Not really solved perfectly but it'll do for now I guess until Trisquel 7 is
out, haha.
I'm hoping the Trusty enablement pack might fix the issue but I don't know.
>If looks are important, install the latest Elementary OS (Luna) and then run
the Ubuntu to Trisquel conversion script from
https://trisquel.info/en/wiki/migrate-ubuntu-trisquel-without-reinstalling
>
>Another route is to install Trisquel 6 and then install elementary-desktop
from the official PPA: https://launchpad.net/~elementary-os/+archive/stable
>
>You may not get as good of an experience initially without tweaks if you go
the PPA route, but at least there are options.
Not an issue about looks but just trying to get a system to work with
acceleration as I know it *can* work with effort, I just am not that good
with handing Xorg configs and whatnot. I actually am a KDE kind of guy, have
used it for a long time and am use to it, plus it can be made to look decent
too haha.
That said, even if I were to install Elementary, it would still have the same
issue of Trisquel where it wont boot to an X server, I'd still have to update
the kernel after converting to Trisquel and I'd still have the same issue I
believe.
> Parabola GNU/Linux supports very recent hardware. It is not as
user-friendly as Trisquel but it actually is a good point if you have the
time (believe me: unless you got unemployed, you have more time while being a
student than anytime after until retirement) and desire to learn more about
the administration of a GNU/Linux system.
I could install Parabola and I probably will sometime. I can install packages
with a package manager so it shouldn't be too hard, I've used Arch a long
time ago so it should be a easy transition. I still love Debian based systems
like Trisquel as I adore aptitude and I know the ins and outs of it though.
> Whining doesn't help. I don't see either of your names on the Trisquel
donate list.
I don't mean to "whine" as you say, I just feel the community is very
fragmented, and I think the FSF have lost focus on actual software
development. Does it really make sense to campaign heavy to tell the public
to switch to free software when most new modern PCs with Intel chips wont
even boot with the easiest distro around (Trisquel)? I'm not saying it to
slam Trisquel, I appreciated how how it is to develop something so big as
this, but I recognize that if the community wanted a more modern system, if
we could work together better and the FSF could pitch in and help things
would be a lot easier, and then it would mean more people could switch. Right
now it's like putting the cart before the horse. "Switch to free software!"
they say, and then when people do try to, the OS they picked doesn't support
their hardware, even though it is supported. Technology changes a lot, that's
why projects like Ubuntu release every 6 months, to keep up with hardware and
to keep things moving ahead.
I would be happy to donate to Trisquel, and someday I intend to as I believe
in the project (I do not have any money now), but even if I did donate, I
don't think it will speed anything up, which disappoints me, thanks to how
fragmented the community is. We have so many distros and so little time to
keep up. The hardware drivers, like that from Intel are available, but free
software distros cannot keep up as well due to lack of time people can put
into them as there is just not enough funding.
If the FSF backed a system that they could hire a couple developers, I could
easily support them as many people do the FSF already and they could have the
funds to really push out a modern, easy to use OS very often. Parabola is
hard to use, if there was a Debian based system that updated every 6 months
like Ubuntu and was free software, then hardware support would be great and
this wouldn't be a problem. As it is now, Debian is the best I can do, as
they have their testing branch with modern hardware support. It's not the
best, since some of their software suggests non-free software, but it works
if you know what you're doing and choose not to use non-free repos.
I read it took something like a year for Trisquel 6 to come out since Ubuntu
12.04. This is sad, as a year is a long time for software and hardware
support. It should be more like a month or two apart at most, and if Trisquel
had more support, then it could be done. The FSF has the ability to help with
this support, but they don't do software anymore, all they do is campaign.
Which is putting the cart before the horse.
>Yeah, I feel the same way.
>Convincing people of the benefits of free software is not difficult (at
least this is my experience).
>But I as soon as they ask for a free alternative for windows or apple I get
into trouble.
>I think no one of my friends will be happy with trisquel since there are too
many problems to deal with (hardware support, flash problem etc.).
>The fsf raised lots of money last year and all they do is campaigning and
making festivals.
That's exactly what I'm saying. Campaigning is good, but the lack of support
for hardware is a fault that is hard to deal with, especially when there's no
reason why the hardware shouldn't work.
I understand that some hardware cannot work, like AMD GPUs and Broadcom Wifi
due to non-free hardware. There is nothing we can do about that, other than
campaign and tell users to buy systems with Intel. What is annoying is when
people *do* buy systems with Intel and Atheros that does work with free
software in theory, but due to the lack of support from the community due to
fragmentation, etc, all the OSes are too outdated to support hardware that
can work with a little effort.
As for flash, I wish it would die. While it's annoying, I think people who
really want freedom can avoid flash if they have to and if they are taught
the importance of freedom. I don't have flash on my system at all. But when
the hardware that is suppose to work doesn't work, and the only reason for it
is because the OSes are too outdated, that's an issue that should be a
non-issue, and would be a non-issue with effort if the community wanted to
Unify to fix it.
