I noticed when I ran xorgconfig that I wasn't given the option for 32 bit color. I selected 24 bit, that being the highest option. Is it not possible to have 32 bit color with Slackware? Is there a way for me to change this?

The reason I ask is that when switching between Windows and KDE and running Firefox with the exact same theme, I feel like the icons in Firefox aren't as sharp as in Windows? It could be my eyes playing tricks on me but I am also wondering how can I check to see that my video card is properly installed in Slackware. It is an ATI Mobility Radeon 9000 and in xorgconfig I chose Radeon [Generic] but I am wondering how to know that I have all the right drivers. Do I have to just go ahead and get them and install them?

And one more question about appearances before I go. In KDE is it possible for the Konsole to be truly transparent? Right now it seems to me that the transparency just shows the desktop beneath it and not what is actually beneath it. Also it doesn't update in real time as I move it around. Just Curious.

Thanks so much. I'm having so much fun figuring this all out!

Apparently the extra 8 bits are just used to do extra stuff and not actually for the image...


alpha channel

An 8-bit layer in a graphics file format that is used for expressing translucency (transparency). The extra eight bits per pixel serves as a mask and represents 256 levels of translucency. For example, TIFF and PNG are graphics formats that support the 8-bit alpha channel. The GIF89a format supports a 1-bit alpha channel that allows one color on the palette to be translucent.

That's only possible with XOrg's Composite extension, you can also have shadows with it, but it takes a lof of resources (last time I tried, could be better now). The apps can't have transparencies by default because of the design of X, not KDE or other window managers.

Regarding 24bit vs 32bit. When I still used Windows, my ATI card would be set for "32" bit in Display settings, but I've read a few places that ATI cards really only support 24bit. I actually ran into some problems on Windows (with a Microsoft written DirectX tool no less) where a program would expect 32bit and would crash because only 24bit was actually available. So, this could be the issue with 24bit being the highest available in XOrg setup. I've not tried to use an nVidia card with Linux to know if XOrg ever offers 32 bit, but that may be the reason.

cant remember what distro it was, i am thinking suse, where the default xorg.conf file had 32bit listed (it might have been xfree86 though too)

i also remember in debian using the net installer that when it asked what color depth to use it would tell you why 24 bit is really like 32 bit except for one thing, cant remember what it was, but as far as i was concerned i never noticed

for the firefox icon thing, if you are dual booting and using the same video card for both windows and slack, but youhave a generic driver for slack, then that could be all it is. you probably are using a much better driver in windows and only a generic one in linux. i would get the correct driver for your card for linux and use that and see if it does not improve

good luck

I know it is pointless saying this but ffs read what other people have posted before you post.
32bit in windows is the same as 24bit in linux. The only difference being the 8 bit which is alpha channes which are see through so you don't need them, thankyou jimdaworm. So you see you have just as much colour but now know the people who wrote windows are idiots because it is pointless having 8 bit of colour when you can't see it. BUT if you so wish to have 32bit I do believe you can just edit your xorg.conf to say 32 instead of 24.

24-bit = 2^24 = 16777216 colours.

Realistically, you aren't able to distinguish more than about 50,000 colours, even though you probably only have a name for 10-20 of them. 24-bit is enough to be better than human perception. 16-bit is enough for a lot of people.

More importantly, in terms of colour depth, there's absolutely no difference between 32-bit colour and 24-bit colour. You're already dealing with colour depths well beyond what the human eye is capable of distinguishing, and the 32 bits are distributed between 4 channels instead of the usual 3: Red, Green, Blue, and Alpha (transparency).

Transparency level, incidentally, can be set and displayed on a 24-bit display. My laptop, for example, only goes up to 24-bit display, and yet I can display transparency. It slows down on moving pictures such as backgrounds of webpages, but that's more a function of system load, because it uses software rendering. Most "32-bit" graphics drivers don't actually do the alpha in hardware, however, and the result is that there's absolutely no difference in performance between 24-bit and 32-bit.

Glad to be of help jkh My brain is going to the dark side... I only deal with windows at work and its a been a while since I have been on here

I have a couple of nVidia cards, in my laptop a GeForce4 420 Go and in the desk machine a GeForce2 MX 400.

It's exactly the same: 32 bits in windows and 24 bits in KDE. Anyhow I have always had the feeling about the games run smoother on linux

ATI doesn't care about linux, and quite frankly NVIDIA is better, but that's not the point, nor the arguement. I'm just saying that you're gonna have one heck of a time getting ATI to do it's thing in Slack, and the best thing to do is try some googling, then post here if that fails. Hope it helps,

slackwarebilly