There is a driver. It is not in Linux mainline and not in Ubuntu by default. Vendor-supplied source works on Ubuntu, and you can use it in your boards as long as you won't update the kernel without also installing the driver for it. Ubuntu will release a package soon if Linux mainline won't get it first.
Really? That was posted half a year ago! If there was a problem then, it's long gone. Why post it now?
As you've noticed, the driver is not in the mainline kernel. I am specifically looking for a motherboard with is supported out of the box by modern Linux distros.
Just because it's not in mainline, does not mean that you can't use it. There is nothing special about vendor-supported drivers, at worst you can complain about lack of package management support, so you have to run vendor-provided driver build procedure after kernel updates. Ubuntu has infrastructure for such drivers, so the soultion would be to ask someone to maintain the package -- you did not ask Realtek and Canonical, did you?
While Pulseaudio has plenty of flaws in both design and implementation, all issues you have described were fixed for years. Stop searching Ubuntu forums and posting every complaint and bug report as a current issue, it's getting really, really old.
due to the motherboard reporting a Linux-supported ethernet device (the common RTL8168) while it was actually using a GbE Ethernet device that does not work with the legacy drivers and didn't even work with a test Windows 7 install until the driver disk was installed.
Model and manufacturer, please! Sounds like bullshit to me.
Obviously, any narrow-minded individual has problems understanding a reality where people have different needs, so instead resorts to cheap sleazy insult.
Fish may have legitimate reason for not wanting bicycle suitable for humans, however I would rather not use a bicycle based on the requirements of a fish.
I could point out that none of what you actually said is true (some graphics adapters DO support scrollable viewports,
All of them do, in X.
Windows does provide switchable viewports,
Inaccessible to the user without additional software, nearly unusable with said software, and in conflict with all other possible desktop enhancements due to lacl of design. How typically Windows-like.
not everyone uses what you use,
It does not matter. I am an engineer, and my configuration of a desktop is conducive to complex engineering/software development work, therefore my requirements are legitimate, and Windows' inability to satisfy them is a flaw. Just because there are plenty of other engineers who have never seen anything other than Windows, does not mean that they do not suffer and do inferior job, or live shorter, more miserable lives, because of the deficiency of the environment forced on them.
there is a shit ton of problems/issues with multi-monitor support in X
Maybe in those X servers that run on Windows. X on Linux works just fine.
and some of them are more than a decade old, etc etc etc), but it would be pointless.
Some of software that I use is older than I am, and most of it is older than you are. It works just fine because it was not crap to begin with. Unrelated to this, I have no idea, what the fuck do you mean -- Xorg, the only modern X server, is being actively developed.
A narrow-minded person has no mental space available for a different perspective.
Burning hatred toward militant idiots is not narrow-mindedness.
Since Vista, the new DWM is a compositing window manager that has NONE of the problems you describe.
No, it's actually a very thick composite manager, not a window manager like ones in X. X window manager performs manipulations on windows to configure the parameters that determine how they are displayed by X server, and processes all user's input when user intends to manipulate windows, completely bypassing applications themselves. At the same time composite manager (that may or may not be the same program) implements hardware-accelerated compositing. This is also why window manager can work with or without compositing (though some eye-candy-heavy window managers such as Compiz would rather run another window manager instead of implementing non-composite mode). As usual, Windows developers jumbled together huge pieces of the system, and implemented them in a way that completely depends on hardware feature that is optional everywhere else, performs tiny fraction of functionality, and allows no configuration or extensibility. Good job, Redmond!
Take the time you spend trying to insult people from inside your bubble to actually read what you're replying to. Did I complain about being disabled? No, I complain about being broken.
That's the false part -- it works just fine when enabled. Though usually there is no good reason to enable it, as remote X works with either ssh tunneling (for very lazy people or insecure networks) or preloaded cookie files (for X servers attached to session after authentication). However when XDMCP is needed, it works.
Actually, an X Server runs no applications at all - it is the client that runs the applications.
It runs display procedures and input for them, you extraordinary pedant.
Apparently you must be using a X Server implementation different from anyone else, since according to you it runs your applications instead of just rendering them.
VNC renders. X server draws (though now mostly by copying bitmaps around).
Good to know. You must be one of those guys for which everyone is an idiot, right? Or are you just compensating your own social akwardness?
No, it's just you are an idiot and I am not.
So, in other words, working with simple tools like Microsoft Office seems to be beyond your habilities. Most of what you said could be said about any program. Really.
No, Microsoft Office just happens to be a convoluted application made for a very simple purpose -- this is why it does not matter for it, how bad is the display subsystem and desktop environment. Just wait, and you will see that it will be the only application that perfectly fits into the abomination that is Metro/Modern.
X/Xorg: is an application for making pretty documents with incoherent formatting
X is a general purpose display server, it works well with all applications, including "Office" ones of all kinds.
MySQL: a pseudo-database with calculations
MySQL is a general-purpose SQL server, as opposed to Excel, the bastard child of Visicalc and Access.
DIA: absurdist art
Most things created in diagram editors are, indeed, in absurdist category, however it's not the fault of software. Well, at some extent it is, because it comes with UML library.
And this is relevant to the current topic how?
It's relevant because Microsoft Office should fit into a tablet, so it works on hopelessly crippled desktop.
But do tell me about all those X/Xorg tablets, inquiring minds want to know...
My Nokia N900 phone has a desktop based on a full-featured X server. It works great (including scaled live view of running applications) despite very limited CPU performance. So does Plasma Active on all current implementations.
I'm shure your CPU is taxed at 99%, and your work is more relevant like no other.
Only when I run timing optimization of my FPGA projects. However it's more important that I can see all information I have to see when I develop software and run it on complex hardware configuration, with all kinds of monitoring and logging that I have to analyze to make any sense of it.
You could die tomorrow and probably no one would give half a shit about your work, Machines are tools, not the endgame. Really, get a life.
Do you realize that everything -- absolutely everything that you have ever used -- exists because people like myself at some point made critically important design decision, before worthless scum like yourself became able to "design" things by copy/pasting their work?
There are many differences between people like me and people like you, but one of the most fundamental is the reason why people like me really, really care about their tools. I can't use Windows not because Windows is inefficient or ug
What you have described, is absolutely trivial on Linux, and was for a really, really long time (randr 1.2 configures arbitrary screen offsets at runtime). People didn't use it before because stupid "widescreen" ratios kept vertical display too narrow for document editing and viewing until recently. *I* don't use it because my standard development layout involves two large text editor windows side by side for cross-referencing, it takes almost whole screen, so everything else goes on another monitor or viewports, therefore everything stays in landscape.
So far, the only usable implementations of virtual desktops are in X, and everything else is total crap. Yes, even OSX. Obviously, a Windows user wouldn't know a case when virtual desktop are useful, from his own ass.
XDMCP and remote X are disabled on Ubuntu because for home users they are nothing but a potential security hole. Enabling them is trivial for those who need them.
X servers for Windows don't run Windows applications, and mostly don't run X applications, either, due to extreme ineficciency, outdated implementations, and nonexistent hardware support. Among other things, they don't support dynamic resolution changes and compositing. Apparently idiots like you believe that all X implementations are as crappy as those.
Microsoft Office is an application for making pretty documents with incoherent formatting, and using a pseudo-database with calculations, that grew into something that has more in common with absurdist art than any productive activity. People who only use it, would be better off with a tablet-keyboard combination -- too bad, one that Microsoft tried to sell is total crap, at large extent because their tablet-style UI is almost as bad on tablets as it is on desktops. If you judge workstations use by the type of users who waste computers' capability the most, you you are bound to end up with idiotic preferences -- oh wait, this is what Windows mlti-screen support is!
Not to bait you but you didn't actually debunk his post
I have explained that his comparison is invalid because he based it on one least-relevant feature.
are there any Win users here that use multiple monitors to give us a comparison?
You mean, gamers who have one box running fullscreen game on three screens (three is important because otherwise his gun's sight will be between screen edges)? And office dwellers who have Word on one screen and Excel on another because they have no scrollable/switchable viewports? With the way how Windows users use multiple monitors, no. Windows may be ready for desktop, but it's not ready for any serious use as a workstation.
Sony still makes nice cameras (I prefer new Fujifilm still cameras, but they are just as Japanese and just as expensive). Of course, my laptop is Chinese Lenovo Thinkpad X220, and I have nothing negative to say about it.
This shows that people like you have last used Windows back in the XP or even ME days. Get with the times instead of wallowing in outdated criticisms.
Now the effect is masked by the speed of processors and programmers carefully starting tens of threads for their UI, but it's still there (window won't even move if anything gets blocked). Meanwhile, X applications may run on some remote m68k, and won't slow down the rest of UI.
This is soooooo useful to so many desktop users
Workstations users need that all the time, they just can't get it from Windows.
compared to the use case of extending desktop to another monitor on the desk without fiddling with multiple config files and utilities. *snicker*
Do you even understand what this is about? All this IS IMPLEMENTED in nice UI, the article is about a new KDE utility for it.
You didn't (and still don't) even have a separation between window manager and applications, so hung application produces pretty patterns on the screen when you try to drag your window, if you can even drag it at all. You didn't (and still don't) have usable multiple-desktop or multiple-viewports support, so changes in resolution only affect one giant constantly-displayed area, with all windows mapped to it. You can't allocate a monitor connected to one host to become a part of the environment for other hosts, or combine multiple hosts with their monitors to show a single desktop, with applications spanning all of them.
So you are comparing the ability to change the resolution on the fly without restarting applications (what Windows had before Linux got it in 2001, and became part of mainstream in 2007) against actual usable management of resolutions on multiple screens, some virtual, some networked. And no, your stupid Terminal Services don't count.
They're poor because their government insists on keeping them that way. If we undid the economic blockade, the "party members" would be rich, and everyone else would still be poor.
NK could do any number of things to end the economic blockade, because no one cares about ruling that country, they've only ever worried about a possibly batshit crazy leader with nuclear weapons. The cold war is long over and communism is dead.
Do you have anything at all, other than words ot US propaganda workers, as the base for all those bold statements? Have you even seen any kind of Communist in your whole life, leave alone, a North Korean official? Studied economy of the region collecting information from actual sources? Did any comparisons between North Korean and Chinese leaders' actions over recent half a century of their history? And if not, please shut up and never talk about those things again.
So if I'll find hydrazine on anything launched by US, I should claim that they are probably using WWII-time German designs, and go on and on how stupid are Americans for using engines that require single-component, self-igniting fuel?
That said I'd much rather they'd put that much effort in actually feeding their own population.
They can't. They have no sources of energy required for food production on the kind of land they have, and thanks to US-instigated economic blockade, have no way to obtain them.
They are not stupid or crazy, just very poor, and the origin of their poverty is the same as in your nearest ghetto.
Slashdot Mirror
And then it will be able to rebuild railroads, so it will stop using a luxury form of travel as the primary form of transportation.
pwnt.
"HAY GUYZ, we will keep people as employees and rent them to you AT MAD PROFIT" is not a viable business model.
Then why are you posting this here?
There is a driver.
It is not in Linux mainline and not in Ubuntu by default.
Vendor-supplied source works on Ubuntu, and you can use it in your boards as long as you won't update the kernel without also installing the driver for it.
Ubuntu will release a package soon if Linux mainline won't get it first.
What else so you want, ponies?
Actually, that was me on the askubuntu forums.
Really? That was posted half a year ago! If there was a problem then, it's long gone. Why post it now?
As you've noticed, the driver is not in the mainline kernel. I am specifically looking for a motherboard with is supported out of the box by modern Linux distros.
Just because it's not in mainline, does not mean that you can't use it. There is nothing special about vendor-supported drivers, at worst you can complain about lack of package management support, so you have to run vendor-provided driver build procedure after kernel updates. Ubuntu has infrastructure for such drivers, so the soultion would be to ask someone to maintain the package -- you did not ask Realtek and Canonical, did you?
Because then it won't keep those computers Windows-only.
So simply being a nice person is now manipulative because it makes people like you? Do you even realise what you're saying?
There is nothing nice about causing harm for no reason to other people (users in this case) while smiling and talking politely.
While Pulseaudio has plenty of flaws in both design and implementation, all issues you have described were fixed for years. Stop searching Ubuntu forums and posting every complaint and bug report as a current issue, it's getting really, really old.
Submitter here.
Asus P8H61-M LX
This board is supported by a vendor driver (open source, maintained by Realtek itself, just isn't in mainline). Your "complaint" is suspiciously similar to one described at http://askubuntu.com/questions/157969/dhcp-not-working-on-new-install/159031#159031 , what makes me question its authenticity.
due to the motherboard reporting a Linux-supported ethernet device (the common RTL8168) while it was actually using a GbE Ethernet device that does not work with the legacy drivers and didn't even work with a test Windows 7 install until the driver disk was installed.
Model and manufacturer, please! Sounds like bullshit to me.
Obviously, any narrow-minded individual has problems understanding a reality where people have different needs, so instead resorts to cheap sleazy insult.
Fish may have legitimate reason for not wanting bicycle suitable for humans, however I would rather not use a bicycle based on the requirements of a fish.
I could point out that none of what you actually said is true (some graphics adapters DO support scrollable viewports,
All of them do, in X.
Windows does provide switchable viewports,
Inaccessible to the user without additional software, nearly unusable with said software, and in conflict with all other possible desktop enhancements due to lacl of design. How typically Windows-like.
not everyone uses what you use,
It does not matter. I am an engineer, and my configuration of a desktop is conducive to complex engineering/software development work, therefore my requirements are legitimate, and Windows' inability to satisfy them is a flaw. Just because there are plenty of other engineers who have never seen anything other than Windows, does not mean that they do not suffer and do inferior job, or live shorter, more miserable lives, because of the deficiency of the environment forced on them.
there is a shit ton of problems/issues with multi-monitor support in X
Maybe in those X servers that run on Windows. X on Linux works just fine.
and some of them are more than a decade old, etc etc etc), but it would be pointless.
Some of software that I use is older than I am, and most of it is older than you are. It works just fine because it was not crap to begin with. Unrelated to this, I have no idea, what the fuck do you mean -- Xorg, the only modern X server, is being actively developed.
A narrow-minded person has no mental space available for a different perspective.
Burning hatred toward militant idiots is not narrow-mindedness.
Since Vista, the new DWM is a compositing window manager that has NONE of the problems you describe.
No, it's actually a very thick composite manager, not a window manager like ones in X. X window manager performs manipulations on windows to configure the parameters that determine how they are displayed by X server, and processes all user's input when user intends to manipulate windows, completely bypassing applications themselves. At the same time composite manager (that may or may not be the same program) implements hardware-accelerated compositing. This is also why window manager can work with or without compositing (though some eye-candy-heavy window managers such as Compiz would rather run another window manager instead of implementing non-composite mode). As usual, Windows developers jumbled together huge pieces of the system, and implemented them in a way that completely depends on hardware feature that is optional everywhere else, performs tiny fraction of functionality, and allows no configuration or extensibility. Good job, Redmond!
Take the time you spend trying to insult people from inside your bubble to actually read what you're replying to. Did I complain about being disabled? No, I complain about being broken.
That's the false part -- it works just fine when enabled. Though usually there is no good reason to enable it, as remote X works with either ssh tunneling (for very lazy people or insecure networks) or preloaded cookie files (for X servers attached to session after authentication). However when XDMCP is needed, it works.
Actually, an X Server runs no applications at all - it is the client that runs the applications.
It runs display procedures and input for them, you extraordinary pedant.
Apparently you must be using a X Server implementation different from anyone else, since according to you it runs your applications instead of just rendering them.
VNC renders. X server draws (though now mostly by copying bitmaps around).
Good to know. You must be one of those guys for which everyone is an idiot, right? Or are you just compensating your own social akwardness?
No, it's just you are an idiot and I am not.
So, in other words, working with simple tools like Microsoft Office seems to be beyond your habilities. Most of what you said could be said about any program. Really.
No, Microsoft Office just happens to be a convoluted application made for a very simple purpose -- this is why it does not matter for it, how bad is the display subsystem and desktop environment. Just wait, and you will see that it will be the only application that perfectly fits into the abomination that is Metro/Modern.
X/Xorg: is an application for making pretty documents with incoherent formatting
X is a general purpose display server, it works well with all applications, including "Office" ones of all kinds.
MySQL: a pseudo-database with calculations
MySQL is a general-purpose SQL server, as opposed to Excel, the bastard child of Visicalc and Access.
DIA: absurdist art
Most things created in diagram editors are, indeed, in absurdist category, however it's not the fault of software. Well, at some extent it is, because it comes with UML library.
And this is relevant to the current topic how?
It's relevant because Microsoft Office should fit into a tablet, so it works on hopelessly crippled desktop.
But do tell me about all those X/Xorg tablets, inquiring minds want to know...
My Nokia N900 phone has a desktop based on a full-featured X server. It works great (including scaled live view of running applications) despite very limited CPU performance.
So does Plasma Active on all current implementations.
I'm shure your CPU is taxed at 99%, and your work is more relevant like no other.
Only when I run timing optimization of my FPGA projects. However it's more important that I can see all information I have to see when I develop software and run it on complex hardware configuration, with all kinds of monitoring and logging that I have to analyze to make any sense of it.
You could die tomorrow and probably no one would give half a shit about your work, Machines are tools, not the endgame. Really, get a life.
Do you realize that everything -- absolutely everything that you have ever used -- exists because people like myself at some point made critically important design decision, before worthless scum like yourself became able to "design" things by copy/pasting their work?
There are many differences between people like me and people like you, but one of the most fundamental is the reason why people like me really, really care about their tools. I can't use Windows not because Windows is inefficient or ug
What you have described, is absolutely trivial on Linux, and was for a really, really long time (randr 1.2 configures arbitrary screen offsets at runtime). People didn't use it before because stupid "widescreen" ratios kept vertical display too narrow for document editing and viewing until recently. *I* don't use it because my standard development layout involves two large text editor windows side by side for cross-referencing, it takes almost whole screen, so everything else goes on another monitor or viewports, therefore everything stays in landscape.
So far, the only usable implementations of virtual desktops are in X, and everything else is total crap. Yes, even OSX. Obviously, a Windows user wouldn't know a case when virtual desktop are useful, from his own ass.
XDMCP and remote X are disabled on Ubuntu because for home users they are nothing but a potential security hole. Enabling them is trivial for those who need them.
X servers for Windows don't run Windows applications, and mostly don't run X applications, either, due to extreme ineficciency, outdated implementations, and nonexistent hardware support. Among other things, they don't support dynamic resolution changes and compositing. Apparently idiots like you believe that all X implementations are as crappy as those.
Microsoft Office is an application for making pretty documents with incoherent formatting, and using a pseudo-database with calculations, that grew into something that has more in common with absurdist art than any productive activity. People who only use it, would be better off with a tablet-keyboard combination -- too bad, one that Microsoft tried to sell is total crap, at large extent because their tablet-style UI is almost as bad on tablets as it is on desktops. If you judge workstations use by the type of users who waste computers' capability the most, you you are bound to end up with idiotic preferences -- oh wait, this is what Windows mlti-screen support is!
The rest of your response is plain false.
Wayland is one of the doomed projects that were supposed to replace X, but amounted to nothing. This shit is going on for as long as X11 existed.
Not to bait you but you didn't actually debunk his post
I have explained that his comparison is invalid because he based it on one least-relevant feature.
are there any Win users here that use multiple monitors to give us a comparison?
You mean, gamers who have one box running fullscreen game on three screens (three is important because otherwise his gun's sight will be between screen edges)? And office dwellers who have Word on one screen and Excel on another because they have no scrollable/switchable viewports? With the way how Windows users use multiple monitors, no. Windows may be ready for desktop, but it's not ready for any serious use as a workstation.
Arduino is an 8-bit microcontroller, running code compiled from C++, with disgusting Java-based IDE that is not Eclipse on top of it.
Sony still makes nice cameras (I prefer new Fujifilm still cameras, but they are just as Japanese and just as expensive).
Of course, my laptop is Chinese Lenovo Thinkpad X220, and I have nothing negative to say about it.
This shows that people like you have last used Windows back in the XP or even ME days. Get with the times instead of wallowing in outdated criticisms.
Now the effect is masked by the speed of processors and programmers carefully starting tens of threads for their UI, but it's still there (window won't even move if anything gets blocked). Meanwhile, X applications may run on some remote m68k, and won't slow down the rest of UI.
This is soooooo useful to so many desktop users
Workstations users need that all the time, they just can't get it from Windows.
compared to the use case of extending desktop to another monitor on the desk without fiddling with multiple config files and utilities. *snicker*
Do you even understand what this is about? All this IS IMPLEMENTED in nice UI, the article is about a new KDE utility for it.
Wow. Your deeply reasoned post sighting even a shred of real-world evidence has swayed me!
I am not reasoning with you, I announce your ignorance and inability to have any opinion on the subject that is worth discussing. Go away.
Actually, no, you could not.
You didn't (and still don't) even have a separation between window manager and applications, so hung application produces pretty patterns on the screen when you try to drag your window, if you can even drag it at all. You didn't (and still don't) have usable multiple-desktop or multiple-viewports support, so changes in resolution only affect one giant constantly-displayed area, with all windows mapped to it. You can't allocate a monitor connected to one host to become a part of the environment for other hosts, or combine multiple hosts with their monitors to show a single desktop, with applications spanning all of them.
So you are comparing the ability to change the resolution on the fly without restarting applications (what Windows had before Linux got it in 2001, and became part of mainstream in 2007) against actual usable management of resolutions on multiple screens, some virtual, some networked. And no, your stupid Terminal Services don't count.
BS.
They're poor because their government insists on keeping them that way. If we undid the economic blockade, the "party members" would be rich, and everyone else would still be poor.
NK could do any number of things to end the economic blockade, because no one cares about ruling that country, they've only ever worried about a possibly batshit crazy leader with nuclear weapons. The cold war is long over and communism is dead.
Do you have anything at all, other than words ot US propaganda workers, as the base for all those bold statements? Have you even seen any kind of Communist in your whole life, leave alone, a North Korean official? Studied economy of the region collecting information from actual sources? Did any comparisons between North Korean and Chinese leaders' actions over recent half a century of their history? And if not, please shut up and never talk about those things again.
So if I'll find hydrazine on anything launched by US, I should claim that they are probably using WWII-time German designs, and go on and on how stupid are Americans for using engines that require single-component, self-igniting fuel?
That said I'd much rather they'd put that much effort in actually feeding their own population.
They can't. They have no sources of energy required for food production on the kind of land they have, and thanks to US-instigated economic blockade, have no way to obtain them.
They are not stupid or crazy, just very poor, and the origin of their poverty is the same as in your nearest ghetto.