Re: Why

["Andy Thomas" <andyth@postalzone.com>]

My guess is that the windows install probably uses the same
lowest-common-denominator graphics mode (it looks like it to me) regardless
of video hardware and the Linux X-based setup is using different modes
during setup, dependent upon which video card it thinks it detects.  The
Windows-based setup doesn't go into card-specific graphic modes until
installation is done.  If this is the case then the x-based setup routines
should be written for a standard 640x480x16 mode, regardless of which video
hardware is detected during setup, no?...


a shot in the dark
Andy


----------
> From: Bart Szyszka <bart@gigabee.com>
> To: Evan Moore <evan@info.load-otea.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca>; Brigette Heffner
<brigette@mail.com>; Ethan Benson <erbenson@alaska.net>
> Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Why
> Date: Friday, December 03, 1999 7:11 PM
> 
> > LinuxPPC uses the same installer Redhat uses, recently they made a X 
> > based installer but it was quite broken to begin with and fails far 
> > to often.  (X based installers will always be unreliable IMO just 
> > because of the wildly differing video hardware)
> 
> Now what makes Windows so incapable of having these same problems? 
> I've never heard of anyone having trouble running the Win95 installer
> on a system that just had DOS because of video hardware. 
> 
> -- 
> Bart Szyszka bart@gigabee.com ICQ:4982727
> B Grafyx http://www.bgrafyx.com
> Join AllAdvantage.com and get paid to surf the Web!
> http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=ARD582
> 
> 
> -- 
> Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org <
/dev/null
>