On 8/2/06, Joshua Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

   I am actually not looking for a Windows look alike. I am simply
   replacing my XP system with a BSD solution. I am looking for a fast
   easy to configure and fun WM. I am absolutely looking for something
   new to use. not Windows like. That is why I was looking at
   enlightenment and fluxbox. but there are just so many I was hoping to
   get ideas as to why one would choose one over the other. Other then
   personal preference. I have been using enlightenment for about a week
   and perhaps it is something I did but my resolution is stuck at
   1600x1280 at 65Hz. My monitor keeps getting mad at me and telling me
   that is not the recommended solution. I have been trying to figure out
   how to change it and I have updated the xorg.conf as the handbook says
   but it still defaults. Unless anyone has an idea why I am going to
   switch to fluxbox and see how that feels.

   I did want to mention that I do agree with your point. I am looking
   for something new and I am looking to experiment with other ways of
   doing things. But at the same time I would like a little eye candy.
   After all with today's power full systems there is nothing wrong with
   waisting a few CPU cycles to make the experience a little more

   I will certainly give XFCE a try I have seen allot of recommendations
   for that as well.
   Joshua Lewis

/etc/X11/xorg.conf should look sorta like this, yours should have more
Display SubSections in it:

Section "Screen"
       Identifier "Screen0"
       Device     "Card0"
       Monitor    "Monitor0"
       DefaultDepth 24
       SubSection "Display"
               Viewport   0 0
               Depth     24
               Modes   "1280x1024"

BSD Podcasts @:
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to