I'm also having some serious problems with SUSE 10.1 (x86-x64). During the initial install it detected all my hardware flawlessly. However, as soon as I tried to modify the default settings for my Radeon X1800XT (yeah, yeah, I'm an evil ATI card owner "so it's my own fault" ) it immediately switched to "ERROR." My card works flawlessly in Windows so I know it there isn't a problem with the card itself.

So I started over completely (wiped all non-Windows partitions) and ran the installer again. This time it detected my card as "VESA Framebuffer Graphics," with no option to manually choose a driver. Why can't I simply use the generic Radeon driver? Or better yet, why the hell can't the installer choose that driver when the hardware detecter from a few steps before correctly detects my card as a R520?

Now whenever I run the installer or sax, it detects my Radeon X1800XT as a "VESA Framebuffer Graphics" card and distorts my display to the point where I can barely read the text in a terminal (My LCD says that the resolution it's displaying is actually 1629x1024@80 Hz when it should be 1280x1024@60 Hz. What the hell is 1629x1024?). Apparently manually selecting a card in sax is a Bad Thing (tm) now since there is no option to choose a graphics adapter. Manually configuring my display using xorg seemed to correct the distorted desktop problem but this prevents the sax module from loading (using "sax2 -r" does get the sax module to load again but then I'm back to the generic VESA driver).

Don't even get me started on trying to get my USB wireless network adapter working (even using ndiswrapper doesn't seem to do the trick).

And these are only the problems I've run into during the first 5 hours messing with it (numerous installs, fatal errors during install, display problems, wireless problems).

The general feeling I'm getting from this release is a huge "SCREW YOU" from the developers. I've been a huge fan of SUSE for a while now and SUSE 10.0 only strengthened that support. So I had high hopes for 10.1. Unfortunately, SUSE 10.1 is a horrible mess and seems to break almost everything that worked correctly in 10.0.

VESA is a generic 2D driver that "should" work with everything. For 3D both ATI and Nvidia require proprietary drivers which although free don't comply with the GPL license. Ergo, they can't be bundled. I'm an Nvidia owner and well versed with the process to install that 3D driver. I have 0 experience with Linux and ATI. I can tell you that the chip set vendors provide drivers for download from the web. To install drivers you may need to install kernel-sources, gcc and make from the SuSE distro. You probably need to go to level 3 to install the driver as X can't be running when you install a video driver. You can get to level 3 by opening a terminal console window and entering "init 3". Now your at the command line without X running. Login as root and follow the specific instructions for ATI. Be patient, proceed with care and you'll be successful.

I realize that. I wouldn't expect them to bundle proprietary drivers that aren't GPL compliant. I'm talking about the 2D driver (i.e., one of the drivers that is bundled with SUSE) not being loaded properly, with no option to manually set it using the new version of sax. As others have already stated, I shouldn't have to resort to using configuration files when this wasn't required in 10.0. In other words, it's impossible for me to setup my video card using YaST since there are literally no options to do so.

I'm also familiar with that process. The process is basically the same for the ATI 3D driver. However, I haven't even bothered trying to get 3D to work in 10.1 yet since I can't even get the included 2D driver working reliably.

I'm afraid that I have to agree. SuSE, as a distro, started a nosedive when Novell bought them and 10.1 continues the trend. If I knew that it was going to be step back again, I would have just spent the time to convert the box to Solaris. Oh well, it's up and running the task it's meant to do for now... Just can't do online updates. I'm still afraid to try to use very many of the GUI tools as 10.0 had this habit of completely mangling my config files when I went GUI...

I hope that they don't keep going down hill. Somewhere along the way, they have to get better. Also, APT works perfectly for an alternative to the given package management.

If I can chime in here....

I am one of the other 98% you speak about. So, when friends have RAVED about the stability and ease of Linux, as well as the ability to 'play' with it, I figured I would try a dual boot with my new system.

Well, after four days of posting without any helpful replies, I am about ready to give up on Linux. Tried both Suse and Fedora, as those were two that I recognized as being older and, I assumed, more developed.

Neither installer wants to see my PCI-e Nvidia card. Period. They just crash. Use the onboard video, and I can install either. Downloaded Nvidia drivers via yum, but still won't boot with my card.

And I know that everyone here is volunteers. Don't get me wrong. Had quite a few people read my posts, but no one has answered which I can only assume means that no one has a solution.

I mean, I am not a big fan of Windows by any stretch, but at least I can install the damn thing, ya know?

But at least SUSE 10.0 actually let you configure your hardware using the GUI. That doesn't seem to be an option in 10.1.

I looked at most of your posts and they are all related to your video card. Several people tried to help you out, but their suggestions didn't work because none of the Linux distros you tried wouldn't work properly with you card. I suggest that you use an nvidia AGP graphics card since PCI Express is a new technology and there are many problems with PCI graphics cards even on Windows.

One of the reasons why posts are not replied to is because they lack exact details about the problem or they are vague. Provide as much detail as you can about your problem and post any error messages.

Yeah, I understand about the posts. Tried to be as specific as possible. And don't want to sound whiny. I know that people tried, just couldn't find the answer. If those distros don't work with PCI-e cards, then that's fine. But for any developers out there, new boards don't come with AGP slots anymore, so you're stuck with PCI-e whether you want it or not.

Much thanks to everyone who tried to help out. If anyone knows of a distro that DOES work with PCI-e cards, can you let me know?

Many new boards still come with AGP slots. PCI-E is still not as popular as AGP and until such a time, most boards will have AGP slots.

This website has a Hardware Compatibility List. Take a look there and maybe you will find entries by users who have managed to get their PCI-E graphics cards working with Linux. Personally I am very conservative about buying hardware. I don't really care about getting the latest and greatest because it can be problematic when running Linux (and even Windows).

pcclub.com sells PC components like mobos and video cards. They also have store fronts with repair facilities. The main reason I mention them is that their web site has customer reviews of products. When customers have problems like yours they are reported in reviews. Linux users love to buy stuff there because their prices are very good. I'd check pcclub.com. See if they sell your mobo and check the a video card, with the same chip set and PCI express connector, as well.

Gracias gentlemen.

FWIW...

a) I have recently (past 5 days) installed SUSE 10.0 on a 2.2 GHz P4 with 1 GB ram, on a new Mobo - with an AGP slot !!
b) The install is nearly flawless, much better than mandriva, my Atheros abg card works fine, I can network a printer to windoze and linux machines etc etc...

c) I am quite impressed with 10,0 and am trying to do anytihing I would do in 'doze in linux, and largely suceeding.

d) Re - 10.1 - it loks like a real screw up - I will not be migrating.

e) Re - AGP - my son (with my help) chose a new Mobo for his AMD 64 top end processor and that has AGP, PCI-E and ordinary PCI slots on it. I am sure AGP will be on Mobos for a while yet - just like ISA used to be...

f) BUT I think it is a real pity Linux continues to shoot itself in the feet - or even blow both legs off. SAY what you will about windoze, you can install it and it will work with 99.9% of hardware - which is more than you can reliably say with linux - yet ..

Windows controls something like 92% of the market. The hardware manufacturers have to create drivers that will run in Windows or their product will not sell. Most of them do not feel obligated to support Linux. There are some exceptions like NVIDIA that has a unified driver for Linux. Most new hardware (what we are discussing here) requires use of the manufacturer's drivers, usually on a CD that accompanies the hardware. The manufacturer may have WHQL Certified their drivers prior to release with Microsoft, but they still write the drivers, not Microsoft.

However, since the manufacturers do not choose to support Linux, it is up to the Linux community to develop something that will work, which takes time after a new hardware product is released. As a guess, I would say that it takes Microsoft as long to develop a driver that supports new hardware as it does for the Linux community to develop one. The difference is that Microsoft does not have to--the manufacturers do it for them, at least initially.

In fact, Linux comes with more drivers than Windows. Have you ever bought any device for Windows that doesn't come with a CD with the divers you must then install. Loose the CD and you'll be in trouble if you want to install the device on a new machine. Nvidia doe a good job of supporting Linux. I can say the same for HP and their printer driver HPLIP. As a Linux user I favor hardware from vendors like these which do provide Linux drivers. Before making purchases, I do a little research and have always been able to purchase high quality hardware for every hardware type I've desired. Remember that Linux supported 64 bit long before Microsoft did. If I'm not mistaken, the current shipping Windows XP is still 32 bit.