I've been using a variety of Linux distros for about 5 years now and only use M$ at home to run TurboTax. In that time, Xconfig issues have certainly improved, but I'm shocked how often I read of people who can't set their screen resolution. Of all things that I should be able to do easily with a GUI tool, this is one of the most important.

I'm running Ubuntu Edgy and Mepis 6. Even with those I had a bit of trouble getting my new 22" LCD to display properly. I didn't need to edit a config file, but why can I adjust the monitors on the locked down XP boxes at work in a few seconds (no reboot), yet struggle with Ubuntu? With Mepis I boot to the live CD and use a custom utility to write over my config file with the one the Live CD uses. It's reliable, but why should I have to do it? Suse and Mandriva have mature utilities. Why aren't they copied by others?

I'm sorta sorry to rant, but surely others find this as odd as I do.

I agree, took me a while to get Kubuntu to set display right. I have a Geforce 6600 and a Samsung Syncmaster 204t. First it wouldn't install the nvidia driver, after it did it wouldn't go past 640X480.

Finally got it right, but it was fairly annoying.

Is it both Mepis and Ubuntu that have this problem, or just Ubuntu? (I couldn't tell from your post.)

Annoying is it! I'm a geek if I need to be, but I'd rather just use my computer.

Ubuntu will continue be annoying to those of us who choose to use it but are only "just geek enough" to get done what we need to get done as long as utilities are being developed by people who consider editing config files to be an acceptable method of accomplishing simple tasks.

It's both. Mepis is just a customized Ubuntu and it adds utilities to enhance some lacking in Ubuntu. I also run Kubuntu on another box and find it similarly limiting. Somethings are simple, some are not.

Mandriva and Suse have FAR superior utilities but are very limiting in other ways. While geeks are bothered by the way Yast and drake tools control config files because it doesn't suit their taste, I'm bothered that I have to learn to do it at all.

It's quite simple to figure which distros are developed for geeks. If the answer to a question contains excerpts from config files to accomplish any task an end user reasonably needs to do, like setup a new monitor, then it's not matured for the mainstream.

Ubuntu is supposed to be for all people everywhere, but it's still easier to configure NFS or Samba than a new monitor. That seems like a problem of priorities to me.

Perhaps this could be sent as a suggestion to the Debian/Ubuntu/Mepis teams. I think they currently are using knoppix-like scripts to recognize the monitor.

I guess this is the point where I get cynical and think "I'm sure they already know, but just don't want to use THEIR code." PClinux adopted Mandriva's "Control Center," but it's not well enough refined yet and it's rpm based - I have superior overall experience with performance and long-term maintenance of debian based distros. I don't know of any other distros using Yast even though Suse opened the code.

I guess by airing my beef here on a well populated user forum, I'm hoping that someone with access to developer ears will notice and make the point for me. In my area of expertise (industrial automation), I've learned to be rather selective of who's criticisms I allow to catch my attention. The rest becomes noise.

I don't know the distro development community culture well enough to know how best to communicate suggestions. In my experience with others, you either catch the right ear (by either luck or relationship) or the noise has to be loud enough to grab attention.

Same here. I'm currently using Mepis. For long-term maintenance, I've always been able to trust Debian.

The best way I have found is to search-post-and-pray on mailing-lists. Unfortunately, I haven't had much success with them though...

I've never seen the Suse/Mandrake configurators. What is needed is an administrative GUI program to adjust all xorg.conf settings. At the top of the program: one tab for resolution, one tab for fonts, one tab for mouse, so on. And have it "test" the settings (like on MS), and have you click "ok" to make sure its good.

While I was typing this, I think Linspire might have something (.deb) like that. I'm not sure...

Anyway, I agree that it's a problem. Not exactly sure who to tell, or who would care.

I had the same issue on several Kubuntu 6.10 installs with wide screens.
What I found was that the aspect ratio was set at 4x3 by default during the install.
To check this:
Systems settings > Monitor & Display > Administrator mode > Hardware > Monitor 1 config > Image format > set to wide screen > Apply

Steel Shepherd, is that able to solve your problem?

It gets weirder than that with Kubuntu. I got it working on the widescreen and then I had to send it back for exchange, so I switched back to my 17" LCD. I could get the resolution to 1280 x 1028 while using it, but then when I'd reboot it would try to run 1680 x 1050 again, or at least it seemed to. It was widescreen squished.

I got annoyed with Kubuntu and just switched back to Mepis. Mepis is very nice as I can boot to the CD and replace my Xconfig with the one created when it boots. I suppose it's a problem that I'd ever need to do that, but it sure is handy.

Regardless of whether my system is working at the moment, the point remains that many people are still having display setup problems that go beyond selecting a resolution, testing it, and applying it if it works. Why do I have to restart X to test? I've been stuck in text mode running different driver setups before. Before Mepis, I've had to boot with Knoppix to edit X in order to be able to boot again from HD to a GUI. There's no reason I should ever have to do that, but as long as it's considered acceptable to recommend a noob to edit Xconfig, Linux on the mainstream desktop is just talk.

I agree. See this page for more Linux desktop issues: http://kegel.com/linux/comfort/

It's not about bashing Linux, it's about making Linux better.