Linked by Eugenia Loli on Tue 10th Apr 2007 19:24 UTC, submitted by Charl P. Botha
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu "This is a more critical than usual mini-review of Ubuntu Feisty beta on an HP NC8430 laptop. It practically examines some of the problems laptop users will run into when trying to run Feisty on their hardware."
Thread beginning with comment 229283
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
vanfruniken
Member since:
2006-07-18

... as they have done for years in MacOSX?

Take the support for hi-res screens. Why aren't 1440x900, 1680x1050, etc. not supported? I understand it only takes a few lines in a config file to do this. This not just puzzles me, it means Linux developers have no clue about the non-geek community they mean to target.

Edited 2007-04-10 20:07

Reply Score: 2

smitty Member since:
2005-10-13

... as they have done for years in MacOSX?

To be fair, I think everything would just work in Linux as well if they had a limited amount of hardware to support and full specs on all of it like Apple does.

Take the support for hi-res screens. Why aren't 1440x900, 1680x1050, etc. not supported?

That's always confused me too. It seems like it would be one of the easier things to fix and yet no one ever seems to do it.

Reply Parent Score: 5

tsedlmeyer Member since:
2005-07-07

1680x1050 has worked out of the box for me for several years with several different distributions.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Morin Member since:
2005-12-31

> This not just puzzles me, it means Linux developers have no clue about
> the non-geek community they mean to target.

It puzzles me just as well why nobody takes Linux as a platform to implement a complete end-user system just the way Apple did. Take a talented developer, a talented product designer, and somebody with a clue about usability, then start off where Linux is now. I don't rate Linux very high in usability or coolness, but that's exactly the exercise to solve here - and you actually get a lot of help since (1) it can already do a lot, if you are an expert (which you should be if you try to build a product), (2) it's free in both senses, and (3) you can ask the community (though some people can be quite offensive when they hear that you want to build something that "just works").

Now if doing that just wasn't so boring...

Reply Parent Score: 4

adamk Member since:
2005-07-08

Why aren't 1440x900, 1680x1050, etc. not supported?

The chipset in his laptop is not supported by any open source driver, so Feisty defaults to the 'vesa' driver. The vesa driver is generally considered a failsafe driver and. I'm going to hazard a guess that it tries to use the minimum configuration it thinks it can get away with. If it starts up X at 1440x900, and the monitor doesn't support it, the user doesn't see anything, which is certainly a worse situation :-)

Reply Parent Score: 5

kadymae Member since:
2005-08-02

And is there a reason somebody at "Team Ubuntu" can't edit the VESA driver?

Reply Parent Score: 1

unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06

Apple have the advantage of controlling the hardware, so it isn't all that amazing that they have managed to make things just work. Linux, FreeBSD, Microsoft,... doesn't have that advantage.

As long as the software vendor doesn't control the hardware the new bugs will turn up. Betas are for finding such and bugs and other flaws in the software so they hopefully can be fixed before the final release.

Reply Parent Score: 5

kadymae Member since:
2005-08-02

Take the support for hi-res screens. Why aren't 1440x900, 1680x1050, etc. not supported? I understand it only takes a few lines in a config file to do this.

Yes. Thank you. Becuase I've yet to see a clear, valid reason given why this Doesn't. Just. Work. right out of the box, given that the fix is fairly simple.

It's stupid dren like this that causes people to write off Linux before they've had a chance to see how cool it really can be.

Reply Parent Score: 0

archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

Installing Windows on a PC for which you don't have the driver supported out-of-the-box will also default to a (possibly lower) safe resolution.

As long as the proprietary driver is not installed (which is now very easy in Feisty with the restricted driver installer), this is the kind of behavior your *want*...it is preferable to risking a resolution which is too high for the chipset/monitor.

Reply Parent Score: 2

draethus Member since:
2006-08-02

Why aren't 1440x900, 1680x1050, etc. not supported?

The VESA and VGA drivers are only intended for graphics cards made 10 years ago, which have no better driver.

The reason his laptop is using them by default, is that there is no driver for ATi cards that ships with Feisty, so it falls back to the lowest common denominator. Windows does the same, by the way!

Resolutions like 1440x900 didn't exist back in the day (it's not even 4:3) so not all graphics cards support them, and Feisty has to use safer settings.

It would be interesting to find out whether you get all the resolutions with a card supported out-of-the-box, like an Intel. If not, that would be a real bug.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Isolationist Member since:
2006-05-28

Ubuntu Feisty Beta uses the appropriate driver *by default* for my Intel 855 video card on my laptop. However, the installation defaults to 1024x768 resolution, and doesn't offer the preferred 1280x768 resolution. A quick fix to this is to install 855resolution, which changes the resolution of an available vbios mode. This change is made at boot time. It would be good if distributions like Ubuntu detected this at installation time, and setup 855resolution accordingly.

Reply Parent Score: 1

kadymae Member since:
2005-08-02

It would be interesting to find out whether you get all the resolutions with a card supported out-of-the-box, like an Intel. If not, that would be a real bug.

Intel 950 graphics are NOT supported out of the box by Ubuntu. ;)

Believe me, I know.

Reply Parent Score: 1

apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

Sure they just work on OSX. With Apple hardware. Linux has far more hardware to support. lets see how well Apple does when it comes to dealing with as much hardware as Linux does. I doubt it would pass the test.

Reply Parent Score: 1

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

Sure they just work on OSX. With Apple hardware. Linux has far more hardware to support. lets see how well Apple does when it comes to dealing with as much hardware as Linux does. I doubt it would pass the test.

That is a good explanation, but the fact remains that an end user wants his hardware to work, the reasons that it doesn't are irrelevant.

Reply Parent Score: 1