Setting Screen Resolution in Ubuntu

[the architect]

Hello all. I finally got a computer worth running Beryl on, and I got everything set up swimmingly... except for the screen resolution. I wish to run my monitor at a resolution of 1152x864, but all attempts have thus far failed... Also, I am going to be attending an out-of-state funeral, so it may be a few days before I can reply. I've tried the resolution tutorial on ubuntuguide.org and all it does is set it at 1280x1024. Right now I'm at 1024x768... Can anyone help me?

[MONKEY050]

Ugh. I haven't used Ubuntu in a while and I don't have it on hand.

As far as I can remember I think it's the third top menu, then Preferences (not the administration one), and then there should be a thing for Screen Resolution.

[Bewildebeast]

I seem to remember having to edit xorg.conf to get the correct resolution when I first installed Kubuntu. There's a guide here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=454217)

[piemastermike]

I seem to remember having to edit xorg.conf to get the correct resolution when I first installed Kubuntu. There's a guide here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=454217)
correct. It's a bit of a bitch if you don't know what you're doing but it worked for me.

[Bewildebeast]

correct. It's a bit of a bitch if you don't know what you're doing but it worked for me.
It's even more of a bitch when you don't have a friggin' clue how to use vi. I thought my keyboard was broken.

[Martinus]

Why use vi?
Use kate or another, equivalent GUI-based editor.

I prefer nano for CLI editing myself, simple and easy to use.

[Bewildebeast]

Why use vi?
Use kate or another, equivalent GUI-based editor.
Because the GUI was completely screwed (it defaulted to 24-bit colour, which Virtual PC doesn't support, so it was unusable). It wasn't by choice, believe me

[Martinus]

Ah, I figured it was just really low-res. :)

Install nano

"nano -w /etc/X11/xorg.conf"

ctrl x > exit
ctrl o > save changes

Just remember to make a backup prior to editing.

[wyrd_fish]

Why use vi?
Use kate or another, equivalent GUI-based editor.

I prefer nano for CLI editing myself, simple and easy to use.

heathens!!!

vim for CLI editing and gvim for GUI editing :P

once you've learnt how to use use it you'll never look back, although you do develop the annoying trait of writing :wq all over the place in any other text editor

[Martinus]

vim is a pain in the arse and not in the least bit necessary for doing quick edits. vim and the like make no apologies about being difficult to learn because they're aimed at advanced users who have the time and inclination to learn them.

nano is simple and can be used pretty much immediately. Why make a simple edit into a Rube Goldberg exercise?

[wyrd_fish]

3 commands is hardly overly complex

Esc = command mode
i = insert mode
:wq = save and exit

and once you've got your foot in the door you start to pick up other little tips and tricks

not to mention and half decent distro comes with more syntax highlighting specs than you can shake a stick at, including one for xorg.conf

i was once a nano user, wrote my C coursework in it, then i discovered the error of my ways

[the architect]

I seem to remember having to edit xorg.conf to get the correct resolution when I first installed Kubuntu. There's a guide here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=454217)

this did not work for me, which strikes me as odd because it's the same method i had used in the past. any other ideas? i've even tried rebuilding the xorg.conf file with the resolution that i wanted set as the native resolution, and it didn't like that either

[Martinus]

3 commands is hardly overly complex

Esc = command mode
i = insert mode
:wq = save and exit

and once you've got your foot in the door you start to pick up other little tips and tricks

not to mention and half decent distro comes with more syntax highlighting specs than you can shake a stick at, including one for xorg.conf

i was once a nano user, wrote my C coursework in it, then i discovered the error of my ways

Jebus. That's what I'm getting at though, nano's just a quick editor, I use it to add a line or two to a text file, not to pour over a chunk of well, anything really. I think it's a case of identifying each tool's strengths. In nano you don't have to worry about 'modes' you simply open, amend or write and save. For a person who's never played with a command line editor akin to vi or emacs it's a lot less intimidating. Complexity is moreoften the killer of the enthusiasm that comes with investigating and using something new; in this case Linux.

If you show that something can be easy (and I'm not saying that vi or emacs is unapprochably hard) you tend to get more interest. Complexity, or at least the assumption has always been a sticking point in why people prefer Windows to Linux. Make it easy initially, let them get a bit of confidence and then introduce them to the really cool tools that can do lots of things. :)

[the architect]

Jebus. That's what I'm getting at though, nano's just a quick editor, I use it to add a line or two to a text file, not to pour over a chunk of well, anything really. I think it's a case of identifying each tool's strengths. In nano you don't have to worry about 'modes' you simply open, amend or write and save. For a person who's never played with a command line editor akin to vi or emacs it's a lot less intimidating. Complexity is moreoften the killer of the enthusiasm that comes with investigating and using something new; in this case Linux.

If you show that something can be easy (and I'm not saying that vi or emacs is unapprochably hard) you tend to get more interest. Complexity, or at least the assumption has always been a sticking point in why people prefer Windows to Linux. Make it easy initially, let them get a bit of confidence and then introduce them to the really cool tools that can do lots of things. :)

now back on topic maybe? ;) (no offense intended)

[Martinus]

now back on topic maybe? ;) (no offense intended)
Heheh sorry, got a bit carried away there. ;)

What gfx card are you using? Are you sure you correctly defined the screen refresh rate?

[the architect]

I have an integrated Intel chip. A 855G if I remember correctly. Correctly defined the refresh rate?

[Martinus]

Monitors can refresh (redraw the screen) at different rates depending on the resolution; generally as resolution goes up refresh rate goes down. You need to dig out the monitor specs. and specify the refresh rate in xorg.conf .

[the architect]

yeah, i tried but it still didn't help. it wants to make the jump to 1280 by 1024 resolution every time, no matter how i set xorg...

[Martinus]

Can you send me your xorg.conf?

[the architect]

the one that i edited and it didn't work? or the one that i have now that keeps me in 1024x768?

maybe i'll just edit with both...

edit: Current Xorg (http://paste.debian.net/33454)

Xorg that gave me the funky 1280x1024 resolution (http://paste.debian.net/33455)

[Martinus]

Hmmm, a couple of questions that may seem obvious but need asking...

1: How have you verified that your monitor is running at 1280*1024?

2: What's wrong with running at 1280*1024?

3: What make and model is your monitor?

EDIT: Seems intel chipsets are a bit bothersome, potential fix here: Link (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/FixVideoResolutionHowto#head-0e3051713171cb5d1bf49dc2dc7bea24eb9ed83e)

[the architect]

1) Yes, when I use that xorg it is running at 1280x1024

2) My monitor runs 1280x1024 at only 60 hz - furthermore, it's more pixel and more strain on the graphics card, hence slowing down Beryl (an important tool for me :) )

3) It's a Princeton something... I'm not at home atm

I tried the potential fix at one point, but i seem to recall it being problematic... if push comes to shove, i'll just live with 1024 x 768