The "garbling" I experienced was also on Ubuntu, I don't remember exactly which version but 10.04 wouldn't be far out of the park. I remember trying everything to get it to work, like enabling the X-Org Edgers PPA even. Just wouldn't work. That's the thing with proprietary drivers: when the manufacturer stops supporting it then it dies on Linux because other pieces of the system, like X, continue to change. Eventually you get an ABI breakage and you have to either stick with older software all-around or junk the affected hardware. When that hardware is your video that may not be an option - so older software it is, bugs, security issues, and all.
Yup, most laptops come with an extra display hook-up of some kind. My laptop isn't used in a portable manner, it is plugged all the time and doesn't even have its battery in it. Since it is immobile that makes it convenient to also have the other monitor plugged into it constantly. Now, if it was mobile then the extra screen would be a burden more than something useful. If that was the case then I probably wouldn't go with the xorg.conf file and would instead have two shell scripts that used the "xrandr" command directly: one to enable dual-screen and one to disable dual-screen, which would be the default. I wouldn't have the xorg.conf file because on the go I might not have an extra monitor that that file makes X expect.
You're positing a straw-man. I am not, and never mentioned, "running a render farm." I'm using it for desktop use and programming. I have a full GUI desktop, Xfce 4.10, with Compiz enabled and doing just fine. Flash video plays perfect in my Chromium browser. Intel is fine.
I'm using Xfce 4.10, with the Xinerama config compiz worked fine. Later on someone told me it wasn't supposed to work with Xinerama. Huh, it did.. But, anyway I went with the XRandR config anyway because it is much shorter. However, on my login manager screen - SLiM - the XRandR config has both screens as clones of each other where with the Xinerama config they are independent displays.
The last time I tried the open-source radeon driver it was with an Ati Xpress 1100 chipset. The driver would randomly garble the screen and there was nothing I could do to fix it. Things have perhaps changed but I've never had any issues with Intel.
On Arch, at this time, the X.Org server - as already stated, because the X server is too new - isn't supported yet by the latest AMD proprietary driver.
No, when I buy my next Windows machine it'll have either AMD or nVidia graphics. My current desktop machine, which has AMD graphics, will have those graphics pulled at that time. Which means the machine will then be using its Intel graphics - what is integrated right now on the processor. That machine, the old one when I get my new one, will be Linux. With Intel graphics. And I don't play games under Linux, that's what Windows is for, which will be the new machine - in a year or two.
I'm running a dual-head using XRandR. It works fine. Honestly however I've never used anything more complicated than a dual-screen so I don't want to go off and promise you the moon. Xinerama may be an option for you: before using XRandR I set up with that and even though it's not supposed to compiz did work when in that mode. XRandR, Xinerama, TwinView, you'd think between all that something would work for you.
Ha, nope. Anyone who's been around the Linux block a few times should confirm that Intel graphics drivers (xf86-video-intel) are just the shiznit. Try getting fglrx to run with xorg-server 1.12.1 - what Arch ships - and you'll find that that proprietary driver hasn't been updated to support that version yet. You could always use xf86-video-ati or xf86-video-nouveau but, honestly, both those drivers lack the polish of xf86-video-intel. Intel just works.
Intel, with their open-source graphics stack, makes for some of the easiest-to-maintain Linux boxes around. I'm typing this right now on Arch with Intel graphics. Sure, they don't have a lot of "gaming punch" but they are darn stable and just work with Linux.
My desktop right now has Windows and is running a first-generation Core i5 with an AMD Radeon 6870 added in. When that machine get's replaced with another gaming Windows machine in a year or two I'll be pulling the AMD graphics out of it and running on the i5 integrated Intel graphics. It will be super-low-maintenance in Linux. None of this rebuilding fglrx or nVidia modules every time you upgrade the kernel.
When I go looking for a Linux machine the very first thing I look to check-off is "Intel graphics"? Yup, then it's a buy.
Slashdot Mirror
The "garbling" I experienced was also on Ubuntu, I don't remember exactly which version but 10.04 wouldn't be far out of the park. I remember trying everything to get it to work, like enabling the X-Org Edgers PPA even. Just wouldn't work. That's the thing with proprietary drivers: when the manufacturer stops supporting it then it dies on Linux because other pieces of the system, like X, continue to change. Eventually you get an ABI breakage and you have to either stick with older software all-around or junk the affected hardware. When that hardware is your video that may not be an option - so older software it is, bugs, security issues, and all.
Yup, most laptops come with an extra display hook-up of some kind. My laptop isn't used in a portable manner, it is plugged all the time and doesn't even have its battery in it. Since it is immobile that makes it convenient to also have the other monitor plugged into it constantly. Now, if it was mobile then the extra screen would be a burden more than something useful. If that was the case then I probably wouldn't go with the xorg.conf file and would instead have two shell scripts that used the "xrandr" command directly: one to enable dual-screen and one to disable dual-screen, which would be the default. I wouldn't have the xorg.conf file because on the go I might not have an extra monitor that that file makes X expect.
You're positing a straw-man. I am not, and never mentioned, "running a render farm." I'm using it for desktop use and programming. I have a full GUI desktop, Xfce 4.10, with Compiz enabled and doing just fine. Flash video plays perfect in my Chromium browser. Intel is fine.
I have a laptop, it has its built in screen and a VGA port on the side. Here is it's xorg.conf file:
XRandR xorg.conf.
I did briefly use a Xinerama configuration, and here that is:
Xinerama xorg.conf.
I'm using Xfce 4.10, with the Xinerama config compiz worked fine. Later on someone told me it wasn't supposed to work with Xinerama. Huh, it did.. But, anyway I went with the XRandR config anyway because it is much shorter. However, on my login manager screen - SLiM - the XRandR config has both screens as clones of each other where with the Xinerama config they are independent displays.
The last time I tried the open-source radeon driver it was with an Ati Xpress 1100 chipset. The driver would randomly garble the screen and there was nothing I could do to fix it. Things have perhaps changed but I've never had any issues with Intel.
On Arch, at this time, the X.Org server - as already stated, because the X server is too new - isn't supported yet by the latest AMD proprietary driver.
No, when I buy my next Windows machine it'll have either AMD or nVidia graphics. My current desktop machine, which has AMD graphics, will have those graphics pulled at that time. Which means the machine will then be using its Intel graphics - what is integrated right now on the processor. That machine, the old one when I get my new one, will be Linux. With Intel graphics. And I don't play games under Linux, that's what Windows is for, which will be the new machine - in a year or two.
I'm running a dual-head using XRandR. It works fine. Honestly however I've never used anything more complicated than a dual-screen so I don't want to go off and promise you the moon. Xinerama may be an option for you: before using XRandR I set up with that and even though it's not supposed to compiz did work when in that mode. XRandR, Xinerama, TwinView, you'd think between all that something would work for you.
Ha, nope. Anyone who's been around the Linux block a few times should confirm that Intel graphics drivers (xf86-video-intel) are just the shiznit. Try getting fglrx to run with xorg-server 1.12.1 - what Arch ships - and you'll find that that proprietary driver hasn't been updated to support that version yet. You could always use xf86-video-ati or xf86-video-nouveau but, honestly, both those drivers lack the polish of xf86-video-intel. Intel just works.
Typing this on my Arch laptop, my desktop is Windows..
Intel, with their open-source graphics stack, makes for some of the easiest-to-maintain Linux boxes around. I'm typing this right now on Arch with Intel graphics. Sure, they don't have a lot of "gaming punch" but they are darn stable and just work with Linux.
My desktop right now has Windows and is running a first-generation Core i5 with an AMD Radeon 6870 added in. When that machine get's replaced with another gaming Windows machine in a year or two I'll be pulling the AMD graphics out of it and running on the i5 integrated Intel graphics. It will be super-low-maintenance in Linux. None of this rebuilding fglrx or nVidia modules every time you upgrade the kernel.
When I go looking for a Linux machine the very first thing I look to check-off is "Intel graphics"? Yup, then it's a buy.