On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 07:55 +0800, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 18:43 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > And that's why I am saying that multiple screens per display is just a > > pointless excercise, since it gives you exactly NOTHING that multiple > > montors per screen wouldn't give you -- no, it takes features away. > > Sorry Lennart, in my (gaming) case, it allows the monitors to be placed > a distance from each other, such that the mouse pointer cannot cross > over. I use a small app (mouse-switchscreen) to allow the pointer to > cross over if I want (ie. when not playing games). > > The other thing he mentioned which can't be done on xinerama is > independent view-ports, where switching viewports on monitor 1 doesn't > affect what's showing on monitor 2. > > Everyone has their own use-case =). But I think this is going pretty > off-topic for the pulse list? Let me chip in another user-case: 1 monitor 2 TV; TV not always connected and in another room. I think we agree that Xinerama does not cut it in this case. Multiple displays? Maybe, but: NVidia *and* ATI graphical tools make it easy to set up a dual screen. To set up dual display, you have to get yourself dirty with xorg.conf - not an option for 90% of users.
