Different automated tools that exist to create or select modelines work with different degrees of succsess. However, what one really needs as a good personal backup solution in the case these tools fail is a private database of typically used modes. Monitors file from doc directory of XFree installation is a good place to start. You can copy all modes people have created, indentify individual ones and sort them by resolution and dotclock. (For ignorant, dotclock is the first numeric value in the modeline definition).
Thus, you may have "1024x768a", "1024x768b",.... etc (the same for other resolutions). Once you have such private database built, I doubt you will ever find a monitor that does not work.
I built my database five years ago and I have never come across the monitor that I could not configure in five minutes. What I need to know is what the monitors capabilities are (approximately) and I immediately can take the appropriate modelines from my list.
It is not that dificult once you get an idea of what "classes" of monitors are out there. Believe me there are not that many -- for 99.9% users it is five, maximum six types.
With this approach I had to write modelines only twice -- and those were special modes not suitable for desktop X and not in any databases I could find. One mode was for full screen TV and the other for full screen mpeg. Those were the only cases that I had to learn how to write the modes.
In general, I find X approach more flexible than Windows', since it lets you to define modes manually. When similar multiple modes exist, I can try them and chose the one best looking. I usually have to redefine modes manually after the installation, because I'm not happy with the results. The older tools tended to put the most conservative modes while the latest tools (like latest Xconfigurator form RedHat) put those that have the highest refresh rates, maxing out the monitor. In either case the results were not acceptable and there were not enough choices for me.
X can be very flexible here with just a little effort and understanding from the user side. For example, my modes declaration in Display section begins with "1280x1024f" and ends with "320x200" going thorugh many modes in between. Which windows computer can do that? Another example is my home monitor, which is a cheep 17" allowing to do only 1280x1024 at 60Hz, which is unusable. In windows, I can use it only as 1024x768 (since the only possible selection above 1024x768 is 1280x1024). In linux under XFree, however, I am happily using it as 1152x900 at 70Hz. And I did not have to write that mode either. I just took it from a database of modes. There are other monitors out there (there were much more in the early days of Win95) which when failed to be probed by Windows will work miserably or fail to work at all.
The stuff you mention is a problem, no doubt. But it is not that difficult to master. You need to understand that due to microsoft monopoly and its proprietry standards it is very easy to test monitors under windows (because vendors provide the specs and make their monitors windows probe friendly) and very difficult elsewhere. This situation is going to change rather quickly with expansion of Linux, erosion of Windows monopoly and a bunch of Linux friendly hardware available.
I can e-mail my mode database to anyone who is interested or post it if there is enough demand.
Slashdot Mirror
Different automated tools that exist to create or select modelines work with different degrees of succsess. However, what one really needs as a good personal backup solution in the case these tools fail is a private database of typically used modes. Monitors file from doc directory of XFree installation is a good place to start. You can copy all modes people have created, indentify individual ones and sort them by resolution and dotclock. (For ignorant, dotclock is the first numeric value in the modeline definition).
.... etc (the same for other resolutions). Once you have such private database built, I doubt you will ever find a monitor that does not work.
Thus, you may have "1024x768a", "1024x768b",
I built my database five years ago and I have never come across the monitor that I could not configure in five minutes. What I need to know is what the monitors capabilities are (approximately) and I immediately can take the appropriate modelines from my list.
It is not that dificult once you get an idea of what "classes" of monitors are out there. Believe me there are not that many -- for 99.9% users it is five, maximum six types.
With this approach I had to write modelines only twice -- and those were special modes not suitable for desktop X and not in any databases I could find. One mode was for full screen TV and the other for full screen mpeg. Those were the only cases that I had to learn how to write the modes.
In general, I find X approach more flexible than Windows', since it lets you to define modes manually. When similar multiple modes exist, I can try them and chose the one best looking. I usually have to redefine modes manually after the installation, because I'm not happy with the results. The older tools tended to put the most conservative modes while the latest tools (like latest Xconfigurator form RedHat) put those that have the highest refresh rates, maxing out the monitor. In either case the results were not acceptable and there were not enough choices for me.
X can be very flexible here with just a little effort and understanding from the user side. For example, my modes declaration in Display section begins with "1280x1024f" and ends with "320x200" going thorugh many modes in between. Which windows computer can do that? Another example is my home monitor, which is a cheep 17" allowing to do only 1280x1024 at 60Hz, which is unusable. In windows, I can use it only as 1024x768 (since the only possible selection above 1024x768 is 1280x1024). In linux under XFree, however, I am happily using it as 1152x900 at 70Hz. And I did not have to write that mode either. I just took it from a database of modes. There are other monitors out there (there were much more in the early days of Win95) which when failed to be probed by Windows will work miserably or fail to work at all.
The stuff you mention is a problem, no doubt. But it is not that difficult to master. You need to understand that due to microsoft monopoly and its proprietry standards it is very easy to test monitors under windows (because vendors provide the specs and make their monitors windows probe friendly) and very difficult elsewhere. This situation is going to change rather quickly with expansion of Linux, erosion of Windows monopoly and a bunch of Linux friendly hardware available.
I can e-mail my mode database to anyone who is interested or post it if there is enough demand.