Hi, I have a Intel onboard graphic card with 16MB of memory and a ViewSonic E771 monitor. This combination in windows can make up to 1280x960 resolution, but in linux, it won't go beyond 1024x768. Here is the pare of the XFree86.0.log that "shows" the error: (II) I810(0): Monitor0: Using hsync range of 30.00-70.00 kHz (II) I810(0): Monitor0: Using vrefresh range of 50.00-120.00 Hz (II) I810(0): Not using mode "1280x960" (no mode of this name) (II) I810(0): Not using mode "1152x864" (no mode of this name) (II) I810(0): Not using built-in mode "1280x1024" (width too large for virtual size) (--) I810(0): Virtual size is 1024x768 (pitch 1024) (**) I810(0): *Built-in mode "1024x768" (**) I810(0): *Built-in mode "800x600" (**) I810(0): *Built-in mode "640x480" (II) I810(0): Attempting to use 85Hz refresh for mode "1024x768" (45) (II) I810(0): Attempting to use 85Hz refresh for mode "800x600" (43) (II) I810(0): Attempting to use 85Hz refresh for mode "640x480" (41) (**) I810(0): Display dimensions: (324, 244) mm (**) I810(0): DPI set to (80, 79) Any ideas? Any help will be appreciated. BTW: X detects all hardware correctly.

That seems like a REALLY odd resolution. Try setting it to "1280x1024".

ignore what frink36 said! Boot up your system and login as root. type in cd /etc/X11/ type in vi XF86Config hit "I" to enter edit mode scroll down at the end of the file change "1280x1024" to "1024x768" change 16 bit to 24 or 32 whatever your heart desires... to save changes hit the Esc key and Crtl + Z deicer hacktheplanet@hotmail.com THe PlAneT isNt SafE

I agree. 1280x960 is a non-standard resolution, and I find it odd that "This combination in windows can make up to 1280x960", and not 1280x1024. What's wrong with using 1024x768, anyway? I'm still using 800x600. I'm with frink36. Use 1280x1024. You probably won't even notice the difference between it and 1280x960. Good luck.

Why is 1280x960 non-standard, because you haven't used it much? It preserves the 4:3 aspect ratio that is in 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1152x864, which is not in 1280x1024. On Linux, because you can define your own modelines, you can use basically any resolution you want that is within the bounds of your monitor and video card; X doesn't care, and window managers don't care. The VESA standard defines this resolution, as well. Find the specs of your monitor (dotclocks, hsync, vsync), and generate a custom modeline (try videogen or kvideogen, or an online CGI app exists as well). If the monitor can do 1280x1024 in non-interlaced mode, 1280x960 should work fine, though you can go higher if you use interlacing (one of my monitors cannot do 1024x768 at the VESA standard refresh rate, but with custom modelines I got it up to 1640x1230 and 1600x1200).

A short history of standard resolutions: Hercules mono: 720x348 CGA: 320x200, 640x200 EGA: 640x350 VGA: 640x480 SVGA: 800x600 XGA: 1024x768 SXGA: 1280x1024 There are further resolutions to some of these, but these are the standards, if you will. Anything else is just fluff, in my opinion. You notice that not all of the above follow the 4:3 ratio, either. I don't necessarily disagree with you about the X-windows capabilities. However, if it's not working, why not go with something that is generally considered tried and true. 1280x960 may become more common in the future, and I may someday consider it a standard, but not yet. I work with people's PCs all the time, and I've NEVER seen anyone use that resolution.

I tried with 1280x1024 and it worked. Someone mentioned that difference is not that much he was right. However I still wondering why it wouldn't take it... Now I got interested in what Chris said about making a monitor take a higher resolution. I have one at home that I would a higher resolution (working with graphics and tools and stuff like that is better in higher resolution) how would you do that? Can you give me an example of a modline that you had created? Thanks!