Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ard0r's commentslogin

Ipse dixit.

Also, this is a state-by-state issue, and in Texas, at least, you are quite wrong.

http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/76R/billtext/html/HB015...


I've got that setup with a 5970 eyefinity 6 card. The monitors are in portrait mode so it's like one big 3240x1920 surface.


TwinView works for two monitors on one graphics card, but once you get a second card you'll need xinerama, ergo no 3d support.

An ATI card that supports 3 monitors (needs to have a displayport connector and you need an "active" displayport adapter or a monitor with a displayport connector) should work. But don't tell anyone I recommended an ATI card for linux.


What ard0r said about TwinView. I'm anxiously awaiting TripletView from Nvidia...

ard0r, if you were to recommend an ATI card which had three display ports, what would it be? And, as a guy who has used nvidia with Linux for the past, oh, 14 years or so, can you tell me why you seem reluctant to recommend an ATI (AMD)? Am I inviting trouble by purchasing one?


The proprietary drivers have worked OK for me, but I've had issues with playing video. I just couldn't get smooth framerates. The radeon driver was worse in that aspect. I swapped in two nvidia cards and video looked much better. It should be fine for general use and I'm still trying to make the ATI setup work. I don't need 3D, just video.

I have a 5870 eyefinity 6 that has 6 display ports, but those are no longer made and expensive (and overkill).

I found a $60 Radeon HD 6450 card made by Sapphire on Newegg (N82E16814102960) that has two dvi and one displayport, that should work for three monitors. There are other options as well of course, just make sure the cards are advertised as supporting eyefinity and they have at least one displayport adapter. I've had success with an Accel active displayport to DVI adapters.


Thanks....I may try an AMD. I don't need 3D support either, but I do need compositing support (does no 3D mean no compositing? Not sure...).

Not having compositing on the linux desktop these days means you're a second class season. Both Unity and Gnome3 require it to function...if you don't have it, you have to fall back to Unity2D (incomplete user experience) or Gnome 2 (no longer supported. KDE actually does the best of the bunch when it comes to Xinerama so far, but I really prefer Unity or Gnome3.

I've read that if you buy two similar Nvidia cards (same GPUs), you can get compositing across three monitors, but I've not spoken with anyone who can verify. If anyone reading this can, please provide your vid card model.

Do you know if this Radeon HD 6450 will support compositing across three monitors? $60 is cheap to me to get this.

Thanks!


I'm currently using a NVIDIA GT218 (for one monitor) and a GT520 (for two other monitors) on my Arch Linux system. Although Xinerama support is nearly unusable with this setup (most likely due to the different chipsets on the cards), you can do TwinView (for two monitors) and a separate X screen (for the third) or 3 separate xscreens. I just do 3 separate xscreens (I'm a gamer and don't like to see my quake client stretched across two of my monitors and my TV :) ). You can't move windows between monitors with Xinerama or TwinView, but that's a sacrifice I was willing to make for my configuration. I am able to do compositing across all three of my monitors with this configuration.

Anyway, I hope this helps!


That's useful to know.


It looks like that specific card won't work for three monitors, because output #3 is hdmi and not displayport.


Actually, the N82E16814102960 is dual-link DVI + DVI + HDMI.


Twitter and Facebook at least benefit from Free software, and people benefit vicariously. You don't have to be a programmer to benefit.


When I use smartphone sizes, the black area that reduces the viewport covers the scrollbars. Chrome 17/Windows (wow 17!)


yes on mine too chrome 17/mac


This is a non-serious response. I think I'm going to talk to my congressperson about this.


We have both on the contact page, and we get more people filling out the form than emailing us, which I guess is surprising but the contact form is right there whereas the email link is a click away.

I really prefer them to fill out the form, because when we can associate their message with their browser, cookie, and IP address, I can get all kinds of useful information eg whether they came from an AdWords link, how many visits to the website they've made, whether they've ever clicked through a newsletter, their IP address (which I can use for geolocation), whether JS is enabled, etc etc.

I also find that it's easier to block spammers via the contact form than the email link, because of all this information I know about them.


I also find that it's easier to block spammers via the contact form than the email link

Definitely. Even without looking at information like cookies, IP address, it is much easier to filter comment span than email spam.


https://github.com/astronoob/NoDaddy Here is a chrome extension that notifies you if the domain you're on is registered through GoDaddy. Looks like it does an XHR request to who.is and then matches on: new RegExp("/(registrar\.godaddy\.com|whois\.godaddy.com)/")


AI foosball.


I entered some random URLs I had open, hit the button, and got an alert "Something is definitely wrong" when I entered a URL with several parameters: ?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SlickdealsnetFP+%28SlickDeals.net+Frontpage%29

I removed this bit and it worked fine.

Did you already implement jk86's unique URLs suggestion? It looks like you did!


It gives the warning when thumbnail generation failed for some urls and less than 2 urls left for displaying. Actually I did not implement it yet just watching the real time visitors from GA =)


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: