I currently running fedora core 14, but when I went to boot fedora core 16 live, it hangs and my screen turns white. I think it might have to be with my video card but it's hard to debugged when there isn't any error messaging. Just a white screen.

My video card is:
[code]
04:06.1 Display controller: ATI Technologies Inc RV280 [Radeon 9200 PRO] (Secondary) (rev 01)
[\code]

I'm guessing its supported in FC 16, but it doesn't seem to play nicely. Has anyone had this problem? Or anyway to diagnose this further?

I do have a Nvidia video card I'm going to try and see if that works.

Thanks.

is this one of the 10 year old ati 9000 cards ?

is so and that nvidia is just as old
the gforce 5 ( 5000 , gforce 4 and 2 )and older are NOT supported by nvidia and x11 any longer

also fedora dropped the "core" part way back on fedora 6
there is no os called "fedora core" just "fedora"

Thanks for the reply. My video card is about 10 years old. I guess it is time to buy a new video card.

you will not find any new ones that will fit into that old motherboard

a gforce5 would but the 173 driver is also End of life or soon will be

install CentOS 6 or Scientific linux 6 and you can get about 4 more years of support on that old box .

the version of X11 is locked and will not change - so the open neoveu driver will work for that old Nvidia card
the ATI one ? unknown but the open ati driver should still work on the older x11 is RHEL .


after RHEL6 hits End of life ????

I have Scientific linux 6.1 running just fine on a old 11 / 12 year old computer with a Gf2 mx 400 card.

Yes you can. You can buy a brand new PCI (not PCIe) Zotac nVidia GT520 video card for about fifty five quid. These are intended to support the ITX market - but it's just a PCI video card.

I, too, have a problem with graphics on Fedora 16. First, let me tell you my hardware situation. I'm running on a Dell Dimension 4600, about 8 or 10 years old. I can't get Linux to tell me what my graphics card is, but Windows XP says it's a "NVIDIA GeForce 4 MX 440 with AGP8X" -- whatever all that means. It's what was in the Dell when I bought it, back in 2004 or so.

Now, my problem. If I do a clean drive install, Gnome has some random, but very frequent, problems: some of the on-screen labels are missing letters, the screen often goes blank white, and occasionally it will pop up the "problem" window telling me I have to log out. So far I've tried the normal distribution DVD, the network install CD, and the Live! CD (both from a CD and from a thumb drive). There are a number of things I find especially interesting:

* If I boot the Live! version in basic graphics mode, I have no problems, but I can't use the full 1920 x 1080 resolution of my monitor; also, I can't figure out how to boot a disc install in basic graphics mode -- not that I would want to as a long-term solution.

* If I boot in normal mode, reducing the screen resolution doesn't help.

The two facts above tell me that this is definitely a driver problem, but:

* If I install the KDE desktop rather than Gnome, everything works fine.

Clearly, Gnome is using some features of X11 that KDE doesn't use, so this might be a short term solution for me. Long term, though, this bothers me for a number of reasons:

* The Fedora team clearly prefer Gnome to KDE, and I worry that they may end up dropping KDE as an installation option.

* Installing KDE means that I have to do a hand install for a bunch of apps I've gotten used to, even assuming they'll run under KDE; some of the Gnome games won't.

* There's nothing to say that KDE will never use the X11 features that are causing my Gnome problems.

I'm not really asking for help, although I wouldn't turn it down; I guess this is more of a rant than anything else. I do, after all, have the option of upgrading to a newer graphics card and/or computer. I'd rather not have to, as my current system performs well enough for my needs (except for the above-noted problems). What really bothers me is that up until now, Linux has always been more supportive of old hardware than Windows has; it's one of the things I like about Linux. Now we appear to be losing that backward compatibility. I realize the reason for it, i.e., too much backwards compatibility compromises the ability to take full advantage of new technology.

But that doesn't mean I have to like it.

andymck fedora 16 is WAY to new for that 10 to 12 year old nvidia card
you might as well remove it
it will NOT work on 16 ,nor 15 .

that old card is to old


if you want to stay in the Red hat family
install CentOS 6.2 and use the opensource nouvaeu driver
do not even attempt to install the old 96xx nvidia.run driver it will not work

no it is a X11 issue also

the 96 driver is no longer supported and was not updated to use the NEW x11

nvidia killed off that 10+ year old card
after 10+ years can you blame them

the older CentOS 5.7 is still using the older x11 and on that you CAN use the ( now dead) 96xx nvidia.run driver.

1 members found this post helpful.

John, I'm not arguing, I'm just asking: Do you know why KDE doesn't give me problems like Gnome does? I did notice from a few Google links that Gnome is making much more use of hardware acceleration than before, so maybe that's it, but I'm by no means sure.

And I did try CentOS, booted off of a Live! DVD; as you said, it worked fine, but the CentOS server doesn't have nearly as much recreational software as Fedora does and I don't know how to link to both servers without creating a conflict. I think I'm simply going to have to bite the bullet and do a hardware upgrade when Fedora 14 goes EOL, which I believe will be pretty soon.

Speaking of hardware upgrades, does anyone have suggestions for a relatively low-cost Linux-ready PC? I don't need Linux already installed, I can do that; I just want to make sure I can avoid compatibility issues without jumping through a lot of hoops. Frankly, the talk on Slashdot about "secure boot" issues has me even more worried than closed drivers.

I my self do not use Gnome 3
but Gnome 3 is still in the early stages of development
KDE4 has been around for a bit