hydroel

Hello all,

I've been scratching my head with this for a while now, and some help would be greatly appreciated. My issue is that my monitor's native resolution (3440x1440) and refresh rates are not recognized by Ubuntu natively, whether I'm using Wayland or Xorg.

The monitor's EDID file contains a mode with the actual screen's resolution in DTD (Detailed Timing Descriptors) format, but neither Xorg nor Wayland seem to be able read it for some reason.

I've really tried a few things now, neither of which worked, so a few pointers would be greatly appreciated!

What works

Using X11 and manually setting xrandr's mode to the output of gtf 3440 1440 60. That's pretty much the only solution I've found to use the monitor's actual resolution so far.

What did not work

• Modifying the grub settings to set the video output to the same resolution/framerate as what works on X11
• Using the edid-generator to generate a custom EDID file using those same settings, and telling grub to take it into account. It was quite a pain to make it work by itself, and I have suspicions that it might not work because it was not built to accommodate resolutions not supported by EDID 1.3 (which are limited 16:10, 4:3, 5:4, 16:9).
• Doing either of the two previous points using the settings from the EDID file (read from edid-decode < /sys/class/drm/card0-DP-3/edid)
• Unsurprisingly, trying to use xrandr to set the correct output to the Wayland monitor (XWAYLAND0)
• Some other stuff, probably not worth mentioning

Some other info

• Ubuntu 22.04
• Gnome 42.9
• X.org 1.21.1.4
• Mesa Intel Graphics (not a gaming rig, but the chip is able to manage a 3440x1440 output)
• Laptop: Tuxedo InfinityBook Pro Gen7 / monitor: DELL S3422DWG

Edit: the solution

@[email protected] cracked it, the problem is from the dongle: I had tested the cable but never the dongle, obviously. Thank you all for your support!

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/2287056

I feel like this is a question that might have been asked around and maybe there are guides around, but that's a discussion that I'd like to have with the lot of you.

The context

Using Linux on both my work laptop and the Steam Deck has made me quite interested in a full switch to Linux - my other computer is a gaming desktop, which I use a lot for many things, but mostly for gaming. Getting used to Linux has made me quite more intolerant to all the BS Microsoft is pushing than I used to be, the latest one being forcing the users to switch from the older email client to the new Outlook, which has a big, nice ad banner that looks like an unread email. So I've began wondering: after all, why not? Why shouldn't I embrace the penguin? Well, the answer is that I should not if there are too many hinders and drawbacks in using Linux, which would make me need a dual boot instead of a single OS install.

We all know gaming has long been one of the main limiting factors in switching, but the Deck has changed the whole landscape on that front. We've basically switched from "Windows is the only OS suitable for gaming" to "Linux is also viable", and the Deck has been made that available to the general audience. Therefore, nowadays, how viable is Linux for a gaming computer? What are the limitations users will encounter? Would I be able to play all the games from my Steam, Epic and GOG library with a bit of tinkering, including the new releases?

The drawbacks of using Linux (or those that I can think of)

1. Other gaming launchers support on Linux suck: GOG and Epic will work through Heroic Games but Activision/Blizzard, Ubisoft, EA and Rockstar games will all be a pain, or even not work at all. Is is true? Is there any way around that?
2. No Microsoft GamePass. Or none that actually matters, as the only solution is to pay for the higher tier and stream the games - so no game actually runs on the desktop. No, thanks.
3. Some DRM will prevent games from working, and this is especially true for games with heavy online content.
4. NVIDIA support for Linux is far from being on-par with that on Windows, especially the open-source drivers. Is this still true?
5. Many devices, especially those for gaming, might not have good (or even working) compatibility drivers for Linux. I know my UWQHD monitor works flawlessly on Windows, but requires quite a bit of tinkering on Ubuntu
6. Newer games might not be optimized for Linux in the first place
7. Tinkering is inevitable (as with any Linux computer, really)

What can we add?

The advantages (I can think of)

1. It's free
2. It's ad free
3. Customization on Linux is awesome, and I might end up spending more time ricing, breaking it all and reinstalling than gaming (see also, previous section's 7.)
4. I will no longer be sending data to Microsoft

What else am I not thinking about?

What distro?

And finally, let's say I make the switch. What Linux distro should I use? I've read a bit about Drauger, Ubuntu GamePack, or even Pop! OS with some manual setup. What do you guys think, and advise?

I feel like this is a question that might have been asked around and maybe there are guides around, but that's a discussion that I'd like to have with the lot of you.

The context

Using Linux on both my work laptop and the Steam Deck has made me quite interested in a full switch to Linux - my other computer is a gaming desktop, which I use a lot for many things, but mostly for gaming. Getting used to Linux has made me quite more intolerant to all the BS Microsoft is pushing than I used to be, the latest one being forcing the users to switch from the older email client to the new Outlook, which has a big, nice ad banner that looks like an unread email. So I've began wondering: after all, why not? Why shouldn't I embrace the penguin? Well, the answer is that I should not if there are too many hinders and drawbacks in using Linux, which would make me need a dual boot instead of a single OS install.

We all know gaming has long been one of the main limiting factors in switching, but the Deck has changed the whole landscape on that front. We've basically switched from "Windows is the only OS suitable for gaming" to "Linux is also viable", and the Deck has been made that available to the general audience. Therefore, nowadays, how viable is Linux for a gaming computer? What are the limitations users will encounter? Would I be able to play all the games from my Steam, Epic and GOG library with a bit of tinkering, including the new releases?

The drawbacks of using Linux (or those that I can think of)

1. Other gaming launchers support on Linux suck: GOG and Epic will work through Heroic Games but Activision/Blizzard, Ubisoft, EA and Rockstar games will all be a pain, or even not work at all. Is is true? Is there any way around that?
2. No Microsoft GamePass. Or none that actually matters, as the only solution is to pay for the higher tier and stream the games - so no game actually runs on the desktop. No, thanks.
3. Some DRM will prevent games from working, and this is especially true for games with heavy online content.
4. NVIDIA support for Linux is far from being on-par with that on Windows, especially the open-source drivers. Is this still true?
5. Many devices, especially those for gaming, might not have good (or even working) compatibility drivers for Linux. I know my UWQHD monitor works flawlessly on Windows, but requires quite a bit of tinkering on Ubuntu
6. Newer games might not be optimized for Linux in the first place
7. Tinkering is inevitable (as with any Linux computer, really)

What can we add?

The advantages (I can think of)

1. It's free
2. It's ad free
3. Customization on Linux is awesome, and I might end up spending more time ricing, breaking it all and reinstalling than gaming (see also, previous section's 7.)
4. I will no longer be sending data to Microsoft

What else am I not thinking about?

What distro?

And finally, let's say I make the switch. What Linux distro should I use? I've read a bit about Drauger, Ubuntu GamePack, or even Pop! OS with some manual setup. What do you guys think, and advise?

Alright, so I consider I mostly beat SMG. I got 102 stars and then beat Bowser, so enter the PURPLE COIN LEVELS.

The first one was easy enough, just... Not fun. The second one, same. Third one, still the same, except it was easy to die stupidly, and I did, several times. Not that they're really hard, it's just that restarting everything every time isn't fun.

Sp my question is: are all purple coin levels as annoying as those first 3 ones? Some levels in the main game were pretty hard, but all in all it was good fun, but if the remaining ones are in that style, Luigi can suck an egg.

To breathe a little life into this new community, I'll start with a repost of a fantastic creation: the revamp of the classic 2002 BIONICLE "Boxor" 8556 set, by talented creator Alex Mertens. You can look into his other posts, this guy is awesome.

After Mr Miracle (2017), Strange Adventures (2020) and One Bad Day: Riddler (2022), the Hugo-nominated duo Tom King and Mitch Gerads comes back with a retelling of one of the most famous comic books covers (if not stories) of history.

Although I haven't read One Bad Day: Riddler, I'm generally a fan of Tom King, and his associations with Mitch Gerads are generally a win. What are you expecting?