As much as it hurts to say it...

> I didn't make a neat list of major and minor issues as per usual

You didn't even explain what do you think is wrong with it, so it is not
a helpful criticism. Most of your complaints about the 4.0 release were
based on your graphic card being not free software compatible, or about
missing features. It is not that mini was supposed to be that feature
rich, so I wouldn't say "missing". Evaluate it on its own, not compared
to the gnome edition.

Ruben, this isn't about the persistent graphics problems, which are bad enough for anyone with an ATI GPU. I have even grown to begrudgingly tolerate those problems on my current installation of Triquel 4.5.

Even a mini edition of an OS ought to have music management software and all the necessary help files installed by default. That is not splitting hairs on my part. It is missing features.

I'm sorry to say it doesn't feel like it has been diligently tested and debugged. I caught more bugs (new and old) in half an hour than I care to stomach. To be honest, it seems like you barely booted into the sucker. An acceptable level of maturity for a proper release would be Lubuntu minus any nonfree parts, but it is actually far buggier than that

And yes, I understand, there are certain things like YouTube not working that are simply out of your hands. I can't hold that against you, because it is innate to the software. The only fix would be installing Firefox with FlashVideoReplacer, which would totally defeat the purpose of a lightweight OS. But considering how important sites like YouTube and Vimeo are to the average user's Web experience, it still sucks.

I evaluate it not compared to the Gnome edition but on what I would call the "best friend" litmus test. That is, if my best friend got interested in "Linux" (as he calls it) and wanted to try it on his netbook, could I realistically recommend the distro to him? For Trisquel Mini, the answer would be a definite "no." Even with manual tweaking on my part, I couldn't imagine using it daily.

BTW, to go into more detail about the problem that "crashed" the browser:

Naively, when I was typing up the list of bugs, I was testing out what happens when you click on an e-mail hyperlink, crossing my fingers for it to work. The normal behavior would be for the Sylpheed mail client to open at that point with a new message window. What happened instead is that new tabs in Midori started opening rapidly, again and again. This behavior did not stop and I had to close the browser.

This is what I mean when I say poorly tested.

But that issue is regarding to the old version of midori a newer version would probably get better support for email links. It's not trisquels fault. Cause the upstream has to get the software right.

The Youtube issue could be solved if we would include the Linterna Magica userscript into the Trisquel Mini image. That would be great for this edition it removes the Flashplayer thingy and starts the totem video player backend. Just take a look at http://e-valkov.org/linterna-magica/ .

I'm using that plugin all the way in my midroi setups at work and home :-). I like the browser but i guess the next release of midori would be even better cause it's still in development.

AndrewT i've to test the mini iso and would recomend some software which could be used on that medium. ;)

weird spam above...
anyways I tried to put Trisquel Mini on my Asus EEEPC 901 and was dissapointed because it does not feel capable or legitimate. For one thing, the graphical update manager will not work. When I click install updates it just hangs to his day. 'sudo apt-get upgrade' seems to work, but update manager still will not go away.Plus even after installing Web Browser AND IceCat with FlashVideoReplacer, I get no performance. I feel like all the power of Trisquel has been removed by using the "mini" edition.