This message was posted on behalf of Intel Corporation1 of 1 people found this helpful
ka-nuc: As Al Hill mentioned, your OS is not supported by the NUC. Please go to https://01.org/ for you to get drivers for your OS if that does not fix this issue go to the Linux* community for support about this problem you are facing.
1 of 1 people found this helpful
Hi ka-nuc, I have the NUC7PJYH Linux/HDMI/Audio all works. Running Kodi on Debian Stretch with back-ported 4.15 kernel. Also installed Intel DMC firmware for GeminiLake.
My TV is a first gen smart 4k Samsung 55" and my nuc boots up at 3840x2160 @30 hz, I think my TV doesn't support 60 HZ? although it could be the HDMI cable...fullsize 6 ft hdmi to hdmi.
Maybe it's your tv's not supporting hdmi2 is the problem, try it with a friend who has a 4k tv.
Here's a review where of the NUC7CJH where they tested with LINUX. nucblog.net/2018/04/gemini-lake-nuc-nuc7cjyh-review/
Even though Intel says they don't support Linux OS at least you can choose Linux OS in the BIOS! Thanks for that Intel.
edit: ultraHD works at 3840x2160 @60HZ
had to enable UHD color in TV display options!
I'm new to NUC and still fairly new to Linux. But it seems like Intel is backing away from any desire to support Ubuntu or other linux distros.
There are tidbits of info on Linux support here and bios discussion here. But the looking at the very recently updated "Supported Operating Systems for Intel NUC" that you referenced -- Ubuntu is missing/removed since I queued last. Crazy :_)
Its understandable with the fractured nature of all the Linux distributions and significant changes within Ubuntu coming. But the terms "mini pc kit" just seem to offer hope for some decent mainline hardware, full featured and decently priced, for the linux community.
Let me be very clear: Intel does not provide support for Linux on the NUC products. No, Intel is not backing away; Intel never has provided support for Linux on the NUC products and likely Intel never will provide support for Linux on the NUC products. No, you never saw the Supported Operating Systems page list any distribution of Linux as being supported. Yes, some helpful notes that have been posted, but this is all unsupported information from third parties.
No, this is not crazy; it is a simple economic decision. Each O/S release that is supported incurs a significant validation cost and a significant support cost. Each major version of each Linux distro would count as an O/S to be supported and would incur the same level of costs. Saying this another way, one major version of one Linux distro, say Ubuntu 17.10, would incur the same validation and support costs as would Windows 10 Home. The cost of validation and support must be sunk into the cost that Intel charges for a NUC. Are the 95% of users who use Windows 10 going to be willing to pay, say, $50 more for a NUC so that the various Linux distros that are used by the other 5% of users can be supported? Not a chance.
Now, before you attempt to argue with any of these numbers, I suggest that you spend some time reviewing the data in this article: Usage share of operating systems - Wikipedia. As you will see, I have actually been generous in my estimate for Linux usage.
Practically any distro of Linux will run on the NUCs. In fact, NUCs are used by folks within Intel who work on the Linux kernel and on Linux device drivers. For Intel overall, Linux is important; very important -- but this doesn't mean that the NUCs, which must exist as separate, economically-viable products, can afford to include Linux support.
I appreciate your candor and viewpoint in this issue and I agree. I wouldn't argue with the "numbers" at all.
Unfortunately, I do feel that there is a need for an operating system, such as Linux in the market. Every so often I review what is available as an alternative and then usually determine that, once again, Windows seems to be it.
The intended application and usage for the NUC platform is a stable isolated system. Windows cost, continual updates and larger space requirements made Linux seem attractive. You just can't turn off notifications and other irritants well enough on Windows 10. But Linux is a very fractured environment and I would be hard pressed to develop a working platform aside from a few systems or systems specifically designed and validated for a Linux distribution.
Frankly, I was just very impressed with the NUC platform. Thanks for all the hard work on an excellent product.
Hey, I was explaining the logic behind the decision, not expressing any opinion regarding Linux. If you want opinions, let's go for it...
First of all, I actually happen to like Linux. I spent part of my career doing development on Linux. My comment directed at Martin is specifically with regards to the utter disaster that is the world of portable software development.
Windows 10 is an absolute disaster as far as I am concerned. It seems that every release takes away features that I actually found helped my efficiency. So much time is wasted re-learning how to be (as) efficient using the latest version. There are three things that are killing Windows, (1) Microsoft's desire to make money through its app store, (2) Microsoft's desire to have the same O/S support phones and (3) Microsoft's arrogance and utter disregard for its customer's input (read: only we know what a good GUI should look like).
The major problem I see is that Linux is not the panacea that is going to keep Microsoft (more) honest. First of all, 90% of the people choosing Linux for their personal PC are doing so for no other reason than it is free (most have been scared away from Windows XP (the other free O/S of choice) by all the security issues). Secondly, there are simply too many distributions and few that are supported by an organization that is commercially viable (let alone successful). Because no one in the personal PC marketplace is willing to pay for these distributions, almost all lag well behind the hardware - sometimes by as much as 6 months! Intel has engineers working their butts off to get drivers for new hardware ready almost as quickly as for Windows, only to see the distributions taking months and months to actually incorporate them. Why is this? The folks that need to do the work to incorporate these drivers into the distributions are mostly volunteers and thus have to concentrate on their *real* jobs so that they can feed themselves.
Ok, let the "but"s fly...