Useless, doesn't even have a meaningful title
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| phsolide Dec 16, 2009 3:38 PM EDT |
The title doesn't relate to the contents much at all. Here's all the salient points of the article: "Some KVMs cause X windows to lose it." "You might want to try an xorg.conf file, instead of letting X configure itself." "Don't use a super-cheap, no-name KVM switch." "Even some brand name KVM switches don't work right." |
| zenarcher Dec 16, 2009 4:04 PM EDT |
I've used KVM switches here with Linux for about four years. First, a Trendnet (PS/2) and now a Linkskey. Neither are very expensive and both have worked perfectly. I'm getting ready to replace the Linkskey (USB) so I can use the DVI video rather than VGA, which will be a more expensive deal, but I've not experienced any problems as mentioned in the article. |
| caitlyn Dec 17, 2009 4:41 PM EDT |
Best Linux article practices include taking articles like this with a grain of salt. No, that's not right. Make it a boulder of salt. |
| herzeleid Dec 17, 2009 6:55 PM EDT |
I've also used kvm switches for some time - I first bought a kvm switch around 2000, and bought another one somewhere around 2004 - still working fine, no problems with any linux distro I've used in this millenium. Not to mention the various IT shops I've worked at which use kvm switches on the linux servers. What was the article about again? |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!