn't mean everyone who uses Linux should be using it and all commercial equiv.'s should be considered evil. If Linux is to ever "take over" as a major desktop OS, it *needs* the support of companies like XiG who are willing to put out commercial-grade software. And fwiw, AccelX *is* quite an impressive product -- superior to Xfree in a lot of ways. Support for more cards, SUBSTANTIAL performance increases, and the install is so simple a monkey could do it. Its good that Xfree 4.0 will be a lot better once its released. Well, wait till they release AccelX 6.0 and it blows the nuts off of Xfree. Its called competetion people, and its whats going to make the quality of software improve for Linux.

    1. Re:oh god by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
      They're trying to advertise their product like every other company does.

      Well, some other companies may well advertise their product[s] in a clueless fashion, so "like every other company does" doesn't necessarily mean "in a fashion that shouldn't be roasted".

      Methinks "our product is better, because it's not a piece of free software, it's Commercial-Quality Software" may not be the best approach if you're trying to sell to a community of people running an operating system made out of, err, umm, free software....

      I.e., it's not clear that

      [The X server] is more than twice the size of the Linux kernel and much, much busier. Critical communications, fonts, drawing, windowing, mouse, keyboard, memory functions, and more all depend on the X server.

      is in and of itself a sufficient reason to believe that "free software does a good job" applies to an OS kernel and OS libraries (Linux and glibc, say) but not to an X server.

    2. Re:oh god by tamyrlin · · Score: 1

      and besides, the Xig server is probably based on the same source base as XFree86. (The source code from MIT)

  89. Yeah right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last time i checked Xig, there looked good. I bought it, installed it (Millenium II, at that time not yet supported by XFree but Xig did) and de-installed it pretty quick. Problems with colormaps and stuff like that ... Never had any trouble with Xfree ...

  90. XFree is pretty good by penguinboy · · Score: 1

    In the year that I've been using Linux, I've found XFree86 to be quite reliable. It's not perfect, but it's certainly preferable to any version of Windows. One _really_ annoying thing is when xfs isn't running and the X server locks up the console because it crashed and then is respawned by init. The only way to deal with that is to go in be telnet and then reboot in single user mode. I wish that the X server would just halt, and not exit, so that it would be possible to switch VC's and entera different runlevel without rebooting.

  91. cupholders by copito · · Score: 2

    If you had bought a B&W G3, your cup holder would have come with a ingenious blue brace, of course the cup holder itself is a little high for my liking and I'm not sure why they changed manufacturers, the cup holder itself isn't much different than the one made by CD, although my friend told me that DVD is the wave of the future so they must be doing something right.
    --

    --
    "L'IT c'est moi!"
  92. Re:I don't like 'em too well, myself. by warmi · · Score: 1

    Don't count on it. AccellX has a great product, much better than XFree. I paid $ 100 and I am extremely happy with AccelX 5.
    ( one thing that sucks is that I need to shell out another 200 for laptop as XFree (trident) on ThinkPad is almost unusable , so slow)

  93. Re:Some background on XFree86/XiG relationship by warmi · · Score: 1

    Well, it looks like better half of original XFree project ended up in XiG. How else would you explain difference in quality (specially speed !!)
    between two products.

  94. X should crash on a bad program? Give me a break by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It should not crash on poorly written code, period.

  95. At least in Linux X is an option by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    With Linux/FreeBSD I can just leave Xfree off from my server, someting I sorely wish I could do with my NT servers.

    Hell these days its almost impossible to keep IE4/5 off your sever, let alone the GUI.

    Boy if I had to run netscape and XFree on all my Linux/FreeBSD servers, I'd probably be running from Linux/FreeBSD as quickly as I ran from NT (after using it on my servers for 4 years).....

    Face it: A file server needs a gui like a dog needs a hat.

    When I was short on hardware once (work for the gov, money comes, money goes) I had one video card for three servers. Really. I'd install the os, shut down rip out the video card and reboot. Things worked swell. I even installed all the X client apps and used the Xserver on my (NT back then) workstation to access the spiffy X based GUI tools.

    Keep on Keeping On.....


  96. I have crashed Linux with it . Here's how ... by squireson · · Score: 1

    Running RedHat 6.0 , KDE and netscape 4.08 and 4.61 I have completely frozen Linux ( no virtual terminals , no keyboard or mouse response , nothing ) by viewing this page :
    http://www.ferretsfirst.com/fadop/


    I have never tried to fix it across a network .
    I have heard that the same can be said of netscape
    4.7

  97. Ok listen Reason here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look i've had X crash on my Linux box and ALL i could do was telnet in and tell it to shut off. I couldn't restart X I couldn't goto a console it had locked the keyboard and the video card it seemed. This type of crash is what they are referring too

  98. Re:your sig by MrHat · · Score: 1

    Wow... I need to find my way back to a high school science/math department fast... Scientific notation errors are about as embarassing as they get... :)

  99. GPL by DP · · Score: 1

    Yet another reason why [L]GPL rocks, for projects and businesses alike.. the business contributes to the actual project, can sell it SUPPORT/SERVICE, not the product, and the project doesn't ever get these kind of problems.
    Previous post of mine, which I don't feel like pasting

    --


    -- d'arcy poirot
  100. XFree is not a openned develope team by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They claimed they are not closed but they are.

  101. Re:entire operating system goes down?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You will have to re-compile the kernel to enable this. Most distributions don't have this enabled by default because it gives the user at the console too much power (ie. ALT+SYSRQ+U == unmount disks == kill syslog).

  102. Re:wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Here are a few observations from a 'humble' XFree86 user....

    X doesn't use all the available memory on some video cards.

    I'm sorry, but Windows 95/98/NT only supports up to 1600x1200x8bit colour depth on my Intel740 8Mb; XFree86 however, supports the same resolution up to 16bit colour depth.

    X is a lot more pickey about what monitor it runs on.

    I have seven monitors on a variety of graphics cards; all work interchangeably with very little modification required to a stock XF86Config file.

    X crashes leave Linux in an unuseable state

    Linux has never crashed due to a problem with X; this year, X has only gone down on me once and that turned out to be duff memory - I consider XFree86 to be an extremely stable piece of software.

    Kernel prevents X from accessing memory it needs in order to run...

    Geez! - what do you think a swap partition/file is for !?!?!?!

  103. wow... by um...+Lucas · · Score: 3

    So after all those posts saying that how Linux is so much more stable then NT, it is now that we can surmise that well, yeah, the box is more stable, but only if you have a second console to be able to telnet into with in the case that X locks up the display...

    Really! Just a little while ago (in the Gartner thread) there were all these posts saying things like: "Linux kicks NT's as in terms of stability", "Linux can dominate the desktop"... Face it, if X crashes, the system may as well be crashed if you're an end user.

    Lets' just continue the list a little more, shall we?

    X doesn't use all the available memory on some video cards.

    X is a lot more pickey about what monitor it runs on.

    X crashes leave Linux in an unuseable state

    Kernel prevents X from accessing memory it needs in order to run...

    And you wonder why Gartner says that Linux isn't ready for the desktop? Joe user (and me) doesn't want to worry about a kernel not wanting to give my video card the memory it needs to run. I just want to plug it in, maybe load some drivers and have it work...

    -----------------

    Go ahead, moderate me down... I've got karma to burn!

    1. Re:wow... by Connor · · Score: 1
      I'm not even attempting to imply anything about NT, just that it takes an article like this for Linux users to admit that, yes, there are some things that need to be worked on...

      Lots of people admit that when (valid) bugs and shortcomings are pointed out. Although /. seems to have a fair amount of zealots, the ones that do the work mostly accept complaints and fix them instead of yelling about how it's not fair. Of course, not everything _is_ fair, and that's when the shit really hits the fan. Nothing is more efficient if you want to enrage people who care a lot than incorrectly telling them that the thing they care about sucks.

      I always read rambles about how Linux is uncrashable compared to NT, etc..., but then reading this one and seeing everyone voice up and say "Well, MY system doesn't work that way" or "When X crashes I'm completely frozen from my system, except i can still telnet into it"

      I don't know about others, but _my_ desktop system is never up long enough for Linux's "instability" problems to hit me. If I run the computer at most two days in a row, but usually turn it off when done, a crash per month is not going to be a problem to me. If it crashes once per day, like some other OSes, it _is_ a problem.

      Where stability _really_ matters (I'm not saying it doesn't matter on a desktop, just not as much) is in a server. Guess what? X doesn't crash a server, because it (usually) doesn't even _run_ on one. There is no point in having a huge graphics application on a server, unless you spell your name with an 'M' in the beginning and 'icrosoft' in the end.

      I think a system is only as capable as the person whose responsible to run it... Too often, that tidbit is left out of discussions around here.

      Hehe. Amen to that. Although it does get pointed out in threads like the one about PCWeek's cracking contest. :)

      The main thing that makes Linux advocates look bad is, if you ask me, the fact that the ones that can argue coherently, are open to discussion and are generally nice people, are already busy _working_ on improving Linux. The noisy ones are the ones that don't work on improving it, leaving them with lots of free time to yell at others for not thinking the same way they do.

    2. Re:wow... by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      I think the main difference here is that
      linux users addition to a problem is a
      lot more critical. With an operating
      system that is created by the people they
      will take a lot closer look at it. With
      NT we know it sux its expected to crash,
      leak memory, freeze etc... I see people
      here complaining that their X server
      crashes on them at least once a week, or
      once a month, or once a year. When you
      hear of people crashing windows it usually
      starts with once a day, then once a week
      etc... I have yet to see linux crash for
      a non hardware related problem even then
      it does well at working around crappy hard
      ware. I have also had the chance to work
      with linux on several different systems
      well into the hundreds and possibly close
      to the thousands.

      The Arson Smith

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  104. What about that free web browser... by TedC · · Score: 1
    I'm more interested in replacing that free (beer) web browser that came with my last Linux distro (or ten).

    I've had XFree86 crash exactly once, and that was immediately preeceded by a Netscape crash (it could have been a coincidence). The keyb controller got hammered, and I couldn't ctrl-alt-backspace to kill the server.

    I'll keep XFree86, thanks, but I've got to get a better browser some day soon.

    TedC

  105. Xig plain lying on homepage! by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

    Diamond SpeedStarA50 8MB 350 MHz
    Accelerated-X v5 9.7 12.7 16.9 N/A
    XF_SVGA 3.3.3.1 -0- -0- -0- N/A
    NOTES: Tested Apr 99. XFree supports this chipset, but does not support this card, XF86_SVGA will not run with this card.

    This is what i found on their website.
    I have this card!
    I bought SuSe 6.1 on 1th april with FX86 3.3.3, and it works perfectly with my card, so they're plain lying!

    --
    RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    1. Re:Xig plain lying on homepage! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SuSE modifies their X servers. You'll notice that SuSE also typically has more driver support and/or fixes/enhancements before the base Xfree distribution does. So nyah.

  106. Re:Netscape Crashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess since netscape sucks so much you are all helping mozilla stress test 5.0? No? Report bugs or hush.

  107. I don't necessarily have a problem with this... by otis+wildflower · · Score: 1

    ... XiG is free, as a corporation in a democracy, to do whatever it likes with its advertising budget. Likewise, we as consumers in a democratic capitalist system, may decide to purchase their software (or not) based on its merits.

    If the slags on XFree are without merit, then we'll know soon enough. If XFree can use some improvement (which it can, in terms of utilizing vendor-specific acceleration HW to its fullest), let's see the commercial market spur the free product!

    I've never used XiG, though I considered it for the brief moment when they were the only X server that covered the NeoMagic laptop chipset. Once that feature got rolled into XFree, I haven't needed the performance of the accelerated drivers, and I have never had a problem with stability on XFree. EVER. (though finding the right damn modelines can be a chore ;)

    1. Re:I don't necessarily have a problem with this... by BrianH · · Score: 2

      You're right of course. XiG has the right to promote their product any way they see fit. However, Linux and OSS advocates do have a right to object to this type of lowball marketing and retaliate in any way they see fit. While we can't (and shouldn't) attempt to legally stop this type of advertising, we should show our displeasure by turning potential buyers on to other products. Just put them out of business :)

      --

      There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
  108. Negative Campaigning Bad for Linux by Fjord · · Score: 1

    I can see ads like this one cutting into Linux acceptance. Basically this is an ad for a Linux product saying that the free stuff ain't worth it. The average non-Linux user is going to get from it that inorder to have a stable graphics system on Linux, you have to pay. In the minds of many, they will goon to think that you have to pay for anything good on linux and will become disillusioned with Linux advocates. They will refer to the ad as "proof" that you have to pay to run Linux.

    I certainly hope that we all take this as a lesson of what not to do.

    --
    -no broken link
  109. IMAP client? Try tkrat by David+Jao · · Score: 1
    TkRat is my IMAP client of choice under X. It has the advantage of being usable (unlike Netscape, which from the looks of your post is definitely unusable).

    You might also want to try Postilion, a client derived from TkRat (although I've always had better luck with TkRat myself).

    1. Re:IMAP client? Try tkrat by An+Ominous+Cowherd · · Score: 1



      [ontopic]
      XFree only crashes on me when xfstt and xfs start fighting over fonts-- then it cycles and glitches and screenrolls until I have to telnet in and kill X.
      [/ontopic]

      trying TKRat:

      I have. It's so damn ugly, though. And minimal support for attachments, URLs, and html mail, all of which are, unfortunately, job requirements for me.

      I've been impressed with Balsa, but it's not quite there yet. Actually, I'd like to see Balsa integrated with gnomecal and gnomecard for a full-service productivity app a la' Outlook.

  110. Xig and XFree86 both crash by CharlieHedlin · · Score: 1

    There have been times that I have gotten fed up with problems with XFree86, and downloaded trials of Accel-X, goign back to 2.1 and most recently with 4.x or 5 (I don't remember) for a laptop.

    The first was a problem on an old S3_911 card, that would occasionally crash X, and with the old version of XiG (this was in 1995) it took out the whole machine. I went back and tolerated the smaller XFree problems.

    There have been other instances I don't remember clearly, but recently with a Laptop using a CL 7548. I had wierd problems with XFree, and X-accell just took the machine out. Needless to say I have never purchased the non demo of their product. If it crashes in 10 minutes, I am not going to buy it.

    On a side note, I have always been very happy with XFree's quick resolution of these problems. My current computers, my desktop with a Matrox Millinium 2, and my Laptop with a Neomagic, seem to work great on XFree, and I have no desire to introduce instablity in machines that haven't ever crashed with the current versions of the software.

    I hope someone at Xig is reading this. Mabey they will cut the FUD.

  111. Re:Accel X is not that stable either (offtopic) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I don't have a Real Solution for you (sorry) but I've seen XFree86 have a problem w/ this as well (today, actually). As I understand it gpm and X fight over the mouse, thinking they are both exclusive users.

    I usually disable gpm. (under rh 'chkconfig --level 345 gpm off; /etc/rc.d/init.d/gpm stop')

    Also, try 'man gpm'.

  112. Re:The XFree team is "Closed",so quality is concer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you try to join them? It's VERY easy. They are
    really open... Just send a message about it.

  113. Don't believe the hype by murlock · · Score: 1

    Personally, although I was able to get greater color depths with Accelerated-X, I could never get the resolutions to which I've become accustomed to in XFree and windows. Accelerated-X claimed my hardware was not capable of 1600x1200 at any refresh rate or color depth, yet it clearly is, since that's the resolution I have running on XFree as I type this.

  114. Re:crash? by BigPink · · Score: 1
    The X server is independent from the kernel in the same way that the monitor is independent from the machine: if the monitor goes out, the system keeps running, but you're probably not going to get much done.

    The X server can't actually cause a kernel panic, but it does take control of the mouse and the keyboard. If it crashes badly enough, it can effectively cut off the console. If the machine is networked, you could go to another machine on the network, telnet in, and reboot. If not, you're pretty much forced to hit the 'ol reset button. In the ~3 years I have used XFree86 on Linux, I have had this happen maybe 3 times. I've found that the trick is to watch the memory footprint of X. When it gets too huge, restart X. I wind up doing this once every week or two.

    --
    -- THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK -- --
  115. Commercial and free X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Accelerated X might perform better on some cards. But the cost/benefit isnt that good. My X server only crashed 2-3 times and that only because I misconfigured it. If its configurated correctly it is rock stable. Just as stable as an X server can be.

  116. This is nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember seeing ads like this in LJ two or three years ago, slamming XFree86 just as this one does. That, along with their CDE product being a complete and total POS (yes, I know how you people feel about CDE; the decision to standardize on it for the whole center wasn't mine), such that X apps (not just things that used the CDE libraries - anything that used X) you built on machines that had it installed would not run on machines that didn't have it installed due to extra libraries being linked in, was the reason I successfully made the case for dumping X Inside. The only reason we ever used their X server product in the first place was because XFree86 was lagging behind at the time (a situation that has improved greatly since - thanks to all the XFree86 programmers.) Once we had working XFree86 servers, I saw no need to throw any more money at X Inside.

    I haven't seen this ad anywhere, but I'm not surprised it's running. I am surprised that the marauding Slashdot forces haven't noticed it before...

  117. Been using Linux about five and a half years by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    In that time I believe I've had my xfree86 X server die inexplicably about 3 times. I've had my window manger crash about 15 times and I've had Netscape consume all resources on my system, necessitating a power cycle about 8 times (Disabling java and javascript helps this problem immensly.) I've had to power cycle my machine 4 or 5 times because a Voodoo enabled application crashed leaving the voodoo card in a non-usable state.

    With the exception of the voodoo problems and the netscape problems, none of the crashes ever affected the operating system proper (With the vooodoo issues I could have tenetted in and rebooted remotely if I'd had the resources.) It either goes back to the command line or back to XDM depending on where I started X from on that particular system.

    I would like to note for the record here that all the worst lockups on my system were the result of commercial software. It is my experience that commerical software can not match open source software for quality and reliability (And I've seen the guts of a lot of proprietary commercial software and worked on a lot of it myself.) A good portion of this problem is a simple allocation of resources. How many programmers does Accelerated X have working on any given X server. How many can Xfree86 marshall? If worse comes to worse you can always hack your X server yourself if you're using an open source product.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  118. Re:I've had that happen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Microsoft just spouts sunshine about itself." ??? This is a joke, right?

  119. Re:Xi's server crapped out on me by demon · · Score: 1

    Nod. Those apps make a lot of use of MIT shared memory, and AccelX has often in the past had a broken MITSHM implementation. (Doesn't seem like it'd be so hard... the official X11 source tree has all the code right there, but...) Of course, I still don't know about their DGA situation - do they have DGA at all? If so, are they making ANY attempt to be compatible with XFree86? (Yes, XiG, XFree86 is STILL the setter-of-standards.)

    --

    Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
    Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
  120. [offtopic] email clients by David+Jao · · Score: 1
    TkRat can send and save mime attachments. What more do you want, an integrated office suite?

    As for URLs, every time I click on them in tkrat, it fires up netscape.

    Don't even get me started on html mail ... if your job requires html mail, I feel sorry for you.

    I guess the difference between you and me is that I want a mail client that can read mail, and you want something that looks pretty and can handle attachments, html, and other things not generally meant to be done with email. Maybe actually reading mail is a secondary priority for you, considering how badly Netscape Messenger crashes on you all the time.

  121. YES but KDE needs an automated tool for this :) by Sleepy · · Score: 1
    You can also change to a virtual terminal to kill the X server, provided your keyboard isn't locked out, even if Ctrl-Alt-Backspace doesn't seem to work. Let's not forget that LOTS of people have networks at home now. Telnetting in isn't impossible...you don't even need a second Linux box. Although, you are correct in stating that if X crashes AND locks out your keyboard AND you can't telnet in, you're pretty well hosed.

    What - TELNET in?!?
    Just download KReset and you have a nice push-button interface for resetting stuck display servers. You can even STORE your ROOT login password in the application so grandmama can fix her display without calling you at 3am.

    This would be MUCK more useful than say KTop, a graphical interface to the awkward and very DOS-like "top" command. I was very saddened when I discovered there was no homepage for Ktop... [sniff!].

    KIDDING folks.. put down the knife Pitr.. :)

  122. NT is much worse on this count by David+Jao · · Score: 2
    You are completely missing the point. Of course when your graphics subsystem crashes it might leave the keyboard locked up. This holds true whether you're on Linux or NT.

    The difference is that in Linux, when the graphics subsystem crashes, you at least have the option of killing the X server over the network. With NT, if the graphics subsystem crashes (and don't tell me it never crashes), you're looking at a blue screen.

    The ability to recover via network when the graphics subsystem crashes is a feature that is useful and absent in Windows NT. It's ironic that you slam X crashes as leaving a Linux system unusable, when in reality the situation is exactly opposite of what you describe. Between Linux and Windows, the only OS that is left unusable by a graphics system crash is Windows, not Linux.

  123. Re:Accelerated X is not worth $100.. or even $1.00 by BitS · · Score: 1

    My wheel mouse works flawlessly... and as for OpenGL... perhaps you should read the part that says you have to buy the OpenGL libraries...

    Although, I think they should be included with AccelX... paying $100 for it was enough, add in the price of the OGL libs ($150 i think?) and its way over priced... I think Xig needs to realize charging $100 for AccelX alone is pretty bad when you can find copies of Win9x floating around for the same price... perhaps not legitimate... but the home user really doesn't CARE who supplies them with the CD... just that they get it.

    --
    http://www.schizo.com/
  124. Interesting by BDKR · · Score: 1

    Who are these guys? One would think that they are from the Windows camp with statements like these. Was it the suits that said this crap, or the developers?

    Oh well, when you get down to it, X stability is a given. To think that it could ever be up for some sort of questioning is unbelievable by itself.

    BDKR

  125. XiG by inspiron7k · · Score: 1

    Funny, I have had X-free crash on me about twice in six months. I wonder if the XiG driver allows you to ctrl+alt+bckspce? I have never had my Linux box freeze because of the Xserver. Maybe I am just lucky. Kinda sad to know that FUD is not just a Micro$haft ploy :o(

    --
    "One world, One people, One Operating system" Micro$haft Ad "Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer" Crazed European Dictator
  126. Re:Actually ... [Bit Planes] by Jeremy+Chatfield · · Score: 1
    Changing bit planes is not plausible with X. In the very first exchange between X client and X Server, the X Server offers the visuals and color depths supported and the resolution. There is no protocol request or event to notify the X client that the Server has changed these characteristics and there is no way for a client to ask the X Server to change them.

    Probably the easiest way to gain a similar effect is to use a graphics card that can support hardware overlays. That way you can have both 8bpp applications (using 255 colors) and 24bpp applications. Use the 8bpp overlay planes as a default and your WM and other simple apps will save system memory and don't interfere with the separate 24bpp planes at all.

    'ps', 'top' and most other process listing utilities do not seperate system memory and driver memory use. Many (most) graphics chips are now used with memory mapping. This can result in the X Server memory mapping more memory than exists in the system. I've seen systems where the X Server uses 150% of available memory and apps use the other 80% ;-) That's more of a defect in process listing tools than in the X Server or the X Window System.

    Accelerated-X should be fine with the i740 in 24bpp color depth, both in the normal AGP and in the StarFighter PCI version. That's not an X failure or a Linux failure...

    Cheers, JeremyC.

    --
    Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
  127. Tried AccelX... wasn't worth it to me by thule · · Score: 1

    It was nice, but XFree86 seems to have all the nice toys these days. Can't wait until 4.0!! Can AccelX keep up? I'd use AccelX if there was no hope that XFree86 would get drivers for a particular card.

  128. Re:Entire OS with it? Bullshit! by Dirtside · · Score: 1
    Actually, it's in the Oxford English Dictionary. I looked it up the first time I heard it. It means the same thing as regardless.

    You might want to check before spewing bullshit next time, English Nazi.

    --- Dirtside

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
  129. The topless donut store phenomenon by hawk · · Score: 2

    We've seen that one over here, without help fo the government :)

    Every couple of years, usually in California, someone opens a topless donut store. Not the customers, but topless waitresses. Yes, it's a dumb idea, and not viable. Left to themselves, they'd be gone within a month.

    But what happens, which they *count on* before opening, is that NOW will come picket, and local news will cover the pickets. They sell a lot of donuts (probably very bad donuts :) for a couple of months, and then go away--having made a killing, thanks to the notoriety.

  130. Or try this one (if the above doesn't work) by phantomstranger · · Score: 1
    http://www.ferretsfirst.com/tpz/

    I should know - not only did I build the pages, I also experienced the crash that (ultimately) required me to wipe out and reinstall Linux (Caldera OpenLinux 2.2).

    Netscape 4.61 -- The program itself freezes, but X and KDE are still responsive, allowing me to kill it.

    Netscape 4.7 -- Totally froze the whole system. Keyboard and mouse froze. Forced to reboot. Linux was *not* happy with my decision, and locked up again on restart.

    If you use 4.7 *Don't go there*!!! (Unless you're incredibly brave)

    MP

    1. Re:Or try this one (if the above doesn't work) by QuMa · · Score: 1

      Yes, I am incredibly brave. I went there with NS 4.7, no problem. Is this just a nice way to get hits? :-)

    2. Re:Or try this one (if the above doesn't work) by Wiseleo · · Score: 1

      I must be a divine creature...

      I can actually enjoy viewing that site without difficulties... I even switched resolutions, moved it to a different vdesktop, reloaded a bunch of times.

      Is it supposed to make my box crash or do a mind melt? I don't know... I know only one site that crashes Netscape very successfully. That site is http://www.playsite.com. Ironically, I am one of the chat moderators there, and it gets to be annoying. Gonna try Netscape 3.04 gold and pretty sure it won't crash.

      Specs:

      Suse 6.1
      KDE
      Netscape Comm 4.61
      160mb ram
      --
      Leonid S. Knyshov
      Network Administrator

      --
      Leonid S. Knyshov
      Find me on Quora :)
    3. Re:Or try this one (if the above doesn't work) by Zappa · · Score: 1

      works fine with my suse 6.2/netscape 4.61. was in the chess chatroom...

  131. Dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How are they supposed to make any money and give the source code away?

  132. Re:xig should fire their marketers: this is foolis by Quikah · · Score: 1



    This is nothing new. About a year ago a huge flamewar erupted in comp.os.linux.x about XFree 4.0, the participents included Jeremy Chatfield and Thomas Roell of Xig (me too). It was all extremely ugly and distasteful. I lost all respect for Xig after this, they acted in a very unprofessional manner (and I wasn't too proud of my own actions, but I wasn't representing a company). The thread is here.


    Apologies if this doesn't work right, dejanews has sucked ever since they changed their interface.Just do a search of "XFree86 4.0 /X11R6.4 ".

    --
    Q.
  133. What graphics board? by Jeremy+Chatfield · · Score: 1
    Both are fine for me.. but you don't report the graphics card that you use. Just because it crashes for you, doesn't mean that it will crash on all graphics cards on all X Servers.

    The 4.61 crash sounds like a netscape bug. The 4.7 crash sounds like an X Server crash. Most X Server crashes are h/w dependent. Usually, a bug that can kill or disrupt one X Server on one h/w platform is completely irrelevant to a different X Server and graphics chip. It may not even affect a different revision of the same graphics board (e.g. different memory type or different graphics chip revision).

    Cheers, JeremyC.

    --
    Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
    1. Re:What graphics board? by phantomstranger · · Score: 1

      Creative Labs Riva TNT Not using any specialized drivers or server software (mainly because I don't have the time to try and figure out how to use nVidia's drivers at their site.)

    2. Re:What graphics board? by Jeremy+Chatfield · · Score: 1
      When we looked at the Creative Labs X Server, it was indistinguishable from the XFree86 Server, which in turn was drawn from the nVidia sources.

      Having source code for the X Server doesn't matter if you don't have the databook for the graphics chip. Without the data book for the graphics chip, you are in pretty much the same state as someone without the source code. There is some small stuff you can do, but considering that the errata for a graphics chip may rival the size of the databook, you are unlikely to ever work out what is wrong and how to fix it.

      You make the point for us. Your X Server is crashing, you don't know why and there is, in practical terms, no way for you to fix the XFree86 sources. For a fee, we take responsibility for the X Server.

      Cheers, JeremyC.

      --
      Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
  134. Not really news. by patrikr · · Score: 1

    They've been running these ads in LJ for quite a while... Can't say I like the way they use "free" like a dirty word though. :P

    --

    --
    All Glory To The Hypnotoad!
  135. Re:Article text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure. Xig should have hyped the speed aspect of their X server while not trying quite so hard to scare more users away from Linux in general rather than just Xfree.

  136. Re:Article text by gellor · · Score: 1

    "Accelerated-X is like a fresh set of tires on brand-new blacktop."


    That statement becomes all the more funny when you realize that in real life if you start to get too jiggy with new tires on fresh blacktop you'll soon end up in a ditch. Zero traction. Believe me, I watched my roommate NAIL his brand new '99 Subaru Legacy GT into a median due to excatly those conditions...

  137. The last time mine crashed... by schon · · Score: 2

    Well, I'd love to say that I've never seen X crash, but the unforutnate truth is that it crashed on me a couple of times (actually, it was an old version of KWM that crashed - and it was reproducable... but it only ever happened with an old S3 video card.) And yes, it was a complete lock-up.. no network or anything else.

    Also, my computer has crashed a few times in Linux; always with NFS (if I don't use NFS, it works 100%)

    Netscape (under Linux) has crashed a total of 4 times (I think - might be only 3..) in 18 months.

    Other than that, I've never experienced a single crash, or lockup, or failure (and this is on 18 boxes.)

    I'd say that's pretty damn stable.

  138. Re:never seen _Xfree_ crash, but... by Jose · · Score: 1

    I have seen accelX take down my computer before though, I was trying it out with my brand-spanking-new diamond Stealth 3200, I used the wrong settings, and poof it brought Linux down...my fault of course, but it could of at least crashed nicely...

    --
    The basic sleazeware produced in a drunken fury by a bunch of UCBerkeley grad students was still the core of BIND. --PV
  139. Re:Actually ... mine already crashed by Jeremy+Chatfield · · Score: 1
    The X Server is the graphics driver. Crudely, a program isn't X if it doesn't use an X Server. The X Server handles the keyboard (via system calls), mouse (via system calls), system memory (via system calls), the bus (directly controlled with registers, for graphics purposes) and directly controls the other graphics hardware (graphics memory, DAC, CRTC, graphics engine, bus interface).

    What you describe sounds exactly like an X Server crash, probably caused by an incorrect configuration or because the hardware is more recent than the X Server support. Cheers, JeremyC.

    --
    Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
  140. Re:Competing? by Schnedt · · Score: 1

    The XFree project's goal is to produce "a freely redistributable implementation of the X Window System that runs on UNIX(R) and UNIX-like operating systems (and OS/2)."

    There is also a port now to Windows NT running Interix, although I haven't tried building or running it.

  141. Isn't the whole point of Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that it tends to be more stable than proprietary code because anyone is free to look at it and point out bugs... Personally, I'm very impressed with X86Free; it's always been very stable for me.

    1. Re:Isn't the whole point of Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that's supposedly the whole point of Open Source.

      Not that anybody can enforce a definition of "Open Source" (oh wait! they can! didn't one of the Advocacy Groups(tm) [Airsick Raymond's group?] trademark it recently?)

  142. Re:Netscape Crashing by Xidus · · Score: 1

    By the way, has anyone figured out what's different between 4.6 and 4.7? Besides the "Shop" button, that is. ALL the bugs I found in 4.6 are still in 4.7. What the hell was the point of that release?

    4.7 seems to be more stable on my system. It still crashes intermittently, and I've never figured out why, but it seems to do so less frequently. As far as new features, I don't know of any. (no, I don't count an extra button on the toolbar and a few extra links from the 'Window' menu features)

    When you're talking about X crashes, btw, it matters whether you're talking about an end user or a guru. To an end user, an X crash is just as bad as a Losedows crash -- it requires a reboot. To the guru, the crash is simply an inconvenience which rarely does any damage. IE, the important services are still running, just have to open all those shell windows again.

    I don't remember who stated that an X crash leaves Linux in an unusable state, but it's completely false. At worst, you may have to telnet in and kill running X servers, but it doesn't leave anything unusable. Rebooting won't help any, at least.

    --
    $ more ~/.sig
    ******** .sig: Not a text file ********
  143. crash? by kaniff · · Score: 1

    I was under the impression that the X server was seperate from the operating system itself. So when X dies or anything, the system continues to run. And X can just be restarted or the offending processes killed. The description seems a little misleading, "the entire operating system goes down and the user unfairly blames Linux." I think someone is just trying to jump on the linux bandwagon by selling replacement tools that fix nonexistent problems.

    That's what my experience has been. :)
    And I think I'm first.




    kaniff -- Ralph Hart Jr

    1. Re:crash? by valdemar · · Score: 3

      Well, they are only seperate in name. The X server runs as root and has full access to the hardware on the system, it can even disable and enable interrupts whenever it likes. Thus, a bug in its low level driver code would be the same as a bug in the kernel. It could happily walk all over kernel data structures. Or even if the driver was ok and the code that called it was buggy and told it to DMA a chunk of video memory into kernel space, there would be nothing to stop it.

  144. Re:Entire OS with it? Bullshit! -- not by Ivootje · · Score: 1

    X crashes a lot on me. OK, It's probably the crappy app I programmed myself, with the huge memoryleak, but...

    I couldn't get out with CTRL-ALT-F1, CTRL-ALT-BS or sysrq-K or R. Logging in remote said X did die, but the screen still showed my frozen desktop. sysrq-(nice sequence to sync,unmount,reboot) worked, tho, but when I can't restart X anymore, that's about the same as "bring Linux down" for me.

    Still, it was my own crappy X app, but that did bring down my X server. Too bad an app can bring down the Xserver

  145. Not true by Sanity · · Score: 1
    I am not so sure that UK companies are banned from negative campaigning - although it is rare. I saw an AOL advert the other night on TV which specifically mentioned one of its competitors (I can't recall which one).

    --

    1. Re:Not true by Gid1 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it was something to the effect of:

      "Ten hours of peak-time usage of Freeserve will cost you 24 ukp, whereas it'll only cost 16 ukp on AOL"

      It just sounded desperate to me. One more reason to turn AOL CD-ROMs into large-scale Tazos.

    2. Re:Not true by jd · · Score: 2
      It depends a bit on the number of complaints lodged with the Advertising Standards Authority, and how quickly they act. Sometimes, a ban on a specific advertising campaign is only issued -after- the campaign has finished.

      Othertimes, the ASA will avoid taking action, because the company in question has launched an illegal advertising campaign -in order- to be banned. (This happened with the Club 18 holidays, a few years back.) The publicity the press give such a ban is often greater than that which the adverts gave, and all for no cost.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  146. Re:Accelerated X is not worth $100.. or even $1.00 by teg · · Score: 1

    AcceleratedX does support wheeled mice, and there is an OpenGL library available - which costs extra. It's also easy to make it use a generic monitor. This price is rather high, though - and far too high if you include OpenGL. A good thing about the upcoming XFree is that I believe Xi will have to lower their price on the X/OpenGL as they need to make it one package. PS: I first bought for my old I128. It crashed the XFree server frequently, as well as being real slow - even after it got acceleration support. With AcceleratedX, it was very speedy. With my new Riva TNT, XFree is fast enough and stable enough.

  147. FUD for the managers by TheDullBlade · · Score: 2

    When was the last time your XFree86 crashed? When was the last time your computer crashed, and you blamed it on Linux?

    I've had Gnome and Enlightenment crash on me plenty of times (hmm... beta software and beta software, what a great choice for the default setup on RedHat), so I switched to wmx and now the only thing that crashes is Netscape (and my own stuff while under development).

    Yeah, you need a commercial quality X server about as much as you need a commercial quality OS.

    --
    /.
    1. Re:FUD for the managers by Greg+Merchan · · Score: 1

      I have to agree, this is pure FUD. Not only does XFree86 rarely crash, but it never generates a kernel oops, or any such thing. Maybe I'm in a mood today, but this ad really pissed me off and though I considered shopping around commercial X servers, I'm sure as hell not going to use this one and probably no other either. As for those few crashes...the usual culprit is a java app in netscape. (Whoever thought of using java to make a web page pretty or for any other thing that doesn't need it should go work for the company that makes this ad.)

      Lest I be too negative, I can proudly say that I've renedered my laptop inoperable through my own foolishness. (Actually, if I'd had a net connection at the time, I could have fixed it by remotely killing my client, and the X server would have been fine.) I must remember not to grab to keyboard and pointer asynchronously, or was it synchronously, when I don't process their input. :)

      Thank you for this opportunity to rant.

    2. Re:FUD for the managers by eric17 · · Score: 1

      Just the other day. Its happened twice in a few months. Never "brought down the OS" but of course all the X apps died... Started happening after a Gfx card change...dang driver must need work.

      -- Eric

  148. The X server isn't solely responsible for C&P by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
    It drives me nuts that I can't cut and paste from emacs to Netscape. If Accelerated X would fix that, it might be worth the money.

    The Accelerated-X server's involvement in cut-and-paste is that it accepts requests from X clients to set and get various properties on windows, and the like; the problem you're having is probably a problem with what either Emacs or Netscape is doing, not with what the X server is doing.

    Maybe those applications are dynamically-linked with toolkit libraries that are doing the X requests to do the cut-and-paste operations, and maybe, if you also use XiG's versions of the client libraries, it'll work better (or if you relink a statically-linked Emacs with those libraries), but I wouldn't count on it.

    I just tried it with GNU Emacs 19.34.3 and Netscape Communicator 4.02 on Solaris 2.5.1 (displaying on Exceed on an NT box); paste-current-selection (i.e., select something in the GNU Emacs window, and hit the middle mouse button in the Netscape window) worked, but true copy-and-paste (select something in the GNU Emacs window, use the "Edit/Copy" menu item in Emacs, go to the Netscape window, select the "Location" box, and try to use "Edit/Paste") didn't - the "Edit" menu had "Paste" grayed out. (I did copy-and-paste rather than cut-and-paste because I ran Emacs on a file to which I didn't have write access; both of them should use the CLIPBOARD X selection in order to Play Well With Others.)

  149. Re:Entire OS with it? Bullshit! by spectecjr · · Score: 1

    What really amuses me is everyone saying that "Linux never crashes" and "Linux is stable", and claiming that NT crashes all the time, when in fact it's the same scenario as when the NT GUI goes down; the kernel is still going, it's just that you can't do anything from the GUI.

    Simon

    --
    Coming soon - pyrogyra
  150. I've had that happen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I've had X crash linux a number of times. I've also had the filesystem corrupt on me a couple of times, too, so maybe I just have the bad mojo... :(

    On the other hand, I don't like mudslinging. (The linux crowd seem really guilty of this... how many of those banners have we see with the dummy crashing into a monitor with the windows or mac logo on it.) At least Microsoft just spouts sunshine about itself.

    -trish

    1. Re:I've had that happen... by bmetzler · · Score: 2
      At least Microsoft just spouts sunshine about itself.

      I think I just spurted Mountain Dew out of both nostrils or something.

      That was great.

      -Brent
      --
    2. Re:I've had that happen... by Waldo · · Score: 1

      "At least Microsoft just spouts sunshine about itself."


      Yeah, they can afford to pay other people to do their mudslinging.
  151. Re:You've lost me by Foogle · · Score: 1
    Ok, let's be honest with ourselves - I know that you're just trying to make a point about their ad tactics, but would you ever really have bought something from them anyway? I mean, face it: most of the people here at /. are Linux-users and, as a general rule, we don't pay for most of our software.

    I think my point here is that the /. crowd wasn't their target anyway. They're looking to snag corporate buyers who want a product that they can sell their boses on. This isn't about quality - it's about viability. And, unfortunately, the two just don't go hand in hand in the corporate world.

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  152. They have a (slight) point by Mark+F.+Komarinski · · Score: 1

    No offense to the XF86 guys, since I've been using their product since ..well forever (7 years now? wow.). I have seen recent releases that just don't work with the hardware I had (an S3V/VX and CT69000 come to mind). Earlier releases worked just fine. As the later releases came out, the S3V quit working with the release bundled with RedHat 6.0, and the CT69000 quit working with the 6.1 release. I did get the CT69000 working, but not without tuning off BitBlt, forcing me to modify the XF86config file. Both situations would cause my Linux box to hang hard (requiring me to hit the reset switch). I wound up replacing the S3V with a G400MAX (get one now!).

    That being said, Xig is not really playing nice. There are certainly other things that differentiate Xig with the standard XF86 product. Performance, multi-head (now), and bleeding-edge cards.

    --
    -- Ever notice that fast-burning fuse looks exactly the same as slow-burning fuse? I didn't... (Edgar Montrose)
    1. Re:They have a (slight) point by Cannon · · Score: 1

      I've got a ViRGE/GX2, and the system WILL freeze unless I add Option "no_accel" to my XF86Config file. I've tried numerous fixes I found searching DejaNews, every resolution/color depth combination imaginable as well as every XF86 update since I bought the card. With the acceleration features turned off, X will run for weeks on end - usually until KDE decides to crash, but otherwise, I am guaranteed a frozen system (not even network access) soon after starting X.

    2. Re:They have a (slight) point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm the one of the maintainers of the C&T driver in XFree86 and I am always very interested in hearing about problems with the driver. If you haven't already, send a bug report to xfree@xfree86.org or contact me personally on dbateman@club-internet.remove.fr after removing the anti-spamming Basically there has been no changes to the C&T driver since 3.3.3pl1 since all development effort has been on getting a good driver for XFree 4.0. So it surprises me that the CT69000 driver stopped working between Redhat 6.0 and Redhat 6.1. This sounds like it might be a Redhat specific problem because of this. So you might also like to contact Redhat's support

    3. Re:They have a (slight) point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There were known problems with the S3 server in RedHat 6.0. Their updates fixed the problem.

    4. Re:They have a (slight) point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have some Linux machines here running with S3V cards (VX and GX). Even with RH6. There's only one of them that freezes the whole system (the GX one), but only when using 24 bpp (16 bpp all is fine). The other seem to work fine (haven't tested them throughly though, they're not in my machine).

    5. Re:They have a (slight) point by majikthyze · · Score: 1

      Have to agree. Love XF86, but on a number of occasions it just hasn't properly supported my config. I just bought Xi's LX 5 'cause the support wasn't there in XF86 and I'm not willing to wait.

  153. Re:Why AcceleratedX does indeed rock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I haven't had experience with Accelerated-X, haven't had a need for it
    I can attest to the ease of XFree. I've used an *unsupported* video card (Unsupported by XiG, and XFree, currently they both are offering support though) with a hacked driver on my laptop with out incident. After the driver hassle, it took me approximately 5 minutes to establish a working X server
    Lets see Accelerated-X give me that capability
    This is why open source rocks.
    I'm not bashing Accelerated X or XiG, but sticking up for XFree. They both provide capabilities that the other doesn't have. But slinging mud is not a good marketing technique. Leave that to politicians.

  154. Re:Netscape Crashing by kuro5hin · · Score: 2
    As the poster above pointed out-- the libc5 version has major problems with complicated table sets. Other Netscape problems:
    • The textarea widget leaks up memory like no one's business. If you're going to leave netscape open for a while, for god's sake don't leave it displaying a textarea widget!
    • Intermittently, Messenger (the only semi-functional IMAP client I've found for linux btw, for X) will go into some kind of loop, where it cycles using 100% of the processor, then 0%, etc about once per second. It also fails to get mail, frequently, stalls on IMAP connects, etc etc. Basically it needs to be restarted about every fifth time I check for mail.
    I'm getting really sick of netscape, myself. I wish there was another option.

    By the way, has anyone figured out what's different between 4.6 and 4.7? Besides the "Shop" button, that is. ALL the bugs I found in 4.6 are still in 4.7. What the hell was the point of that release?

    ----
    We all take pink lemonade for granted.

    --
    There is no K5 cabal.
    I am not the real rusty.
  155. Re:Yes, I noticed on the back of LJ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is it you know so much about marketing if you are such a techie? Maybe you just know it all.

  156. Re:What a better way to... by Zagato-sama · · Score: 1

    Evil Empire? Oh please ;) Linux advocates have been "trouncing" Windows for years, who exactly is the great shining hero in this scenario? Linux? Give me a break.

  157. Re:Accel X is not that stable either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that mouse problem is familiar to me. are you sure you are using the IMPS/2 driver?

  158. Re:X stability/Accelerated-X Design by Jeremy+Chatfield · · Score: 1
    Accelerated-X use still uses "classic" Intel UNIX X Server design of a root privilige process that directly accesses graphics hardware. Workstation designs usually use a kernel device driver. Xi Graphics (under contract) has done Workstation style designs, too.

    Do they help? Umm, not really. If you get the code wrong, it goes wrong as easily in the kernel as in user space.

    What does help? Testing, testing, testing... Most of the bugs we find aren't caused by X Server design, but by graphics chip changes or misleading statements in databooks and sometimes by human error (typographic errors in coding).

    Every Accelerated-X driver module is subjected to many automated tests and several types of human testing. We use things like the freely available X Test Suite and our own tools. We also monitor an automated problem reporting mail address. Accelerated-X has a feature that when it crashes, most of the time it will generate a human readable crash dump and email it. That finds some failures that we miss in the standard testing, or identifies new hardware variants that crash with the normal code.

    Cheers, JeremyC.

    --
    Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
  159. Re:Entire OS with it? Bullshit! by DaveHowe · · Score: 1
    What really amuses me is everyone saying that "Linux never crashes" and "Linux is stable", and claiming that NT crashes all the time, when in fact it's the same scenario as when the NT GUI goes down; the kernel is still going, it's just that you can't do anything from the GUI.
    Odd, whenever an NT box I have the misfortune to need BSODs out, I seem to lose drives mapped to it, and the webserver stops responding. I wasn't aware those were normally considered parts of the GUI.....


    --

    --
    -=DaveHowe=-
  160. Re:Yes, I noticed on the back of LJ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even a relative un-social techie can realize that it is typically counterproductive to annoy your intended customers. These aren't monopolists. They need to operate with some minimal amount of tact.

    Otherwise, their intended audience can and just might go tell them what they should do with themselves.

  161. Re:Enjoying Linux w/o X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is "Beavis!" I am just too lazy to log in. I posted the comment you replied to. You missed the point. Besides, do you use a program for the program's sake or for doing something useful. Drawing a graphic is useful. Making beautiful music is useful. And yes, coding is also useful. But to tie all of those elements together, you need a GUI. If you can give me one example of a program that will run in a shell that give you beautiful output on screen and allows you manipulate (with complete accuracy and control) that output interactively, then I will shut up. But you can't because there isn't one. Eye candy is not for neophytes. It is for the new breed of geek who is aesthetically aware. Oh yeah. And X doesn't suck. Xig's ad is a farce. Their X server may have some niceties over XFree, but if you are poor and you have to pay for it, it still sucks.

  162. Re:Xi AD. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Well I have just started using XFree for the first time in three years. I have just upgraded the OS and the old Xig 4.1 did not work with the new libraries.

    Anyway, using the tool I had at hand (SuSE) it was easy to get XFree working, but it is slower and I have seen screen corruption (random drawing) when scrolling a window contents fast. This never happend with the Xig Server I used earlier.

    So I am going to get me a new version of the Xig server because it is a very good X-server, but I dont need a stupid ad to be convinced.

  163. Re:Actually ... mine already crashed by Lev_Arris · · Score: 1

    I finally found out what was wrong: The frequencies for the 'monitor' were causing problems with the LCD display that's hooked to the server. So I booted in NT, copied the freq's from the Info the On Screen Display gave me and used them to set up X and voila, it worked!

  164. Weak Argument by prok · · Score: 1

    What makes a graphics card so different from any other card in your machine? Nobody said you had to stuff the X server into the kernel. All you really need is the code that talks to the hardware.

  165. whatever. by AugstWest · · Score: 1

    After 2 or 3 years of dealing with Linux systems in whatever spare time I can muster, I still consider myself a newbie. A lot of X is still a mystery to me, as is much of the system itself.

    Still, I have never had a problem with X, and never had a problem with it crashing. From the first time I installed RedHat 4.2, X has *always* stood up and saluted....

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

      I have to agree. I also consider myself a 'newbie' after a few years of playing around with Linux. I also agree that X has never crashed at all. Of the times that I have crashed, it has usually been my own stupidity. That is the answer, stupid people that cannot admit it. "Gee, must be the OS...I would never do anything wrong."
      Well, free is better, and X is stable, and I don't bother my time with this FUD.

  166. Re:Netscape Crashing by Wiseleo · · Score: 1

    Well...

    In my observations Netscape's development went severely downhill after release 4.05.

    Don't get me wrong, I used to be a member of DevEdge and loved Netscape. :)

    I think as soon as they started integrating Netcenter, what's related, and other nonsense the number of problems increased.

    What really pissed me off is that I had to edit prefs.js to turn off the Netcenter crap. Then again, AOL purchased them, what could you expect? User-friendly way to turn off annoyances? ;-)

    I would advise using Netscape's FTP archive for previously released versions and download release 3.04gold. That's probably the most stable release they ever had with no Netcenter nonsense and quality engineering.

    I have a DevEdge CD with all releases of Netscape up to 4.5 for all platforms, and this is the most stable version.
    --
    Leonid S. Knyshov
    Network Administrator

    --
    Leonid S. Knyshov
    Find me on Quora :)
  167. No LBX support in Accelerated X. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Accelerated X still doesn't have lbx (low bandwidth X) support. Is it so hard to define BuildLBX to Yes before compiling? Or probably they don't know what lbx is?

  168. Article text by konstant · · Score: 4

    You mean, two competing products are.... competing????

    Here is the text of the gigantic image:

    Bumpty Ride

    Buckle up. If you're still using that "free" X server that came with your Linux distribution, well, hazardous conditions lie ahead.

    The X Server is the graphics sub-system in a Linux or UNIX installation. It is more than twice the size of the Linux kernel and much, much busier. Critical communications, fonts, drawing, windowing, mouse, keyboard, memory functions, and more all depend on the X server.

    When the X server "falls over" - crashes - the entire operating system goes down. And usually, the user unfairly blames Linux itself.

    To make your graphical Linux all that it can be, you need a commercial quaklity X server that's proven itself in thousands of mission-critical applications. An X server that delivers the full power of your graphics hardware to your LCD or monitor in the form of crisp, clean, and fast images. For all that, you need Accelerated-X.

    Unmatched stability. Lightning-fast graphics. Superior performance. You'll find accelerated-X is like a fresh set of tires on brand-new blacktop. Want a test drive? Steer your browser to our website.

    -konstant

    --
    -konstant
    Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!
    1. Re:Article text by Zerth · · Score: 2

      I don't know what mags this ad's been running in, but sure bet it is probably something like PHB World or something. It is just a bunch of superlatives connected to some semi-meaning[ful,less] nouns and verbs by heaping bucketfuls of business-speke. "Accelerated-X is like a fresh set of tires on brand-new blacktop."

      What kind of analogy is that? This ad probably appeals to people who like that computers that come with built-in cupholders.

    2. Re:Article text by Stephen+VanDahm · · Score: 1

      I don't understand the point of the ad. People who are going to be scared of a free X server are going to be scared of a free operating system.

      The only replacement for XFree86 I've used is something called MetroX (is that right?). it came on an old Red Hat 5.0 CD -- I didn't see any difference, so I switched back to XFree86 when Red Hat 5.2 came out.

      And the X server has never crashed in the 12 months I've been running Linux on my box.

      Take care,

      Steve

    3. Re:Article text by m2 · · Score: 1
      I don't know what mags this ad's been running in, but sure bet it is probably something like PHB World or something.

      Linux Journal. Picked a copy at the Frankfurt airport. Read the ad. Thought about sending a comment about it to /., gave it a second thought. It was not worth it.

    4. Re:Article text by Wiggin · · Score: 1

      My computer DID come with a built-in cupholder. The only problem is that it broke, and for some reason tech support won't send me a new one ... =)

      --

      "I don't need a compass to tell me which way the wind shines." - Mr. Furious, Mystery Men
    5. Re:Article text by FooGoo · · Score: 1

      It's simple you never mention a competing product in your advertising it shows fear and makes will make people who never heard of it check it out.

      --
      People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them
  169. Re:Netscape Crashing by bcboy · · Score: 1

    >I don't remember who stated that an X crash leaves Linux in an unusable state, but it's completely false

    You're dead wrong. You assume that the X hot keys are still working, that the machine is networked, or that you have a 2.2 kernel with the sysrq keys compiled in & sysrq K actually manages to get X unstuck.

    None of these are necessarily true. In particular, it's absurd to say "well, just buy two computers, so when X dies you can telnet in from the other one and fix it!" yeah, right. X shouldn't leave the machine stuck in a state where you *need another machine* to fix it.

    I just ran another X hanging program (gnuplot a very large data file). When it locks, the ctrl-alt keys are *not* working. I do have sysrq, and sysrq K appears to have killed X (assuming it didn't die on its own) & since I have xdm running it was respawned.

    However the ctrl-alt keys still don't work & in fact lock up X, now. ctrl-alt-f1 freezes the display. and following this sysrq K no longer works.

    only sol'n is reboot or log in remotely (since i'm at work & have a dozen machines on the network). killing X via remote login, or going to run level 3 still doesn't get the consoles back. hot keys still don't work.

    this is some pretty serious pathology for something as simple as "plot 'data'".

  170. Dumb marketing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    That was an incredibly foolish thing to do.

    After reading that ad, I feel more devoted to XFree86 than I ever was. Now I'm interested in even contributing to the project.

    I'm sure others feel the same. Good move, XiG. Really.

    Not to say that it's wrong of them to compete or anything, they must be facing things similar to what BSDi is up against. But what a dumb thing to do.

    To add my chips to the pile. I've never ever had XFree86 -crash- on me. At work, home, on any machine, be it FreeBSD or Linux.

    Metrolink has the idea.
    Xi Graphics doesn't.

  171. Re:The thin line b/w cluelessness and stupidity by ithmus · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but if you think about it, with linux's current popularity, there are users who couldn't give two Sh*ts about the ethics and values of open source. This is most likely the market they are targeting, the market that doesn't know any better.

    --
    I'm supposed to be working right now.
  172. Re:Entire OS with it? Bullshit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ummm - I've seen it the other way around way too many times - NT allegedly running fine but a few minor services like Remote Access Manager or all TCP/IP things mysteriously stop.

  173. Had to happen by rde · · Score: 1

    Working with Linux doesn't automatically confer sainthood on one. There are mud-slingers the world over; OSS is no exception.
    However, it helps no-one; least of all the makers of this fine ad. In OSS user goodwill is more important than other branches of software. If MS piss off the user base (and when haven't they?) the users grumble but continue use. With Linux, they're outta there like a rat out of an aqueduct.

  174. I'll Second That! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    X really is shit. It's stupid to even try to write window managers running on top of X. Linux developers should have rebelled years ago.

    I'm running both RH 6.0, Suse 6.0, and Windows 95 on an overclocked Celeron 300 (OC'd to 450 MHz) on those infamous Sis 6326 video card. Before OC'ing XFree86 had problems with the display, even after numerous tweaks to the XFree86Config file. After OC'ing, Windows 95 looked great and performed great. Under both Linux distros X looked even more corrupted after OC'ing. In desperation I heard about Accelerated X, installed it (BTW, installation was a breeze!) and all the X problems I had went a way.

    The guys at Xig Graphics know how to write X Servers. And this is something the XFree86 community and the Linux community will never admit--that a commercial company can do a better job than they can. It's about time the Linux community wakes up and admits with X they blew it!

    1. Re:I'll Second That! by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
      X really is shit.

      ...

      The guys at Xig Graphics know how to write X Servers.

      So are you saying that they know how to make good servers for something that's still shit?

      Or are you saying "X" when you mean "XFree86"?

      At least some posters in this thread, when they say "X is shit", are referring to the X Window System, rather than to a particular set of server implementations for it; are you saying

      1. X, in and of itself, sucks, but XiG manage to make servers that make it suck less;
      2. X, in and of itself, dones't suck, but the XFree86 servers suck?

      (I'm not taking a position on whether X sucks or not; I'm just asking whether you think using XiG's servers is sufficient to make it not suck, or whether the real answer might be "use something other than X", e.g. Berlin?

  175. Maybe I'm lucky... by juno · · Score: 1

    or maybe not. I've NEVER had X crash on me, it was always a window manager problem.

    Slamming free software is like badmouthing Goodwill or Salvation Army.

    --

    ---- I'm going to lead you kicking and screaming, giggling and laughing into the future.

  176. LOOK..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is why you need more than one box and have a local network. your Linux DID NOT CRASH just because your keyboard and display locks up on you. go to another machine, telnet , kill the X server.
    big fscking deal.

    this RARELY happens to me, matrox millenium here.. it only happens to me when i'm using wine.

    NOW LISTEN. what's your other hardware? did you buy one of those cheapest RAM you can get your hands on? did you overclock your CPU beyond believe? do you run your puter at 90 degrees temp? many people, especially gamers, develop this idea that it's ok to overspend on a video card but it is not ok to buy high quality RAM or other critical components. i use those really old trident cards on my router and X terminals, and they NEVER crash either. If so, then you don't have the right to bitch about it. i never used anything but Xfree, but from what i heard, Acelx is very unstable.
    I don't know what the hell is the deal with "your system goes down if your X crashes." because many systems don't even have X and they seem fine to me. Lamer ad campagn is targeted to the clueless.

    *** end of bitching. ***

  177. Re:such a critical piece should be open source by dru · · Score: 1

    if it works for you, use it. I personally have been burned in the past by poor support by vendors for binary releases.

    In the ideal world, you'd contribute effort to the open source component, to make it work as well as Xaccel, instead of paying money to a bunch of greedy capitalists.

  178. Re:Why AcceleratedX does indeed rock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why does it take you an hour to setup Xfree? are you blind or something?

  179. What a bunch of nimrods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What kind of linux are those guys running. I'm glad I'm not running it. So far I've had great luck with Xfree86. Even when I've had my moments of moronism and picked the wrong video driver. I start X, it chocks and lands me back where I started. Wash-Rinse-Repeat until desired results. "Life is measured in deeds and memories, not time."

  180. Re: INFORMATIVE??!!??!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just about everything this guy says is wrong and clueless. and it is rated high score with "informative" on it????

    WHAT?

  181. Running scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They just know when XFree86 4.0 is released they're going to be in deep s**t. XFree is simply beginning to pass Xig in terms of driver support and performance.

  182. Only X type system lock I had was WITH AccelX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interestingly, the only time I've had Linux in X lock, and lock hard (random graphics across the screen, all process stop, no network connection, no way to kill X or change console: I.E. full on windows like lock) is when Accelerated X was running on a Trident 975 Image3D card... X (and the system) ran fine with XFree, just REALLY REALLY slow graphics display, which is why we went with Accelerated X in the first place... The random crashes weren't so cool though.

  183. given that their demo crashed on my box... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    xig's demo failed to run properly at all on my box.

    xfree 3 runs. and the xfree 4 alpha/beta/.../whatever runs just about fine (some enlightenment properties fail to get set -- but that will probably get fixed in due course since mandrake is working at it.

    In any case, the biggest liability of any x installation is x11 itself -- it is broken by design, and commercial quality won't help it.

    Besides, windows is also commercial quality, and we know how reliable that is :-)

  184. Really? by phantomstranger · · Score: 1

    Huh. Well, I guess it's just me then! (And no, this isn't a nice way to get hits - I lol'd when I read that!)

    1. Re:Really? by QuMa · · Score: 1

      Have you changed your fontpath as advised in the redhat FAQ? Apparently netscape has some javascript problems with the default fontpath in X in redhat 5.2 (and 6???).

    2. Re:Really? by phantomstranger · · Score: 1

      What RedHat FAQ? I'm using Caldera's distro - so I haven't got a clue. What needs to be done?
      Currently, I've got most all of the font paths set to :unscaled (Though it had trouble before I did this), and I've added a path to some extra fonts I found (stuff GIMP needs and so forth), and that's :unscaled too.

      -MP

  185. Re:Actually ... mine already crashed by Lev_Arris · · Score: 1

    ... but that was/is a driver problem. I'm currently working on installing SuSE 6.2 on an IBM Netfinity 3000 and when I select S3 Trio3D as card , which is what is supposed to sit in that machine, and then fire up X it hangs completely. (Neither CTRL+Backspace nor CTRL+ALT+DEL do anything)

    But I guess that's more the driver than X itself. At least I hope so ;)

  186. Easy way to differentiate themselves? by MrHat · · Score: 4

    In my opinion, the major advantage Xi Graphics, Inc. has over the Free Software Community is their willingness to sign non-disclosure agreements which, though they effectively tie the product to a closed-source model, allow for a fuller featured and more hardware-specific X server, not a more stable X server.

    Yes: it's corporate mudslinging at its finest, a vain attempt to differentiate themselves from the free "competition" by including terms that the public can identify with (like "stable", "secure", and "fast") that have very little technical merit. A page explaining NDA agreements and the politics of the situation wouldn't make a real convincing ad, and would prove that Xi is doing little more than attempting to translate a political advantage into an economic one.

    My 2e-2 cents...

    1. Re:Easy way to differentiate themselves? by Pulver · · Score: 1

      They are not completely wrong. While much of XFree is fast and stable, there are chipsets on which it is less than stable (particularaly newer ones), and while XFree is fast, Accel-X is almost always faster. Granted it's not something you can usually notice since modern cards are so fast even with minimal acceleration. In my case, XFree86 occasionally locks up with my Virge/MX and Accel-X has been very stable.

  187. Use a Palm handheld for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They already come with a serial cradle. Just add the mgetty line to /etc/inittab and se a good terminal program for the handheld. I've made this some times, and it works. Patola

  188. What the fuck?? by urgleburgle · · Score: 0

    Is VA trying to test its computers or something? That image could have been 1/5 the size and we would all get the general idea.

    But it _did_ work, so I guess they proved whatever they wanted to prove...

    Urgleburgle

  189. Re:I bought an X server because of this ad. by Eric+Sharkey · · Score: 2

    I now have a different graphics card, and I'm back on XF86 (those vmware accellerations are hard to beat), but I wouldn't hesitate to go to a commercial X server if I started having problems again. Nor should you.

    That's a bit of a religious issue. If you believe in free software and the philosophies behind it, that's a very strong reason not to go commercial.

    If I were having trouble running my graphics card under X-Free, and I had $150 with which to rectify the situation, I would have no trouble deciding what to do. Buy a new graphics card with better XFree support.

    I don't use commercial software when there's a viable free alternative. Nor should you.

  190. Textbook Java animation applet hangs X w/Netscape by Keith+McClary · · Score: 1

    This is getting a bit off-topic but I've had
    this problem for a while:
    I believe the applet code below is the standard
    way of doing animation in Java with buffering
    to eliminate flicker.
    When viewed with Netscape 4.51 or 4.07 on
    a celeron 400 with Redhat 5.2 using a large
    window in hi-res modes it slows X to a crawl
    and hangs X.
    I had to put a warning on my Solar System
    model:

    http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~kmcclary/

    after getting a complaint from a guy who had
    lost work in open X applications.

    setPriority doesn't help.
    Any workarounds or suggestions?
    (Sorry, pasting this in has killed the indentation and "less-than" signs don't show.)

    import java.awt.*;
    import java.applet.*;
    //Text message moves diagonally across screen
    //Draws rectangle to indicate size of applet
    public class CrashNN extends Applet{
    int mesgpos;
    public void init(){
    new BusyThread(this).start();
    }
    /************ Begin Standard ANTI-FLICKER CODE***/
    private Image offScreenImage;
    private Dimension offScreenSize;
    private Graphics offScreenGraphics;
    public final void update (Graphics g) {
    Dimension d = getSize();
    if((offScreenImage == null)||(d.width != offScreenSize.width)||
    (d.height != offScreenSize.height)) {
    offScreenImage = createImage(d.width, d.height);
    offScreenSize = d;
    offScreenGraphics = offScreenImage.getGraphics();
    }
    offScreenGraphics.clearRect(0, 0, d.width, d.height);
    paint(offScreenGraphics);
    g.drawImage(offScreenImage, 0, 0, null);
    }
    /******** End ANTI-FLICKER CODE ***************/
    public void paint(Graphics g){
    g.drawString("CrashNN", mesgpos, mesgpos);
    Dimension dd = getSize();
    g.drawRect(2,2,dd.width - 9, dd.height - 9); //show size of applet
    }
    }
    class BusyThread extends Thread{
    CrashNN aa;
    public BusyThread(CrashNN a){
    aa= a;
    }
    public void run(){
    //Just to be nice, lower this thread's priority
    //so it can't interfere with other processing going on.
    // Thread.currentThread().setPriority(Thread.MIN_PRIO RITY);
    while (true){
    for(int i = 10; i 100; i++){
    for(int j = 1; j 1000; j++); //number crunching goes here
    try{
    sleep(30);
    }catch(InterruptedException e){}
    aa.mesgpos = i;
    aa.repaint();
    }
    }
    }
    }

  191. Hrrmm... by Yakko · · Score: 1
    KDE has locked up so tight (under Mandrake 6.0) that I had to alt-ctrl-backspace the server, but X has never crashed Linux... not in the 4+ years I've used X (going all the way back to XFree86 3.0).

    (of course, KDE only locked up after I upgraded KDE from within KDE, so... duh? :o) GNOME, otoh, keeps forgetting my settings on the loptop... time to try October GNOME)

    --

    --

    --
    Me spell chucker work grate. Need grandma chicken.
  192. Re:Impressions after using Accel-X for several yea by Jeremy+Chatfield · · Score: 1
    I don't get your point. Accelerated-X updates are free. Check out the Anon-FTP site. Update to 5.0.3 was published very recently, for free, or the cost of a call to your ISP.

    We typically support overlapped older and newer Linux technologies for some time. For example, we supported both a.out and ELF concurently for about 18 months and we've been supporting libc5 and glibc2 for some time.

    So, I guess we agree. We offer free bug fixes and new products are new money, just like video playback (tried playing a DVD in that hypothetical VCR, have you ;-) ). New product releases for us, are a consequence of a new feature and inability to offer a compatible update with previous release.

    Cheers, JeremyC.

    --
    Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
  193. Accel X is not that stable either by Kesha · · Score: 3

    I have AccelX 5.0.2 for Linux.
    It crashes on the SiS 5598 chipset at random.
    XFree86 3.3.5 at least stays up.
    I would not mind their add compain if it was
    completely, but I have examples of the contrary.
    XawTV has fits starting up under AccelX running
    on S3Virge/DX, something about their
    implementation of DGA is screwy. And the PS/2
    MS IntelliMouse on my server works for only
    minutes at a time, then the mouse pointer shifts
    to the corner and any mouse movement results in
    random pointer movements and button presses. I had
    to go back to XFree86.

  194. X accesses hardware directly by Jeremy+Chatfield · · Score: 1

    The X Server is not the operating system kernel. It runs in user space. It needs to be root privilige because it accesses and manipulates low level hardware directly. If you have a piece of software that can change register contents and some of those registers change things like bus handling (e.g. DMA, IRQ) then you can do things to make the machine stop working. Try running your system with interrupts disabled. The kernel may be working, but it is getting nothing useful done. FWIW, a properly X Server can cause the kernel to panic, but only via system calls. The other poster that referred to this wasn't clear, but I think they might have intended that the X Server itself can't generate panics. In 1994/1995 one of the most common kernel halt problems reported with Accelerated-X on Linux and FreeBSD was a defective system call for keyboard handling. This has been corrected in both kernels for about four years. However, when it existed, remapping the casp lock key to be a control key would eventually provoke the kernel crash. So, you are right that the X Server is a user level process. It is, however, unusual in UNIX programs in that from user space, it manipulates low level hardware. That does not make intrinisically less safe than running the same code from the kernel. There are many modes of failure of an X Server. Some of them result in system lockup. Some result in the X Server locking up. Some result in incorrect response to a correct request. Only (extensive) testing finds the problems. Only diciplined programming and a respect for the customers data results in the bugs being fixed. Cheers, JeremyC.

    --
    Jeremy Chatfield, Technical Evangelist, Xi Graphics.
  195. X crashes your system? What about the ad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks to me like the ad is INTENDED to crash your X system.

    I'm on a HUGE pipe at work, and it took FOREVER to download the image.

    For that matter, what a stupid image. I have to scroll this way and that just to read the text. Even then, I wouldn't know for sure what is says if it wasn't duplicated here.

    My score (1-10)

    Technical Merit: 2
    Marketing Merit: -5

    Junk it and put up something meaningful that can be read.

    1. Re:X crashes your system? What about the ad? by Fiznarp · · Score: 1

      I don't think the image slashdot linked to of the ad was scanned in by the same folks whg produced it. It's on linux.com after all.

  196. Re:Impressions after using Accel-X for several yea by thopkins · · Score: 1

    I wasn't impresseed with MetroX. I tried it on my old rendition based card and it was unaccelerated just like the XFree86 server. I couldn't imagine paying money for it. Accelerated X ran quite nicely on that card.

  197. Re:Entire OS with it? Bullshit! -- not by QuMa · · Score: 1

    Yup, but be carefull with this on a production system. You are in effect giving all local users root, unless you disable it with the sysctl. But that would kind of defy the purpose.

  198. XFree86 is stable by dagarath · · Score: 1

    I've not had any problems with the 'free' X Server that came with my distribution. In fact I have 3d accelerated drivers for it and my G200 and RivaTNT cards. But, it's just marketing. They have to compete against a 'free' X server and they have to point at something to say their X is better.

  199. Re:Accelerated X is not worth $100.. or even $1.00 by ^WiReD^ · · Score: 1

    Actually, AX does support the wheel mouse, and does a much better job at it than anything I've been able to accomplish using X-Free and Imwheel. I'm not sure what version of AX you were using, but it my wheel mouse worked immediately upon running it. :)

  200. MIRROR of the whole ad... by Neuracnu+Coyote · · Score: 3

    Click on the link for the ~371k jpg.

    --
    --
  201. Re:Accel X is not that stable either (offtopic) by bambino · · Score: 1

    Well that happened to me before, the gpm errors, i mean. I used a serial Genius NetMouse and switched the gpm to 'pnp' type and it fixed that. hope it helps.

  202. X crashes your system? What about the ad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks to me like the ad is INTENDED to crash your X system.



    I'm on a HUGE pipe at work, and it took FOREVER to download the image.



    For that matter, what a stupid image. I have to scroll this way and that just to read the text. Even then, I wouldn't know for sure what is says if it wasn't duplicated here.



    My score (1-10)



    Technical Merit: 2

    Marketing Merit: -5



    Junk it and put up something meaningful that can be read.

  203. Re:entire operating system goes down?? by QuMa · · Score: 1

    I believe you can assign actions to a few special click sequences with GPM. Use gpm in repeater mode and try that. Or if you have a gameport, there's a small program somewhere on freshmeat that'll exec specified commands on connection of specified pins.

  204. Considering that... by Scott+Francis[Mecham · · Score: 4

    ...as of AccelX 4.1.2 they still had a "dissappearing/corrupting" mouse cursor problem reminiscent of a MIT-SHM bug(very annoying when using Blender or the Gimp), couldn't use DGA extensions, and couldn't drop below 640x480 resolution. The only reason I ordered it in the first place was to support my i740 card, and when the XBF project produced an XF86 driver two weeks after I ordered it..
    It _is_ faster than XF86, and you do get a nice splash screen, but XF86 is more feature-rich, IMHO.

    Also, I could be mistaken, but it seems that the version of Accel-X I had didn't install any X source. When I compiled xanim for the first time, I had an error, and the author of xanim pointed out the problem--in the XF86 libraries that were still installed on my machine.

    --
    --
  205. Re:Actually Accelerated X sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These guys were never able to make their ovepriced bloatware work right with my Matrox Millennium. Every time they released a patch, things only got worse. Their tech support tried to help, but they didn't have a clue. May the bugs of 2000 Windows betas infest their every comptutation.

  206. Woooie! CTRL-ALT-F1 is great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I never tried that before. This is great.
    Everyone in our family (kids 6 and 8, wife,
    myself) uses the downstairs machine. Once
    in a while X (usually w/ netscape or word
    perfect) hangs. Now I can show them how
    to get it un-wedged. Now we can go for TRIPLE
    DIGIT uptimes!

    -- cary

  207. Re:Is it really that unreliable? by jimfrost · · Score: 1
    I've used both utilities extensively.

    Autodetection has certainly improved things on those cards where it works, but it fails on a lot of hardware (eg the ever-popular ATI hardware). But things have at least gotten to the point where you can more or less pick your video card off of a list and have it work.

    Unfortunately that's only the first part of configuration. The next part is the monitor, and here there are lots of problems. The monitor lists have huge holes and even monitors on the lists can be overdriven by the server. For instance: just try running a Sony Multiscan 20sfII at 1024x768 sometime. The monitor is on the list and the list specs are the same as the published specs -- but it still doesn't work. Have a laptop display? Good luck: not only aren't there any on the lists, the manufacturers don't give specs. It's take-a-guess-and-hope-I-don't-fry-the-display.

    I've literally spent more time fiddling with monitor configurations than all other Linux installation tasks combined, and that includes stuff like debugging the driver for my new wireless network card. Your basic user just gets scared when confronted with the questions asked by the Custom Monitor configuration. (Hell, I get scared. You can blow a monitor if you guess wrong!)

    I realize that the XFree86 folk are stuck between a rock and a hard place here. This stuff is really complicated and they're getting little or no help from the vendors. But it's still a problem and we do ourselves no favor by pretending that it's not.

    jim frost
    jimf@frostbytes.com

    --
    jim frost
    jimf@frostbytes.com
  208. Disappointing experience with XAccel by baitisj · · Score: 1

    I used to use Accelerated X because it actually was superior to XFree... at least before version 5 came out. I switched when I discovered that it created a nonlinear framebuffer in my I128 card and I couldn't use my new television card. No DGA support either.

    Xaccel version 4.2 was really fast and crashed much less than XFree in its time. But I'm pissed that I spent $100 on an upgrade that wasn't worth s%@*. It crashed and ate ram like a pig. These days, I can run XFree for a week without having to restart it - which is a real tribute to those hard-working good guys over there at XFree86.org.

    Anyhow, kudos to XFree and rotten eggs to XAccel. That's what I say. Have a nice day.

    --
    Learn from your parents' mistakes: use birth control.
  209. Re:First post ? by daviddennis · · Score: 2

    Does it? It drives me nuts that I can't cut and paste from emacs to Netscape. If Accelerated X would fix that, it might be worth the money.

    D

    ----

  210. Commerical does not equate to bad. by kfringe · · Score: 1
    There is another point of view.

    Over the last four years we've seen linux, and free Unix in general, reach heights of stability and performance that once seemed entirely unreasonable. In the last year, these free (to hell with OS!) operating environments have made equivalently great strides toward mainstream acceptance.

    Dandy as that may be, all of tehse still have a ways to go. Xig addresses some of these problems in a traditional, and what seems to be an honorable way. They write good code.

    So it's commericial! Big deal. Their only real competition in the intel-unix market comes from Xfree. Xfree, however, produces a product that is far less stable and speedy than AccelX.

    Don't flame me for this one, guys. It's simple fact. At least, it's simple fact for now.

    This ad, however, is disheartening. Xig's strengths as a company have always lain in their fair dealings, quick response and honest answers. Their products' strenghts have always been speed, stability and service -- and, sorry to be insulting here, but if you don't think service is an issue talk to me after you graduate from college. This ad, however, mentions none of the effort Xig has made over the last years. Rather, it slings mud at the equally honorable effort made by Xfree.

    This ad, frankly, makes me believe that Xig is on its way to the grave. That would be a sad thing indeed. I can think of no reason other than blind fear for them to make a marketing move that is simply this stupid.

    Anyway, I will continue to use their products where they are best suited (like working my Viper 770 Ultra under FreeBSD) until their product seems as poorly thought as their ad.

    BTW: solution to the telnet in and kick X problem: hook a wyse terminal up to the serial port. Or would that be considered a kludge? :)

  211. Re:X is shit by MrHat · · Score: 1

    Hrm... X is old. X is optimized for uses other than single-machine desktop use. X can do things other (and much more recent) GUIs can't; for example X can run applications transparently even over high-latency network connections.

    X is not shit, and there's a reason it's been around this long. IMO, however, its strongest suit is not powering a single desktop or workstation. It's behind in some areas, but well ahead in others.

  212. PCI hangs (Was Re:X stability) by jamesc · · Score: 1
    Hmmm.... (Several year old memory kicking in.) Isn't the bridge chip supposed to time out hanging PCI operations after a few hundred PCI clocks?

    There's no excuse for a hanging PCI board, but there's even less excuse for the PCI subsystem to permit one to lock up the system.

    --
    "You've crossed my Line of Death!" "What? No! Where is it?" "Here in the fine print...."
  213. I bought an X server because of this ad. by wahay · · Score: 4

    Unfortunately for xig, I bought MetroX, but I will vouch for Xfree86 "falling over". It happens people. It may not happen to you but it does happen.

    When I was running Xfree on my Matrox Mystique card, I would have daily system lockups where the keyboard, mouse, and network all went down. Interestingly, linux really didn't, as proven by my still-running cron jobs, but the system was all but unusable (a solipsistic turing machine). It wasn't until I saw xig's ad that I put two and two together. Once I installed MetroX, I had uptimes of a month or more. Just goes to show you that you really don't want a buggy X server, whoever makes it.

    I now have a different graphics card, and I'm back on XF86 (those vmware accellerations are hard to beat), but I wouldn't hesitate to go to a commercial X server if I started having problems again. Nor should you.

  214. Works when root... by The+Creator · · Score: 1

    Othervise Bloatscape blows up in my face. No Linux/X crash however. RH5.2 Fvwm2 in T style(no [K,G]-bloat for me).
    LINUX stands for: Linux Inux Nux Ux X

    --

    FRA: STFU GTFO
  215. Xi Graphics' Response... by dbrandt · · Score: 1

    Please note that this is not a formal response, just a posting.

    The XFree community is a very out-spoken, passionate group, and we applaud it. As many users find XFree unstable, some do not. Our products are not intended for the person capable of cracking open the source, tracking down the problem, and fixing it. As many users feel it unreasonable to pay for software, our products are not your solution either. Xi provides exceptional service along with exceptional products. Albeit, the products are not 100% bug free, but we are striving to get there. When a bug or problem is encountered, the most efficient and effective steps possible are taken to provide a solution.

    For those who have not experienced Xi Graphics, Inc. in a while, or never have, please visit our web site ( www.xig.com ) do some performance research ( http://www.xig.com/Pages/BenchmarkMasterPage.html ), and no, these tests are not weighed in our favor, x11perf is available via ftp and I invite you to compare with our posted results. Give our demo a try ( http://www.xig.com/Pages/DemoInstructions.html ), compare with your current Xserver and respectfully post the results or email them to me. I believe the performance and stability of Accelerated-X(TM) will pleasantly surprise many.

    For those people who have reported problems and issues with Xi Graphics, Inc. or Accelerated-X, please feel free to contact me, I will address any technical issues, comments, or opinions.

    As for the longevity of Xi Graphics, Inc., business is great. Xi will continue to provide innovative products that surprise, astound, and stir people.

    Cheers,
    Drew Brandt
    Xi Graphics, Inc.
    Technical Marketing
    dbrandt@xig.com

  216. Xig versus XFree by bram · · Score: 1
    XF86 has crashed on me, even really halting my machine.
    Everything was stopped. Just by opening some nedstat page.
    OTOH that only happened once or something (well I didn't open that page anymore :P)

    I could crash XF86 with switching from some SVGALIB app(like quake I in console mode) to X .

    Accelerated X has its uses in the portable market but that's about it, most Graphic cards are supported under XF86 and I can't seem to find a reason to pay for something I don't have any extra benefits from. For a list of supported cards, look here.

    --

    --
    People using html in email should be shot.
    1. Re:Xig versus XFree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      read the manual. don't use svgalib apps and X at the same time, you're almost always guaranteed to crash one or the other if not both. -d

  217. Re:What a better way to... by Zagato-sama · · Score: 1

    Whooptie doo ;) My NT doesn't crash either. Big deal. Windows sucks? Same can be said of Linux on many topics. Darn isn't life tough ;)

  218. Is it really that unreliable? by jimfrost · · Score: 1

    I don't know about the rest of you but XFree86 really hasn't been unreliable for me. In fact, it's never even crashed.

    It's a total bitch to configure, but aside from that....

    --
    jim frost
    jimf@frostbytes.com
  219. Re:entire operating system goes down?? by Daffy+Duck · · Score: 1

    Thanks! The program is jslaunch.

  220. Compact by cdlu · · Score: 1

    Its not compact disc darned it! Its compact dish...get it right. Its a saucer for a cup. :)

    (ok ok, one too many cd-)ch jokes)

  221. Slashdotted! by CoolVibe · · Score: 1

    Maybe AccelX crashed here and took the system down ;-)

  222. If you feel brave: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give 3.9.x a spin, for me at 1600x1200x24, it's quite a bit snapper, and out benches, Accelx.

  223. Why AcceleratedX does indeed rock by BlueLines · · Score: 3

    I've used AcceleratedX for 7 months now since they offered support for a particular laptop graphics chip that Xfree didn't. The installation/configuration process is nothing like Xfree. I had a working server config in about 30 seconds....whereas Xf86setup can still sometimes take an hour if i switch to a different monitor.
    XiG tends to have support for chips 3-6 months before Xfree, and the server itself is much faster. Sure, $150 was a lot to pay, but if I waited for the open source version, I would have been carrying around a $2500 vt100 ....

    --
    --BlueLines "The cost of living hasn't affected it's popularity." -anonymous
  224. Preventing X from forcing a reboot by loik · · Score: 1

    Has anyone ever thought of writing a little daemon that polls the X server every 10 seconds or so to see if it is still there, and kills it if it's crashed? That would come with every X package? Ok, you would still lose your running GUI stuff, but at least you wouldn't have to reset. That would make a difference, also psychologically: I only ever had to reset a computer running Linux when the X server crashed and I couldn't login from another machine.

    --
    and now for something completely different
  225. Xi AD. by Type-R · · Score: 1

    Well... That ad definatly convinced me. Convinced me not to buy Xi products that is. I think I'll stick with my "unstable" XFree86. Since after configuation of machines over the last 6 or 7 years, I don't think I've had it crash or lock. Gee, I must just be real lucky or something.

    1. Re:Xi AD. by Russ+Steffen · · Score: 1

      Back in the bad old days of VL-bus boards and cranky 486 systems, having XFree lock up hard while switching between it and a text console was a weekly occurance. But, I think it was more of a case of "some video cards just suck".

  226. Xfree Freezes occassionally by PalmFrEq · · Score: 1

    I believe that due to a wacky combination of Xfree, KDE, Netscape, and the allignment of the planets, I was forced to assume my Linux box was rendered frozen a couple times -- and hit the power button. (Arrrghghg). Once I eventually put the machine on my University's LAN, and it happened all of once more, I was able to trot down to a computer lab, telnet into the machine, and kill the processes as root. When I returned to my dorm, all was fine, Xfree had restarted, and KDM was asking for a login: this time (and ever since) I opted for WindowMaker. Love it.

  227. My experience with Xfree86 by GC · · Score: 1

    I have been using Xfree since August 1995.

    In that time I have had 3 X server crashes.

    The first one was due to me being slightly overeager with the configuration settings and I left things in a real mess. It was therefore my fault.

    The next time I don't know what happenned, X caught some signal or something and bombed out. I was then left at the shell prompt, I restarted X and everything was OK again.

    The thrid time was a complete lockup, I couldn't do anything although if I'd had a network I could probably have telneted in and killed X to recover. Instead I crossed my fingers and hit that reset button.

    At work I use NT I only have to go back a month to tell you about the last three crashes, which leave me no option but to remove the power cord from the back.

    Also: Note that it isn't necessary to have a network or even a second PC. If you enable a virtual terminal on a serial port then you can use a PalmPilot to login and kill processes. I expect any PDA with a serial connection can be used to do the same.

  228. Re: *YEESH* by TummyX · · Score: 1

    you can still hate something and not bother supporting promised efforts like mozilla.
    i can't wait t ill i get my new project underway and start developing mozilla & ie plugins, but i still think netscape 4.x is the worst browser - wait - worst software i can think of (atm) that i've ever used.

  229. Re:Negative Campaigning by BenH · · Score: 1

    There is an interesting law for this in France: You can only do comparative ads if your ad is backed up by some kind of real benchmark-like comparison, or based on an independant comparison (done by the press for example). I don't know the exact details, but the result in reality is that we almost never see comparative advertising here...

  230. Yes, I noticed on the back of LJ by Oestergaard · · Score: 1

    Sure, they had the aforementioned commercial all over the back of my last LJ issue. I read it, and though ``hell, these guys better buckle for the bumpy ride that's about to hit them hard, in the face, twice''. Sure, it's really good old mudslinging.

    But keep in mind, that he who slings mud, looses ground.

    I don't use their X server, and I'm not planning to. But if I was planning to, I might reconsider. It's not that a clueless marketing department will necessarily make their X server a bad one. Not at all. In fact i'm pretty sure their X server is a fine one.

    But if their internal communication is so vague, that the marketing people have no clue what-so-ever that that is Not The Way (TM) to write an advertisment for the community, I seriously doubt that the executives know what product those ``techie'' guys are brewing, that the techies hear what customer support knows, and in the end, I doubt that the company as a whole is a company I could trust. Trust for support, and trust to be around in two years from now.

    Yes, it's a little exaggerated, I know. You see marketing-, executive- and tech- departments missing eachothers points and goals even small companies. There are probably few companies out there where people in different departments actually have a clue about not only the goals, but also the ethics and methods used by other departments.

    (Ok, code of ethics for marketing departments, that's easy. :) But the problem is that marketing were marketing for techies, and should have applied techie-ethics (read: community-ethics) not marketing ethics). Marketing ethics are fine when marketing for marketing people. Not when marketing for people who know words such as ``fair'', ``correct'' and ``respect''.

  231. From the horse's mouth... by Tet · · Score: 2
    Strangely enough, I commented to Xig back in August that them putting down XFree86 in their ads was making them less trustworthy in my opinion, and it made me less inclined to buy their products. Here's their reply:

    Actually, the motivation for the direct comparisons to XF86 are simply done to indicate to folks considering using Linux in a corporate desktop environment that there is a commercial alternative to the free graphics sw they get with their favorite Linux distribution. XF86 has achieved its primary objective of delivering a modicum of graphics support for the Linux hacker/enthusiast. The problem is that it isn't good enough to garner corporate blessing on the desktop (we know this first hand). Unfortunately, most recommenders/decision makers in the corporate sector come from the microsoft paradigm - graphics is part of the OS. So, when their Linux desktop locks up, crashes, runs slowly they incorrectly determine that Linux isn't ready for the big leagues yet.

    We know this isn't the case. And we're faced with the need to deliver this message in as direct a manner as possible to educate the consumer we're trying to reach (namely a corporate recommender/decision maker). In other words, we're working very hard to help the Linux hacker/enthusiast get Linux into his/her company. We've found this to be the most effective vehicle for capturing mindshare for Linux at the IT manager/executive level.

    So there you go. Convinced? No, neither am I. That said, to a certain extent, they're right. Although XFree86 provides far more than a modicum of graphics support, AccelX is faster, and the design of AccelX is much cleaner, with a single X server and loadable drivers. Hopefully XFree86-4.0 should fix this. And like it or not, corporate customers like to give money away in exchange for peace of mind (whether justified or not). They really *do* think that paying Xig for an X server will mean less crashes. In my experience, both AccelX and XFree86 have crashed on me exactly once each, so both are pretty stable. Don't credit corporate types with logical thought processes -- they simply don't have them. If AccelX is a way to please them, then so be it. The advertising still smarts for the rest of us, though.

    --
    "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
  232. now i'm no expert.. by cheese63 · · Score: 1

    but i've managed to fuck up every peice of software ever made. anything on linux, including the x server, made it fairly hard for me to screw up. why would i pay money for something that already works good?

  233. Re:Impressions after using Accel-X for several yea by tai · · Score: 1

    >>>> Accel-X 5.0 also has an integrated TTF server which saves a lot of pain.

    It's not AccelX which has done the integration, but the OSS project based on XFree86. I believe AccelX is built upon that. Though it's not yet in official package from XFree86 project, TTF support itself is already in XFree86 package from Redhat, Debian, or any other major distribution (I'm using Debian GNU/Linux (potato)).

  234. Somewhat (un)related by grappler · · Score: 1

    Anyone know if www.x11.org is still alive? They seem to be locked in a kind of never-ending delay.

    --
    grappler

    --
    Vidi, Vici, Veni
  235. Competing? by Ledge+Kindred · · Score: 5
    Well, sort of, I guess. In the sense that Linus is competing with Sun, Microsoft, HP, IBM and all the other OS manufacturers out there.

    The XFree project's goal is to produce "a freely redistributable implementation of the X Window System that runs on UNIX(R) and UNIX-like operating systems (and OS/2)." Slamming them in an ad campaign is kind of a cheap shot -- they're volunteers producing a product because they think it's "The Right Thing To Do", not to compete in a commercial marketplace...

    I think the point of the submission is that XiG is slamming a product that's provided gratis, free-of-charge, fo' no money, etc, and representing it like some third-rate software package when, for all experiences and reports, it's actually quite stable and useful.

    And keep in mind, the XFree project has almost certainly been a driving force behind Linux' acceptance and popularity. Think about it: would as many people have been so likely to start using Linux on a regular basis if the only X server available was commercial and cost at least $100? I know I wouldn't have.

    I wonder if XiG is worried that XFree 4.0 will come out and give them a real run for their money, for no money.

    -=-=-=-=-

    --

    -=-=-=-=-
    My mom's going to kick you in the face!

    1. Re:Competing? by EmersonPi · · Score: 1

      I wonder if XiG is worried that XFree 4.0 will come out and give them a real run for their money, for no money.

      Of course they are, if you were XiG wouldn't you be? :)

      On that note, I can't wait for XFree 4.0 (not that XFree is bad now, just the new features in 4.0 will be welcome enhancements)

      --
      Impossible = A fun challenge
  236. Netscape Crashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd really like to know why Netscape sucks so much; I end up with it crashing on me about 5-6 times a day, and our trouble ticket system is web-based. _Not_ a fun time when that happens.

    1. Re:Netscape Crashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess since netscape sucks so much you are all helping mozilla stress test 5.0? No? Report bugs or hush.

      I've been looking at the win32 versions of Mozilla for some time now out of curiosity, but there's no way in hell it's going on my linux box at home. I'm not a code hacker, I simply want a good web browser. If IE4/5 for Linux came out *for sale* I would gladly pay Microsoft 100$ for it and keep my xfree86 server without the bother of netscape crashes. Hates their OS but I do think they did good with the browser/email client.

    2. Re:Netscape Crashing by calc · · Score: 1

      If you are using the glibc version of netscape try going back to the libc5 version. glibc netscape crashes on me every few minutes it seems.

    3. Re:Netscape Crashing by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2
      I end up with it crashing on me about 5-6 times a day,
      I've had very few problems with Netscape on my Linux box - but I run only the standalone browser, and an older version (4.05, IIRC).

      Although Netscape did just cause my my Worst Linux Crash Ever yesterday - after running for a few weeks (yes, weeks), it ate all all my memory and took down my X server and my login shell. Still didn't crash the OS, though. Meanwhile, at work my PowerMac gets completely hosed by Netscape on a regular basis. (Well, it's got to be either Netscape or Apple's CD player...)

      Too bad the Chimera browser isn't in development anymore. I used to run it on NetBSD about three years ago - basic browsing functionality, small, fast, stable, extensible.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  237. Sigh - Not again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This kind of crud is not entirely unexpected, nor the worst that has been said. I can't remember the company involved, so I won't mention names, but they have outright lied in the recent past about cards that XFree86 supports, and regularly cheat on benchmarks (things like using a lower bit depth or overclocking the card by default) It's not unexpected because XFree is a big group run on volunteer work with no mandate to defend (or market) itself (which may not be perfect, but I can't think of a better way to do a project like XFree) so the unscrupulous may feel they can lie about/malign XFree86 with impunity. Please note this is not a comment on all commercial groups out there: Precision Insight (for their many driver contributions) and SGI (for their assistance with progress on OpenGL) come to mind as counter examples.

  238. Re:entire operating system goes down?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Excuse me? "sometime"? ctrl-alt-del is useless as soon as the keyboard is put into raw mode by the X-server, while sysrq will work as long as the kernel is functional.

  239. Graphics in the kernel not necessarily good by Neph · · Score: 2
    Putting drivers in the kernel does not magically confer stability; the code is only so good not matter where it is. In fact, if it's in user space, a program (be it SVGALib, X, whatever) has fewer prvileges and therefore has less of a chance of screwing up the *really* important stuff. X crashing and dumping you to the console is not nearly as bad as a kernel panic!

    That being said, there are tradeoffs. Because userspace graphics need direct access to the hardware, they need to run setuid root, which means security issues. SVGALib is especially problematic because it's actually "foreign" code, linked against the library, that runs as root, rather than just the server (or xdm) in the case of X. I think it deals with this fairly intelligently, though, dropping root privileges at the first possible juncture. It's still not perfect.

    Steve 'Nephtes' Freeland | Okay, so maybe I'm a tiny itty

    1. Re:Graphics in the kernel not necessarily good by Neph · · Score: 1
      Move it out of the kernel and you have multiple maintenance points (X, SVGA, Y, and any other graphics program of library)

      No, not necessarily. Although this is how it stands now, there's now reason there couldn't be a single graphics API outside the kernel. For example, you could build an X server on top of SVGALib. (I'm not saying this is a good idea or that SVGALib in particular is well suitd to the task -- just that it's possible.)

      Steve 'Nephtes' Freeland | Okay, so maybe I'm a tiny itty

    2. Re:Graphics in the kernel not necessarily good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Move it out of the kernel and you have multiple maintenance points (X, SVGA, Y, and any other graphics program of library) for stability and security then the single point in the kernel. There is a reason that the kernel controls resources: hard drives, memory, etc.

  240. I think you just started you linux advocacy page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is as if all the slashdotters finally got a conscious. To hear them talk of negative advertiseing in a bad light is such a refreshing change of pace. But of course it is only in defense of one of their own. Why is it that when every one on here bashes the hell out of Microsoft, it isn't mudslinging, but this pretty common advertising style is. X is the only thing that has ever crashed on my system. Or maybe it was netscape. Who knows, doesn't happen enough to worry about, (not since my 1.1.13 days). Does the word hypocrit mean anything to you people. Read your own rants the next time you want to bash on Microsoft, especially to someone outside of your peer group. You make us all look as bad as Xig looks, only we are fanatical ;)

  241. Entire OS with it? Bullshit! by Dirtside · · Score: 1

    I've had X crash on me a bunch of times (or maybe it was Gnome, or Enlightenment, or something else -- irregardless, the GUI stops responding) so I just hit CTRL-ALT-F1 and kill the X server. It's happened more times than I can remember. X taking Linux with it? I don't think so.

    --- Dirtside

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
  242. Re:Enjoying Linux w/o X by hcsiii · · Score: 1

    I would hope, though I doubt it, that you would move away from Mandrake then. Mandrake's focus and goal is the addition of KDE to RedHat! If you're not even using X, why support Mandrake? If you want to get in and learn the system, why not try Debian/Slackware/Redhat?

    --
    Howard C. Shaw III Grum
  243. Cut and Paste by Hal+Roberts · · Score: 1

    Cut and paste between Netscape and Emacs works fine for me, though netscape has the bad habit of killing the clipboard when you deselect text. What, exactly are you trying to do that won't work ?

  244. i'll tell you what i want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i really really really wanna Xix-a-Xig-Aahh.

  245. XFree86 crashes all the time... by cout · · Score: 1

    ...but it never takes Linux down with it. Actually, X just crashed on me just 10 minutes ago, but I was still able to hit Ctrl-Alt-F1 to get to a virtual terminal. The issue is not whether the operating system comes down with X; rather, the issue is whether X should come down in the first place. If we use statements like "when the X server falls over" instead of "if the X server falls over" we are admitting that there is an integral piece of the system that is not functioning properly, perhaps as poorly as *cough cough* Windows.

  246. Re:Enligenment? Bah! by Nodatadj · · Score: 1

    E hasn't crashed once on me since about December 98, E0.16.0 is rock solid.
    And when E does crash, X doesn't crash, it just happily exits because the process that was keeping it open (Enlightenment) doesn't exist, but because it doesn't know E crashed, it thinks that you want to close X.

    (And it's only been through 1 rewrite, which was to get rid of all the old Fvwm code left in and change the internal design).

    Iain

  247. link to the people who are advertising by TheDullBlade · · Score: 3

    Just in case you wonder who these people are, their web page is at http://www.xigraphics.com.

    --
    /.
  248. Haven't crashed XFree86 yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've run a few versions of XFree86 under RedHat 5.1, 5.2, and manual upgrades to 6.0. I've run the versions that came with the distro, and versions that I downloaded and installed manually. I've used Matrox Mystique, Matrox Millenium G200, and a Diamond Viper550.

    No crashes. Ever.

    Closest I've come to an X crash is accidentally killing Enlightenment while I was playing around with Gnome, and that didn't cause any problems.

    Once I misconfigured for the wrong chipset and locked up the X server, but even that just required telnet and kill -9 to let me fix the problem.

    I had considered Xig's product at one point, but when I saw the price just for an X server, I stopped thinking about it. After reading through this list and seeing the problems others have had with Accelerated X, I'm glad I didn't spend the money.

  249. Enjoying Linux w/o X by sugarman · · Score: 0

    ## offtopic

    After having some problems with my Initial install of Linux (Mandrake 6.0), I decided to wipe the partition and re-install Linux w/o putting on X.

    I gotta say, I do enjoy it a whole lot more. Everything is where it needs to be, and it doesn't feel like Windows wannabe anymore. (This isn't a value judgement on KDE here, just on GUI's in general).

    As an added feature, I'm able to get in and actually learn the system and the commands, and gain a good understanding of whats going on. Something that X and the GUI's where doing a wonderful job of making me oblivious too.

    Don't mind me, I'm just enjoying a second (Computer) childhood on a X-less linux box.

    Now, if I could just figuire out why emacs and vi always give me a Fatal Error 11, I'd be happier. Luckily, pico works.

    --
    --sugarman--
    1. Re:Enjoying Linux w/o X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure I'll be moderated down as flame bait, but I am trying to make a point here... There are VERY FEW people who can do anything productive with a computer that doesn't have a GUI? For example, how are you supposed to create interesting and complex looking graphics from the command line or an ncurses program. And I don't mean fractals! How can you make your computer display look interesting if you are just in a shell? (Remember, most people are more interested in how "cool" their computer looks. I know I am.) About the only thing you can do at a shell is write code, HTML, view web pages in Lynx(yuck!), configure your system. That's about it. Where is the creativity? Where is the artistry? Computers these days are more about art and beauty as productivity. (I will admit, I have seen some great programs written by guys who understand art and beauty. But they are ALL GUI based.) If you want to be stuck in the old fashioned world when computers were nothing more than fancy calculators, go right ahead. But GUI's have given computers a real purpose. Oh yeah, and by the way... XFree doesn't crash on me either. It's just KDE/GNOME and Netscape that seem to bugger the system. So Xig can take their ad and shove it up their @$$!

    2. Re:Enjoying Linux w/o X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looking Interesting isn't productive. When it comes down to it, the productive parts of most programs aren't seen at all. Eye candy is for the neophytes.

    3. Re:Enjoying Linux w/o X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can basically achieve the same thing in X. Whenver I'm in X I always have at least 2 xterms open at all times.

  250. Release the source, then we'll talk by Brian+Knotts · · Score: 2
    No way am I relying on binary-only software for such a crucial part of my system.

    Maybe I'm spoiled, because I have a Matrox Millennium G200, but XFree86 works great!

    --
    Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

  251. Re:First post ? by nijhof · · Score: 1

    > It drives me nuts that I can't cut and paste from emacs to Netscape.

    Select in emacs and middle click in Netscape works, but if it's URLs you want to copy for jumping to, there's something much better: browse-url-at-point.
    It will make netscape display the URL at the cursor position (using netscape -remote).

    I found out about it because it was bound to C-c C-z u in html-helper-mode, but I found it so useful that I have bound it to C-c u globally -- it's pretty useful in mail mode as well!

    browse-url-at-point is part of the standard elisp libraries, for (gnu) emacs 20.3, at least; html-helper-mode is not (although it might be for xemacs), see http://www.santafe.edu/~nelson/tools/ for that.

    Jeroen Nijhof

  252. Idiots and morons. by ccorner · · Score: 1

    Lets put it this way, I have linux on my machine with a Diamond Monster Fusion Card (Banshee). I have X windows working with it (not an easy feat).
    To my surprise X windows has never crashed even because of my worthless video card.
    Also most people don't realize that software is a major cause of system crashes, so watch what you run! Also if you are using RedHat distro try Ctrl-Alt-F2 if you get a black login screen it is not locked up!

    Also addressing the M$ issues, windows isn't that bad, unlike linux I don't have to bend over backwards to get a program working.....

    --
    Quid rides ignare?
  253. entire operating system goes down?? by Pogue · · Score: 1
    Umm, what about CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE?

    1. Re:entire operating system goes down?? by Ivootje · · Score: 1

      Sometime the sysrq have an even higher priority than CTRL-ALT-something.

      /usr/src/linux/Documentation/sysrq.txt

  254. Don't they realise? by scumdamn · · Score: 1

    They should know that X is like your friend's boyfriend. She complains and complains about how lazy he is, and how he smells bad, and the second you say "Where's that laze boyfriend?" she goes apeshit on you for insulting her man. Insulting X is like putting down an old good dog. We all know there are flaws, but some damn proprietary company starts raggin' on XFree and we're gonna kick some ass!

    1. Re:Don't they realise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love this fuckin analogy!

  255. xig should fire their marketers: this is foolish! by FreeUser · · Score: 5

    We use xig's AcceleratedX 5.x to provide multi-headed support. However, it is not at all stable with Red Hat 6.1 (though it is fine with Red Hat 6.0 and Debian 1.2). If you want an example, try running kpackage, then slide the scroll bar for the package tree up and down. You'll be logging in and rebooting remotely in no time!

    We use AcceleratedX because it works with our multi-headed hardware today, but we are keeping a very close eye on XFree and anxiously awaiting 4.0 and xenerama as a possible replacement down the road, with plans to switch when XFree 4.0 is stable and well tested.

    AcceleratedX's strengths are its early access to hardware specs (providing support for hardware XFree doesn't) and the features it offers today which XFree doesn't yet (multiheaded support being the critical one for us). It is IMHO very foolish of xig to sling mud like this. Their market is comprised of Linux users, many of whom (myself included) take offense at that kind of ridicule against an Open Source project, especially when the ridicule is nothing more than FUD of the worst kind -- something Linux users and administrators are very good at seeing through.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  256. Re:First post ? by gfxguy · · Score: 1
    First of all, I wish people would stop saying Windows costs $89.00. Windows UPGRADE costs $89.00. Compare apples to apples, please.

    Second, I had a card (purchased for use with Windows games) that had NO support under XFree (at the time). It wasn't that I had NO choice, it was that Xi was the best choice at the time. Now, a couple of years later, XFree has support for the card, but completely unaccelerated. So I upgraded Xi and still use it.

    $100.00 is more than I like to pay, but it is not "too much", it was still very worth it to me.

    It was easier to install, easier to modify, easy to upgrade with the downloads from Xi, and it's extremely fast.

    I don't agree with their propoganda, but it is a good piece of software.

    --
    Stupid sexy Flanders.
  257. Re:First post ? by sumner · · Score: 1

    Hmm? I have no problems cutting and pasting between an xterm, gvim, netscape, or just about anything else. This sounds bizarre to me, but I don't have emacs installed to test with. Sometimes you need to use the right-menu paste option in Netscape and sometimes the center button.

    Sumner

    --
    -- rage, rage against the dying of the light
  258. Xi's server crapped out on me by Victor+Ng · · Score: 1

    I remember a couple years back when I bought XInside's xserver for faster Matrox support, but the thing kept crapping out when I used Gimp or Enlightenment. Server hangs, graphic artifacts all kinds of stuff. When X11 supported my Matrox (in a couple months), no bugs at all. Go figure.

  259. Negative Campaigning by jd · · Score: 4
    It's common enough in the US, although it's banned between companies in the UK. (The British believe that if a product can't be sold on it's own merits, you've no business selling it.)

    Competition by negative campaigning often backfires and, even when successful, can lead to a more apathetic audience, which can actually lead to fewer sales in the long run. (Voting figures are a good example of this. The years of negative campaigns run by politicians have carved away from the number of people who can be bothered to vote. Why bother? Much the same happened in the UK, during the Thatcher Years.)

    The only way to be successful, and KNOW you're selling a good product, is to sell on merit, not deficit. If people buy your product, because they believe it does what they want, and keep buying, because it DID what they want, you have a good, long-term future. On the other hand, if you DO get people to buy, because they believe everything else is so much carp, you stand to lose your entire customer base when the competition shatters the illusion. They only have to do so once.

    A company is never stronger than it's foundation. A foundation of bullshit and FUD doesn't offer much security.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  260. DDD seems to crash pretty often. by BillWhite · · Score: 1

    The DDD application seems to crash pretty often, if you use the scroll bars for the data display window. When it crashes it does some sort of a keyboard and mouse grab, which makes it impossible to switch to another virtual console or kill the X server.

    However, I have never tried the magic SysRq key. It might be possible to force the X server to die that way.

  261. Re:First post ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Highlight your text.

    2. Go to where you want to put it. Click middle button (or both buttons with emulation enabled).

    Beautiful.

  262. News to me... by Slashdot+Fool · · Score: 1

    ...since my old Slackware 3 box had an X Server
    that crashed quite frequently, but never brought
    the OS down.

    Steff

  263. Have you ever used the XIG servers?? by HamNRye · · Score: 5

    I won a copy of this program from Linux Today. It turned out to not be the laptop version (which I needed at the time)(Darn Neo-Magic) but it was the desktop version instead. All of my Linux machines have Matrox Millenium II's inside, and I was actually noticing more crashes on the machine with the XIG drivers. I noticed 2 crashes in the first month. (!) The machine was still accessible over the network (only for a reboot), but was unresponsive to any of the std. escape sequences. For comparison, I maybe crashed Xfree twice in a year previously, and the process was always killable with an escape seq. or a top over the network. After two months their CD was being used as a drink coaster. Add in the inconvenience of a less than intuitive setup, and no real performance benefit that was noticeable, and now I only reccommend their package for cards that are unsupported by the base distro.

    I would also like to add that I did at some point in the proces need tech support, and I never got through on the telephone, and I never recieved an E-mail that was not an auto-responder. Now a newbie needing install support would not be able to get it from his Distro provider, and no response from XIG?? That sounds like a lose-lose situation.

    In the interest of fairness, the Matrox acceleration is the best among the Xfree servers, and other people using ATI or such might experience different results. This experience that I relate happened ~1 1/2 years ago, so the state of their customer service and/or their drivers might be quite different. (But the the Xfree SVGA server has gotten better too...)

    Other points of interest: Since Xfree SVGA is open source, you can diagnose and fix any driver problems yourself if you know how. But then I hardly think that this ad targets folks with know how... This is just another case of FUD.

    Jason Maggard
    hamnrye@mindspring.com

    "I went mad for a while, It did me no end of good..."
    -Z. Beeblebrox

    1. Re:Have you ever used the XIG servers?? by warmi · · Score: 2

      "and no real performance benefit that was noticeable, "
      You are pushing it here ...
      I used Matrox Mystique and now G 200 and in both cases performance increase was very noticeable.
      I did have to run x11perf or anything liek that -it was simply visibly faster.


  264. It is true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Support for new cards and stability is critical for Xfree, specially support for Laptops. What we need is comapnies like Suse and RH putting more money on the XFree project to improve quality. But pretend that XFree is something that is not is fanatism. Same goes for sound support, by the way.

  265. Another ad critique by slouie · · Score: 2

    This ad definitely plays on the FUD aspect of "free" software as being unsupported. Kind of a cheap shot, but not entirely ineffective towards non-techies who question open-source software reliablity and support. These folks might buy into Xig's gig just because they are promoting support.

    Intrestingly, they imply the size of the X server versus the kernel make it automatically suspect. Microsoft, take note....

    The ad also implies the X server is an intimate part of the OS as opposed to being just an application. That itself is incorrect, but to a non-techie, it "appears" to be that way (ie. if your windows start dying, your system must be crashing). And that may be all that counts.

    Even given that X itself is extremely stable, I've lost work on it when it has died. KDE and GNOME probably haven't boosted anyone's confidence level when dealing with X either, but if asked by management, I'd dismiss the ad out of hand (but start mumbling about a stable window manager).


    -S. Louie

    --

    "I may be Love's bitch, but at least I'm man enough to admit it."
  266. X and video fun by British · · Score: 0

    I have several video cards that have worked iwth X to make the whole system freeze. Fun fun fun.

  267. Re:First Post! (that's gonna be moderated down) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the whole "First Post!" game is being foisted off on us by the stuffed-shirts who want to force as many people as possible to switch to a '1 or higher' threshold. The old "your comments aren't worth my reading unless it's moderated up and/or not moderated down" crowd, some of whom even force slogans like that at those of us who don't have .sigs disabled.

    I am posting this as AC because:

    1. It's off-topic and therefore WILL be moderated down, and why take a hit when I've even been able to post Anti-Linux comments using this nick recently that get marked up to a 2.

    2. I don't care if the stuffed-shirts see it.

    ~AC

  268. Impressions after using Accel-X for several years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3

    I started with Accel-X when I upgraded to a new machine with a Matrox Mystique card. At the time, the XFree86 SVGA server was somewhat unstable with the Mystique and it lacked a lot of features and acceleration. I still have Accel-X 4.X with a Matrox G100 on my main computer, but I switched to XFree86 on my other box when I got a TNT card for it. Only Accel-X 5.0 supports the TNT and I haven't been compelled to spend another $50 for an upgrade.

    Anyway, here are my impressions of the product:
    - Accel-X is easier to install and configure than XFree86.
    - It is significantly faster than XFree86 on most cards, and extremely fast with Matrox cards.
    - It seems to be a little better at garbage collection, or is more memory efficient, or both.
    - Accel-X is very stable with my cards. Of course, so is XFree.

    Accel-X 5.0 also has an integrated TTF server which saves a lot of pain. Overall, I'd have to say that I've found Accel-X to be a better X server than XFree86. So if there was no cost involved, and no hassle of ordering and waiting for them to ship it to you, I'd easily choose Accel-X. However, XFree86 has improved quickly. Two or three years ago, they were so far behind in speed, features, and hardware support that I wouldn't consider anything but Accel-X. Now, I find that the advantages of Accel-X are not enough to compel me to upgrade.

    Anyway, I wouldn't worry too much about Xig going under due to XFree86. They still have a performance edge, and much of their market comes from supplying X servers to other operating systems. Before Linux, they got into business selling replacements for the abysmal X server in SCO UNIX. Metro-X, on the other hand, is really going to dissapear quick. Accel-X was always much, much better than Metro-X and now even XFree86 is probably better.

  269. What a stab in the back. by Damon+C.+Richardson · · Score: 1

    Guys correct me if im wrong. ( sure someone will)
    but didn't Xig get there original code from XFree?
    I thought that they did. I tried there demo server on a laptop a long time ago... It did not work. The only time I have ever had a problem with XFree was with Beta servers for 3dfx and TNT chips... and those server were not official... I have be running Linux for over 4 years. I just can't remember one time when a official Xfree server crashed. Maybe I'm lucky. Maybe I'm forget full. But this sounds like a unfair slam.

    --

    Last one in jail is a fascist.
  270. Hmm.. From the looks of their site.. by Kitsune+Sushi · · Score: 1
    Yes, we're still here...

    Well, I am anyways. In the dank recesses of the X11.org headquarters, I have been trapped, and working on a new site for all you little X-heads out there. Ok, so I've really been playing EverQuest, but the dungeon thing is a lot more dramatic.

    Ramble, ramble, ramble...

    Anyway, yes, the site is still being worked on. No, I don't know when it'll be done. I wish I could tell you, but all I can say now is "SOON". And I mean it this time. Really.

    Of course, that was a month ago. And two months before that they had a similar blurb. I'd give them another month before another such blurb arises. ;)

    In short: don't hold your breath.

    --

    ~ Kish

  271. I'm a european customer since 1994 by os10000 · · Score: 1

    Hi, I've had a Matrox Ultima/VLB and now I have a Matrox Permedia G100. The Ultima came with NDAs for driver development and the G100 was too new for XFree when I bought it. My opinion of AccX (one of the products from Xig) is: very fast, very stable, but non-linux directories make X-app development awkward. As an European, I'm not used to comparative advertising and find it rude and even somewhat childish.

  272. what I think... by walnut · · Score: 1

    ... that even on a 1600 x 1200 the image is too big and is too slow...

    ... that just because it has a price tag isn't a valid selling point (actually that defines selling point...but you get my drift)...

    ... that various managers will buy into this and cost IT departments more and more money so that important items like pencils and paper are rationed out in ludicrious manners...



    ...ugh...

    --
    You say you want a revolution?
  273. What a better way to... by PsychoSpunk · · Score: 1

    Hmm. What a great way to reach to Open Source/Free Software/what have you community!

    Openly trounce the free version. I know it works for Microsoft. I can't stand using a equivalent product that's free cause I can't truly rely on it.

    I know Xig is just trying to compete, but honestly do they think that tactics defined by the evil empire will work with their target market? Until I see numbers, charts, and feel the effect that they describe here, why not use an equally good product that also happens to be free?

    Bad form, Xig. Give me an ad when you're ready to play in this league.

    --
    ALL HAIL BRAK!!!
  274. What I think... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What I think is that Rob Malda needs some journalistic integrity. Since this is now impossible, I think someone _without_ a financial interest in Slashdot needs to edit. Slashdot's Rob Malda: Jerry Springer For nerds

  275. Xig sux! by borisbamsen · · Score: 1

    Funny... i had 3-4 Xcrashes i can remember. at least 2 of them AccelX4 ;O) And i only used that buggy piece of crap for like 2 weeks.

  276. Good for them! by smoondog · · Score: 1

    Competition is good. Mudslinging breeds competition. I'm all for companies bashing products like this, but I am a bit concerned that it may not be truthful.

    My X doesn't crash at all anymore, but it use to. This adds claim, may be a bit out of date.

    -- Moondog

  277. Enligenment? Bah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've had X crash on me exactly once, right after I installed Enligtenment. I know, the E developers claim it's still beta, but it's been years and many rewrites and it's still beta. I've gone back to WindowMaker which I think is extremely stable and very nice.

  278. The thin line b/w cluelessness and stupidity by Lucius+Lucanius · · Score: 5


    This phenomenon seems to pop up with amusing regularity in the 'nix world. Every once in a while, some marketing genius comes up with the brilliant idea to jump on the popularity of the open source bandwagon by.......showing how their product is proprietary and and thus superior. It's really difficult to say if they are just clueless or somewhat thick.


    Free hint to marketers - if you're trying to target free/open software customers, DON'T TRY TO IMPRESS THEM BY SAYING YOU'RE THE OPPOSITE.

    Look at the above statement and think real hard. Repeat till done.

    L.


  279. There is more to X then the Xserver... by law · · Score: 1

    There is more to X then the Xserver...
    XI seems to of forgot this I think, most people who use XI, JUST use there server... nothing else.
    Kinda foolish add I think.

    --
    "Think of it as evolution in action."
  280. Re:Entire OS with it? Bullshit! -- not by bcboy · · Score: 1

    This assumes that X is still alive enough to grab that hotkey, which isn't always the case.

    If it's not, all you have are the kernel hotkeys, which don't get you much further than ctrl-alt-del, or the sysrq's.

    I don't think any of those will get you to a console.

    Anyone know for sure?

  281. Some background on XFree86/XiG relationship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    The founder of XiG actually wrote the original free X386 port of X11 to VGA devices. Not too long after that he had a major falling out with the other folks working on this project; he went off and setup XiG while X386 evolved into XFree86.

    So a lot of XiG's problem with XFree86 is historical and personality-driven. The XiG marketing guys go out of their way to try and destroy XFree86, not that it's done them much good.

    The other commercial X company in this space, Metro Link, is reasonably supportive of the open source community. If I were going to buy a commercial X server, I'd look there first.

  282. Commercial quality on a free os? by handorf · · Score: 2
    you need a commercial quaklity X server


    Seems to me like they're preaching to the wrong group. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with commercialware, but saying that running a "Commerical Quality" XServer on Linux seems to be a slap in the face of Open/Free/Whatever software.

    What's good for the Kernel isn't good for the X-Server?
    --
    -- IANAEG - I am not an elder god.
  283. Accelerated X is not worth $100.. or even $1.00 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i don't know why they talk about it being so great.... if you have a wheel mouse you don't get to use it in accelerated x like you can via imwheel with xfree... theres no opengl for my tnt2 with acceleratedx like there is with xfree... its really a pain in the ass to get it to display right if you have a generic monitor... don't waste your money on their garbage

  284. Two ways to look at it I think by Uruk · · Score: 1

    The first is thinking that it's a mudslinging campaign, the other is to realize that within commercial realms, mudslinging (and I think the choice of the word mudslinging is interesting here - if the ad had been from an "unpopular" company, then it would have been FUD) is inevitable, and seeing a commercial company "mudsling" within the community signifies that the company realizes that there is a market in linux, and their customer base in that area is increasing.

    So, if you choose, you can see ads like these as a success story in a way for linux.

    Don't sweat the small stuff - there has always been infighting in the linux community, the only difference now being that is *appears* as if a company has joined in too.

    Nothing to see here, move along, move along.

    David

    --
    -- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
  285. My only crash experience... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    has been with netscape. For some reason it occasionally locks up all of X when I select something from the bookmarks. Although I cannot kill it via CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE, I can telnet it and restart the server.

  286. Speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am using the latest Xig server right now and its at least *twice* as fast as xf86. Mpegs are no longer choppy when playing back. It takes about the same time to load. If you are doing lots of graphic work, its definately worth it, or if you have a laptop with a chipset not supported by xf86.

  287. You've lost me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I swear as long as I live I will never buy anything from those FUD'sters

  288. Linux Journal by hummer · · Score: 1

    I note Linux Journal has run this ad for the last 2 months, on the back cover of their mag.
    I think this is interesting because although we have seen Linux as a whole attacked by commercial competitors (Case in point, Microsoft), generally, other open source efforts have been left alone by their commercial counterparts.


    It disappoints me a little that Linux Journal ran this ad, although I appreciate they need the advertising revenue. However, maybe they could have asked Metro-X to reword the ad to hilight Accelerated X's features rather than dissing XFree86's problems.


    hummer

    1. Re:Linux Journal by tweek · · Score: 1

      Actually MetroX doesn't produce AcceleratedX. XiG does. MetroX is a whole new commercial X offering in addition to AccelX. None the less, as long as XFree supports my cards, I will use XFree. The only reason I would pay for a commercial X server is if it offered hardware acceleration for my card that XFREE did not.

      --
      "Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
  289. Metrolink's multihead seems to work. by seebs · · Score: 1

    I'll admit it: I had crashes using XMetro in
    multihead mode.

    Then I wrote and described the crashes, and they
    sent me a patch.

    Since then, it's been rock-solid on a two-headed
    system. Even when it had the crash, the *only*
    crash condition was that, if I stopped and started
    X a few times, it could hang. During usage, it
    didn't crash. Ever.

    I use my X desktop about 12-15 hours a day, probably
    (more, according to my spouse), and it's just
    fine.

    --
    My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
  290. Worth the price? by ColonelNorth · · Score: 1

    Accelerated X is all well and good. I have used it before, and while it may be more stable than that put out by XFree, who wants to pay for it?

    Lets take a look at the facts.
    Accelerated X servers range in price from $100 to $300 depending on your setup, with higher prices for the "Developer's edition." What does this mean? Well, A nice OEM copy of Win98 runs around $89 or less. If I thought AcceleratedX was the only way to fly on Linux, I'd trot back to Microsoft. Why pay 4 times as much, even if it is 4 times better. I don't have a problem rebooting once a day. ;)

    In any event, the XFree project is doing an exelent job creating good, stable X servers. They are keeping up with vendors when it comes to display drivers, and seems fast and stable. Until I see my X server crash, Accelerated-X won't even cross my mind as anything of value. And as long as it's priced to kill, I'll never buy it.

  291. Re:Entire OS with it? Bullshit! -- not by bcboy · · Score: 1

    Looks like maybe sysrq K will do it. I'll have to try this next time X totally dies.

  292. Re:First post ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You gotta be desparate to want to spend that kind of money. Even WINDOWS doesn't cost as much as Acellerated X (not that it's better, but it CERTAINLY is more complex).

  293. Re:First post ? by Forward+The+Light+Br · · Score: 1

    select the text in one app, press the middle button in the second (after focus switches)

    you should be fine...
    We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars --Oscar Wilde

    --

    Grrr. my nick is "Forward the Light Brigade"...
  294. X server not quite the same privs as kernel... by seebs · · Score: 1

    There was a recent problem with some versions of
    XF86 not working on some versions of BSD/OS. Why?
    Because the kernel was prohibiting the X server
    from accessing certain regions of memory it wanted
    to use to probe some chipsets.

    So, there *is* a difference in protections, although
    the X server mostly gets a pretty free rein.

    --
    My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
  295. Hmm by Kitsune · · Score: 1

    They do have one good point, though,for many users, if something goes wrong with X, it's linux's fault. (and we usually have the bad habit of brushing the user off as a newbie) I find it rather disappointing that the linux vendors are now slamming the food they feed on. It would be nice too if we could also come up with distribution standards. All these large commercial organizations coming out with different distros and packages (.tgz, .rpm, .slpi, to name a few), it's a headache for the developper and a major source of confusion.

  296. Re:First post ? by OpperNerd · · Score: 1

    DUH ! But most of the time it just doesn't fucking work. I heard this from other people too.

    --
    -- unix is for people without a social life - Patrick van Eijk
  297. Not to savvy are they? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    X can hang the keyboard/mouse GUI interface, but I have only had this happen a few times when the server for my vid card (Banshee2) was in development. When it did crash however, I could telnet in (Linux lives!), kill the process for X then restart the GUI (all the while bitching lightly about the bug that caused it, and note'n that it still crashes far less then Nintendows98.) Those who work in the PR depts need to check with there geeks before spewn forth crap. We have noses highly tuned from years of bullshit (see past microsoft marketing methods). I am now less interested in their product then I was this morning.

  298. your sig by bfk · · Score: 1

    shouldn't that be "2e-2 dollars"? Right now your opinion is worth 2 hundredths of a cent. :)

  299. Check out the charg by Joe_NoOne · · Score: 1

    Their chart :

    http://www.xig.com/Pages/LaptopBENCHtables.html

    shows they are comparing to Xfree86 3.3.3.1, so in claiming that Xfree86 doesn't support many of the cards is a lie.

    Oh well, as the saying goes - lies, damn lies, statistics...

  300. Yes, XFree86 can take down your whole system. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In fact, if it screws up and leaves your video card in "apeshit" mode (see http://lwn.net/1999/0304/a/xfree.html), then there really is nothing you can do except reboot.

    I use a PS/2 mouse, and back in the day if it was sending any input to my computer while I switched to X it would take the whole Xserver down. Nowadays it just locks X up straight, sometimes similar to how a three-button mouse mistaken for a two-button mouse might screw up. So far, with XF86 3.3.5 I've managed three crashes within two weeks with just this problem, the latest (yesterday) screwing my system up so bad that remotely killing the Xserver did nothing, nor did any of the keyboard SysRq or ctl-alt-* combinations work.

    Now, I have no idea how much validity is in Xig's claim that AccelX is any better than XFree86, but it is true that problems exist in the latter in the way they so claim... Still, I'll stick with OSS anyday.

  301. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Put the proper OS back on, why are you running development code on computers that students use?

  302. Re:Impressions after using Accel-X for several yea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please, no, not Metro-X going outta business!

    I've always been impressed with what $40 buys you. Their servers are usually just as good as XFree (at least, imho), but support many more cards. And, Metro-X is super-easy to install. And, they support their product without your money ;-). I bought Metro-X last year, and can still upgrade to the latest version for free. Try that with Accel-X!

    Plus, you don't get pocket raped just because you own a laptop. Like I think a laptop X-Server should cost 3x more than a desktop server. They both use the same processor (intel-alike) don't they? Laptop chipsets should be no harder to program than desktop chipsets!

    Oh well... I'm gonna buy Metro-X when they release another Major (not minor) version, I was that impressed.

    (Note: Perhaps I'm unrealistic, but as a consumer, I'm allowed to be. I _require_ _any_ program over $250 US to be bug _free_. This means there are no errors. This means no updates will ever be required, because the software is error free. Why? Look at it this way. If you buy a $100 VCR and it busts after 2 years, you are dissapointed, but not angry. If you buy a $1500 VCR and it busts after 2 years, you are STEAMING mad, wether or not the company will fix it for you. You paid the higher price for a better product, and you got crap. Feel free to argue this [I know you will]... ;-)

  303. Re:such a critical piece should be open source by warmi · · Score: 1

    Hey, I do use AccelX and therefore trust "a closed source component" In fact, it beats the hell out of XFree on my system so why should I switch to something slower and basically, inferior ?

  304. I don't like 'em too well, myself. by demon · · Score: 1

    Heh. I've used XiG's AccelX server - one word to describe it. "Crashfest". All I had to do was switch out of X, and *bewm* lockup. I haven't had that problem with XFree86.

    Maybe it's just me, but I hope that XFree86 4.0 will start the first nail in AccelX's coffin.

    --

    Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
    Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
  305. It doesn't even actually bring down the OS by Dwonis · · Score: 2

    I've only had an X lockup that totally froze my computer about 5 times ever. My video has been nuked a few more times, but the SysRQ keys still successfully did a clean boot on the system.

    SysRQ-E (send TERM to all processes)
    Wait until disk activity stops
    SysRQ-I (send KILL to all processes)
    Wait 2 seconds
    SysRQ-U (remount all filesystems readonly)
    Wait until disk activity (if any) stops
    SysRQ-S (sync all disks)
    Wait until disk activity stops, minium 2 seconds
    SysRQ-B (reboot)

    And it's all good.

    * SysRQ on ix86es is Alt-PrtSc
    * If nothing seems to happen when you press the keys, try doing the SysRQ sequence again, it sometimes gets sticky.

    --------
    "I already have all the latest software."

  306. Just don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just don't get the ad, I have a linux based server with redhat6.0 installed, uptime reporting 20+ days, and of those 20 days its had X w/enlightenment on top of it running for oh say...98% of the time...I've yet to encounter a problem, maybe I'm just lucky, but XFree86 seems remarkably stable more so than most other commercial WINDOW(s)ing system....go figure.

  307. I've had the opposite experience. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All I have to say is that when doing heavy graphics manipulation, we had two boxes set up next to each other doing a demo. The accellerated x box crashed randomly, while the xfree server remained strong. And actually the only crashes on it were when I found out about an actual linux memory bug that was fixed in 2.2.10... I'm kind of wondering if anyone has had any similar experiences, or perhaps dissimilar experiences. HardCoded "Hex, Bugs, and Rockn'Roll" But anyways, I like using my optimizing gcc compiler to it's fullest. I've got a PII, it should use all of it's scheduling possible, I don't need to be scheduled for a 386.

  308. old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Xig has been doing this type of stuff for a long time. It's really nothing new, they used to make a big deal of performance benchmarks in which they would use color depth modes that XFree86 didn't perform well at to push their product.

    Now they just are using a different tactic, but the same basic approach. I doubt that you'll see anyone from XFree86 "rise to the challenge" and respond.

    --mikej
    -=-----
    mike jackson
    mikej@qualimetrics.com (for another 2 weeks)

  309. It *can* look like a fatal crash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sometimes if X (or Gnome or KDE or whatever other X-related thing) goes south, it can definitely *look* like a system crash. I've seen XFree86 and Gnome (as shipped in Redhat 6) lock up the video chip on certain machines so severely that, while Ctrl-Alt-Backspace will still kill the server, the characters on each VT are garbled and illegible. This makes the system almost useless. I've even seen XFree and Window managers get a hold of the keyboard and render it useless...the system *looks* like it's stopped taking interrupts, and the temptation is to power down. Again, almost useless. Why almost? It occured to me to try this... telnet hostname, login, and at the very least you can shut it down with some level of grace.

  310. anyone who didnt see this coming is ignorant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    its called marketing. perhaps you've heard of it? if you look really really hard you might find that your own for-profit business you are employed at uses marketing.

  311. such a critical piece should be open source by dru · · Score: 1

    Since the Xserver is a critical piece of the operating system, who in their right mind would trust a closed source component?

    all this makes me think about xig is what a slimy company

  312. X taking down Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now I have heard everything! I have had X crash a couple of times. (Very rarely, but I was eating up ALOT of memory at the time.) It has *never* taken out Linux! I have rebooted afterwards, but that was out of lazyness on my part, not from a lack of a functioning kernel. (It left a bunch of random processes from the 15+ apps I was running at the time.)

    Sounds like FUD to get people to pay for AcceleratedX.

    Personnaly, I was very dissapointed with my experiences with their products. Their chipset support was not what I would have expected. I saw no real reason to continue with the product.