Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Mozilla Releases SeaMonkey 2.0

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the little-people-in-fishbowls dept.

Mozilla 185

binarybum writes "Often forgotten, but the independent open source spirit lives strong in the once Mozilla project — now SeaMonkey. Version 2.0 is finally out and rivals Firefox with similar features but integrated email with a small footprint." The Register has a short piece on the 2.0 release, which mentions that SeaMonkey is now based on Firefox 3.5.4. Stephen Shankland lists some of the features in a handy bullet-point style, too. I'm using the new release right now; it's crashed once — but only once — in several hours of use.

cancel ×

185 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Who cares anymore? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914245)

All we need is a web browser. Users need the flexibility to choose their own mail program. Besides, webmail is today's king. This is why "Seamonkey" is often forgotten.

Re:Who cares anymore? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914595)

I am using it all the time - I for once cannot forget the original menu style of Mozilla, instead of dumbed-down-let's-please-internet-explorer-users style of Firefox. Please developers keep up the good work so that the spirit of Mozilla still lives!

SeaMonkey Composer is the best... (5, Informative)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914853)

SeaMonkey Composer is the best way to make WYSIWYG, What You See Is What You Get, HTML files.

Unless, of course, you want to deal with the quirkiness and huge expense of Adobe Dreamweaver. Dreamweaver has more features, but SeaMonkey is usually all you need.

Use TsWebEditor for Tidying SeaMonkey HTML files.

Re:SeaMonkey Composer is the best... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29915967)

Here [kompozer.net] . SeaMonkey's Composer as a stand-alone program.

You're welcome.

Re:SeaMonkey Composer is the best... (1)

Antiocheian (859870) | more than 4 years ago | (#29916559)

WYSIWYG was a new feature in the word processors in the early 90s but in HTML is has never been true.

That said, the Composer is a great and very useful feature for copying and pasting text from an HTML page.

Do you get like... 2 mails per day? (1, Insightful)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914889)

Some of us are far more popular and have to deal with 3 or 4 emails per day. Bayesian based automatic tagging, filtering etc.

Webmail is king only for that 99% who are clueless, which is good, it means I don't get bothered by them.

 

Re:Do you get like... 2 mails per day? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29915107)

I dont know who you are. I stopped checking email on a computer years ago. I guess some people have to check email on their computer, those people are clueless though.

Re:Do you get like... 2 mails per day? (0)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915747)

Some of us are far more popular and have to deal with 3 or 4 emails per day. Bayesian based automatic tagging, filtering etc.

You get 3-4 emails per day and feel you absolutely must have "Bayesian based automatic tagging" and "filtering" to handle that veritable avalanche correspondence? No offense, but I think your problems lie elsewhere...

Re:Do you get like... 2 mails per day? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29916309)

wait... I hear something coming....

Whhoooosssshhhhh.

Re:Do you get like... 2 mails per day? (2, Insightful)

mixmatch (957776) | more than 4 years ago | (#29916177)

Whenever I've had to deal with multiple emails, I have used gmail's ability to download mail from other servers and tag them automatically for me...

Re:Who cares anymore? (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915227)

I don't see the benefit of using webmail instead of a client and IMAP? A client can give me notifications, and search faster. I can use it offline. And I can integrate all my mail accounts together.

There are plenty of very good mail programs out there, just choose the one that sucks the least (Sylpheed/Claws for me).

Totally Your Opinion (3, Insightful)

repetty (260322) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915413)


> Users need the flexibility to choose their own mail program.

Could you please direct me to the RFC that stipulates this?

Maybe by choosing SeaMonkey they HAVE chosen their own email program.

Well, you got first post, at least.

--Richard

Re:Who cares anymore? (1)

Vu1turEMaN (1270774) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915603)

Some people enjoy using Outlook even if webmail is king.

However, until Lightning and Thunderbird get a better overhaul, Seamonkey will never catch on. The calendar and mail interface is mediocre at best compared to Outlook 2007.

Its sad that we use Open Office at the nonprofit I work at, but still use Outlook.

Re:Who cares anymore? (1)

ET3D (1169851) | more than 4 years ago | (#29916415)

I did find having mail and web together comfortable, and being able to edit the odd text web page wasn't a bad feature. Problem was that SeaMonkey just fell so far behind that Firefox provided a lot more useful features, either built in or through add-ins.

I think it may be too late for SeaMonkey. It might have caught up with Firefox, but it already lost long time users like me. It'd be a hassle to go back.

So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914259)

...does anyone besides the developers actually still use this?

Re:So... (4, Insightful)

AllNicksTaken (528293) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914315)

I do. I like its interface much better than FireFox. Crazy, I know. Unfortunately many websites run compatibility checks and freak out if your browser isn't FireFox, Safari, or IE. My main preference of all stupid things is that I have always hated Firefox's search bar. Too many years of searching via SeaMonkey's address bar I guess.

Re:So... (5, Informative)

BForrester (946915) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914585)

I hate the search bar in Firefox too, so I deleted it and set up keyword searches for the half-dozen search engines I use regularly. (If you're not familiar with this FF function, right-click on any search box and select "add a keyword for this search."

For example, "g" is my google keyword. To google something, I type
g something

It works like a charm.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914723)

Ditto. In fact, I have a whole folder of keywords (not all keywords have to have arguments, so you can use them for quick access to any website), Google (g) , Gmail (m), Wikipedia (w), Wiktionary (d), Wolfram Alpha (wa), etc.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914999)

And this is how it worked in Opera for... years?...

Re:So... (1)

value_added (719364) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914997)

I hate the search bar in Firefox too, so I deleted it and set up keyword searches for the half-dozen search engines I use regularly. (If you're not familiar with this FF function, right-click on any search box and select "add a keyword for this search."

A pre-written [cnet.com] list (chosen at random) for easy import.

Re:So... (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915183)

Yeah, it makes Ubiquity toothless.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29915257)

I didn't bother with a keyword. By default you can type anything into the address bar and it'll do a google search. Keywords are useful for other search engines, but really all I use is google, and that works out of the box.

Re:So... (1)

Vu1turEMaN (1270774) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915731)

I just type in whatever i want into the address bar and it searches google...

Or if I type "wiki Denny Crane" it goes straight to his page.

Re:So... (3, Interesting)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914995)

User Agent switcher will fix that problem for you.I keep it around myself, and have found it is MUCH easier to convert older folks to SeaMonkey than to Firefox, as they remember the old Netscape days and prefer its layout. I'll admit I prefer it for certain jobs, such as it is the browser I use for secure transactions. I just like the "feel" of SeaMonkey better than Firefox, which sometimes feels kinda dumbed down to me.

Of course it is the excellent Firefox extensions library that keeps me coming back to FF. Oh curse you and your large library of extensions goodness!

Re:So... (1)

StuffMaster (412029) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915477)

Yeah, I never switched to Firefox because I dislike pretty much everything it changed (the plugin management was good though). I *really* hope they never drop it.

Re:So... (2, Interesting)

bryansj (89051) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914487)

I use it. My choices at work are IE8 or Seamonkey. I had used Firefox until I got a nastygram from the admin about it being unauthorized. I added on AdBlock and User Agent Switcher.

Really, you're OK with that? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914289)

one crash every couple of hours is where we're setting the bar now?

if this was a Microsoft product you'd be outraged and laughing about the ridiculous uptime.

Re:Really, you're OK with that? (2)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914497)

Seriously, I was going to say the same thing. Crashing once with a few hours of use is pretty iffy...

Of course, it depends on what crashed it. But still. The bias towards liking it is obvious, too.. "but only once."

That's like saying that I got a virus in Windows - but only once. So Windows is actually really secure! ...

I am a software tester. If the software I test crashes and I am inclined to think it was a problem with the software, I actually am paid to try to reproduce the problem... not pass it off as only happening and thus not an issue. :)

Re:Really, you're OK with that? (1)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915245)

I agree in theory but what love to know what browser you use that doesn't crash these days. On Windows I have yet to find a non-crashing browser. On Linux the only two non-crashing browsers I've seen are Links and Lynx. Those are nice for researching Xorg issues or just when I really feel like geeking out but clearly not acceptable choices for day to day browsing. Now, I would be willing to believe that all or most of them do not crash of their own fault but Flash causes it. There's a lot out there to miss without Flash though these days.

Re:Really, you're OK with that? (1, Informative)

b0bby (201198) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915631)

My wife leaves Firefox open on Vista with 50+ tabs open, some with flash & some with pdfs, for weeks on end. It actually rarely crashes, much to my amazement. Usually after a few weeks it starts acting a little weird, I close a few tabs, shut down Firefox & re-open (it's set to keep all the tabs) and it takes a couple of minutes for all the tabs to load. Then it's good for another few weeks.

Re:Really, you're OK with that? (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915725)

I've had Chrome, Firefox, and IE all crash. I don't recall Opera crashing but I didn't use it for very long. However, none of the above crash within a few hours of normal use. "Normal" being fewer than 10 tabs and the only flash-heavy site being youtube.

Re:Really, you're OK with that? (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915849)

Firefox 3.0 seems very stable on my WinXP system. I can have it open for day-after-day and not encounter problems. The only time I restart is when the memory usage grows above 300,000 K (either real or virtual/HDD memory).

In contrast Opera 10 crashes every other day. K-Meleon CFF is extremely unstable, and I'll probably uninstall it.

Re:Really, you're OK with that? (1)

Geirzinho (1068316) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915173)

As a long time user of Seamonkey 2 (alphas and betas) as my primary browser I suspect he threw it at a lot of "testing" sites to see what it could stand up to. Sure I do see crashes during regular use, but it's rare enough to surprise me (anything else and I would have stopped using it).

It would be nice if he mentioned whether he actually tried to make the browser crash or if it happened during normal usage...

Totally forgot this existed... (2, Insightful)

sleekware (1109351) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914291)

Time to give SeaMonkey another shot!

Re:Totally forgot this existed... (2, Funny)

rattaroaz (1491445) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915177)

Time to give SeaMonkey another shot!

No thanks. I tried it when I was a kid. They are just brine shrimp. Nothing special, definitely not monkeys, and don't waste your money by giving them another shot.

50% ? (2, Insightful)

daveime (1253762) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914301)

it's crashed once -- but only once -- in several hours of use

As "several" could (potentially) refer to any number more than two, then it could (potentially) "only" crash 8 times a day, or 56 times a week, or 2912 times a year.

Not a terribly positive endorsement to be honest.

Re:50% ? (1)

Tanktalus (794810) | more than 4 years ago | (#29916253)

Even giving the benefit of the doubt and calling it 8 hours, that's still once a (working) day, or 5 times a (working) week. Still not acceptable.

Of course, extrapolating a statistic out of such a small sample size (2 or even 8 hours) is somewhat premature. That may have been the only crash in 10,000 hours, just so happens it was at the beginning. Or it normally would crash 5,000 times in a year, and he just went to "safe" sites. Neither extreme seems likely, but merely possible given the low sample size.

Chrome, though, shows that we should ask an additional question: what happens when one site crashes the browser? Does it take the whole thing (and all 11 of my open tabs) with it? Or do I just lose the one tab. This is important information when figuring out the severity of the problem, too.

Still not acceptable crash rate. I'm upset when I get one crash on my entire system per week. I'm upset when I have to reboot more than once every six months. If users have high standards, developers will have to have them, too.

still no netflix for linux (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914347)

sounds bad for neflix. 'course just like most of the rest of US, they remain hostage to fuddles & his payper liesense bugwear, & softwar gangster exclusions.

Re:still no netflix for linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914673)

What language are you attempting to speak?

Not based on Firefox, other way around (1)

shovas (1605685) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914349)

IIRC, SeaMonkey is actually the rendering engine testing ground for Firefox.

Re:Not based on Firefox, other way around (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914419)

No. The rendering engine is Gecko, and until this release, Seamonkey was stuck with the same version of Gecko as as FF v2.

Re:Not based on Firefox, other way around (2, Informative)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914435)

I'm also working from memory, but I think that Gecko is the engine. Firefox used to be the engineering test-bed browser component for the Mozilla suite, but end users decided they liked the light and fast standalone browser.

-Peter

Re:Not based on Firefox, other way around (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915015)

The funny thing is that Firefox is now considered quite bloated by some and projects like K-Meleon strive to create a lightweight variant of Firefox.

Re:Not based on Firefox, other way around (1)

uhoreg (583723) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915099)

K-Meleon actually predates Firefox.

Re:Not based on Firefox, other way around (1)

onefriedrice (1171917) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915097)

I'm also working from memory, but I think that Gecko is the engine. Firefox used to be the engineering test-bed browser component for the Mozilla suite, but end users decided they liked the light and fast standalone browser.

-Peter

Firefox... light... fast... That's news to me.

Time to suffer the wrath of Mozilla fanboy mods.

Re:Not based on Firefox, other way around (1)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915141)

Was my use of the past tense lost on you?

-Peter

Re:Not based on Firefox, other way around (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915331)

CLOSE, but Phoenix (Firefox's original branding) was a project started to deliberately slim down the browser and focus on it exclusively rather than worrying about other functions like email and HTML editing - ie, it was intended to be an end-user product from it's inception rather than a rendering engine testbed (as the Gecko rendering engine and the Mozilla suite predated Phoenix by quite a bit).

Glad to see! (1)

grumpygrodyguy (603716) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914365)

I'm browsing with SeaMonkey 1.1.17 right now, I prefer they way it handles tabs over firefox.

Hope they didn't change that!

Re:Glad to see! (1)

trb (8509) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914927)

Me too. I like the way seamonkey handles tabs, that's mostly why I use it. I use it for most of my browsing, and was long suffering with an obsolete rendering engine. I have not been able to figure out how to mimic seamonkey's tabs behavior on firefox. Is it possible to get the seamonkey tabs behavior on firefox (with existing settings or add-ons)? -Andy

Re:Glad to see! (1)

Geirzinho (1068316) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915403)

It is, browser.tabs in about:config is the place to look. You can make Seamonkey behave like FF or vice versa.

Re:Glad to see! (1)

trb (8509) | more than 4 years ago | (#29916497)

Let me be more specific:

In seamonkey, when I have a group of tabs open, and I invoke "Bookmarks:Bookmark This Group of Tabs" it saves a bookmark list entry so that when I select it, it opens the tabs immediately. This seems to be the behavior a sensible user would want.

In firefox, when when I have a group of tabs open, and I invoke "Bookmarks:Bookmark All Tabs..." it saves a bookmark list entry so that when I select it, a menu rolls down with links to the individual tabs, and then at the bottom, there is the item "Open All in Tabs." Yes, I want to open them all in tabs. That's why I saved them as a group of tabs, not as a bookmark folder.

I do not understand how to mimic this seamonkey bookmark "group of tabs" handling behavior in firefox. And I cannot imagine why anyone would want firefox to behave the way it does.

Re:Glad to see! (1)

antdude (79039) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914945)

Your version is outdated for v1.1 series. v1.1.18 exists.

Re:Glad to see! (2, Interesting)

chebucto (992517) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915033)

Seems to be the same. The new-tab button is still in its fixed position on the left-hand side.

The interface looks the same, except for a few differences
- The classic theme button icons look more firefox-like and less netscape 3-like (bad thing, in my books). A theme can solve that.
- There is now an rss icon w/ drop-down list on the right hand side of the address bar. So far its been unobtrusive.
- The url-guessing algorithm has been changed; it's now supposed to guess based on URL and page title. Not sure how that will work out, though the algo used in v. 1.1 was imperfect IMHO.
- There is no longer an option for a Bookmarks button in the Personal Toolbar. Huzzah, one less preference to fix on new installs!
- Speaking of preferences, the Preferences window is more or less the same. The only difference I've found so far is that Themes are now set under the View menu

One thing worth noting is the History function - they now store number of visits, as well as a timestamp of the last visit, which means sorting history is way easier. The Download manager now has timestamps, too.

Overall, I'm happy

Re:Glad to see! (1)

incripshin (580256) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915275)

The Javascript is much faster over the 1.x series. For instance, loading slashdot.org no longer brings up the dialog 'the javascript on this page is too convoluted and is taking too long. we're going to make you click okay just for the hell of it'.

Hopefully it doesn't crash as much as Seamonkey 1.x. I never figured out what was causing the crashes, possibly the gcc version I was using or maybe Flash. In any case, I will gladly make Seamonkey my backup browser to Chrome (goodbye, Firefox, I won't miss you).

Re:Glad to see! (1)

incripshin (580256) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915333)

Also, I have something of a Javascript benchmark, my email obfuscater [wisc.edu] . Seamonkey 1 required me to click continue on the 'slow javascript' popup something like three times. Seamonkey 2: zero times.

flash ? (3, Insightful)

polar red (215081) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914391)

it's crashed once -- but only once -- in several hours of use.

flash ?

Re:flash ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29915425)

Linux? Windows ? Flash ? There's lot of crappy software out there indeed, big deal.

Re:flash ? (1)

gaspyy (514539) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915451)

Interestingly, I noticed Firefox no longer crashes because of flash. I don't know who fixed it (Mozilla or Adobe) but the last crash must have been more than 6 months ago.

Re:flash ? (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915717)

I've been getting a lot of Flash crashes on AMD64 Karmic the last couple weeks.

Re:flash ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29916563)

aaaa-aaaa. Savior of the universe.

hmm (2, Funny)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914409)

I'm using the new release right now; it's crashed once -- but only once -- in several hours of use.

In other words, it's even less reliable than the IE I'm reading this on?

Nooo! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914427)

My beautiful Netscape 4.X era buttons! Where have they gone!

Stupid mandatory, glossy modernization!

More similarity with Firefox isn't all good (3, Interesting)

Ktistec Machine (159201) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914465)

I've used Seamonkey as my default browser for a long time now, mainly because I like the user interface better. Seamonkey 2.0 now uses Firefox's printing system, though, and this is one of the main things I don't like about Firefox. I use lpr for printing, not cups, and I liked the fact that earlier versions of Seamonkey (and "Mozilla" before it) remembered any changes I made to the "lpr command" in the print dialog. Firefox uses gtk-print, which reverts back to the default lpr command every time you click print, even in the same session. I've reported this as a bug in the Seamonkey bugzilla.

Regarding crashes, I've seen another report of this at LWN [lwn.net] .

Re:More similarity with Firefox isn't all good (1)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915727)

I use lpr for printing, not cups

Well, I can see another way of solving your problem...

Wrong SeaMonkey (0, Offtopic)

dschmit1 (1353767) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914519)

I was so excited for a new version of the copyrighted brine shrimp. Imagine my disappointment when I click to view TFA. *sigh*

But does it work ... (0)

lbalbalba (526209) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914567)

... flawlessly as an Outlook replacement, as an email/calendar client for an Exchange server ?

Oh noes.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914607)

> Several older operating systems are no longer supported: Windows 95, 98, Me, and NT 4 as well as Mac OS X 10.2 (Jaguar) and 10.3 (Panther).

I'm doomed! doomed I tell you!

Oh wait, that was when I was using Windows Me!

Re:Oh noes.... (2, Informative)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915103)

For older machines I would suggest Kmeleon [sourceforge.net] if you are low on RAM, and Kmeleon CCF ME [blogspot.com] if you have over 128Mb. Both are built on the Gecko engine and VERY fast, but CCF ME has built in ABP and since it is a standalone also makes an excellent flash drive browser, but if you are below 128Mb I've found the memory footprint of stock Kmeleon can't be beat. And both can be run on Win95 on up according to the FAQ [sourceforge.net] .

this is a scam! (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914627)

This is just brine gecko...don't be fooled!

Re:this is a scam! (2, Funny)

rattaroaz (1491445) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915311)

This is just brine gecko...don't be fooled!

Mmmmm . . . Brined gecko . . .

gn4a (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914653)

a change 7o TalMk to one of the

Integrated email? (-1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914667)

I wonder why an email client is integrated into a browser.

If Seamonkey is supposed to be a lightweight alternative to Firefox, having a built-in email client is a mistake. After that people will ask for built-in FTP, built-in Torrent, etc, etc.

Then you're at the same point as Firefox, which was supposed to be a lightweight alternative to Nescape.

Re:Integrated email? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914709)

After that people will ask for built-in FTP, built-in Torrent, etc, etc.

Sounds like Opera!

Re:Integrated email? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914925)

Yet the installer for Opera is smaller than anyone else's.

Re:Integrated email? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29914897)

When the hell was seamonkey supposed to be a lightweight alternative to anything? Seamonkey is a continuation of the Mozilla suite.

Some people may be surprised to discover that there were alternative web browsers before Firefox. But some geniuses must have decided that they weren't dumbed down enough.

Re:Integrated email? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29915057)

When the hell was seamonkey supposed to be a lightweight alternative to anything? Seamonkey is a continuation of the Mozilla suite.

Some people may be surprised to discover that there were alternative web browsers before Firefox. But some geniuses must have decided that they weren't dumbed down enough.

It's from the fact that Firefox takes much more CPU and memory than Seamonkey, and that's only a browser alone. Seamonkey 1.X can still work on Pentiums with all features in Win95 not thrashing much with 64MB, while Firefox demands XP, 140mb+ of RAM all just for striving to pass that stupid Acid3 test which supposedly defines "how the web should be".

Seamonkey is just coming closer to being a much more bloated clone of Firefox now, the reasons why I used it before (speedy browser that renders pages properly without any nonsense) are eliminated. Where's the throbber, even? Why are there annoying new buttons between my filenames and progress bars in each file of the download manager that I can accidentally click and cancel/remove downloads without confirmation?

FYI I use a 2GHz and Seamonkey 1.X is my best friend. Mandatory upgrades that gimp the user functionality do not win my favor.

Re:Integrated email? (2)

KuNgFo0 (519426) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915133)

It's never been advertised as a lightweight alternative to Firefox. In fact it's the exact opposite - it's a browser suite for those that prefer the everything-and-the-kitchen-sink model. When Firefox (or Phoenix I think it was originally called) spun off from Mozilla, the original suite began a steady decline into obscurity. The bastardization that was Firefox focused on stripping away many of the useful features under the premise of trying to build a "lighter" browser (I think they failed, Firefox is still a huge memory hog). Finally, the Mozilla organization officially closed down the suite project and let it become resurrected as a community project and then was born Seamonkey - an effort to restore the glory of the all-in-one suite but still keep it on track with the code updates that went into Firefox.

I know it's hard for some of you to understand, but please be accepting in that there are some of us that just prefer it this way.

Re:Integrated email? (2)

chebucto (992517) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915167)

Learn your history - Firefox was supposed to be the lightweight alternative to the Mozilla Suite. Seamonkey is the continuation of the Mozilla Suite under a different name.

So, Firefox was the lightweight alternative to Seamonkey.

Except, Firefox started seriously competing with IE, started getting bloat, and for some time now has been a more heavyweight program than Seamonkey. All this despite the fact that Firefox only offers web browsing, while Seamonkey offers Web, News, Email, IRC, and HTML Editing.

A reason for this IMHO is that Seamonkey does not try to appeal to a general audience and thus has less pressure to add iffy features. That, and the lower popularity of Seamonkey probably means there are fewer developers trying to make their mark, which keeps things sane(r).

Why?! (1)

fluch (126140) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914687)

"Web-browser, advanced e-mail, newsgroup and feed client, IRC chat, and HTML editing made simple -- all your Internet needs in one application" ... for what reason do we need this all in one single application?

Re:Why?! (1)

zidohl (976382) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915219)

Sounds like Opera. Trying to do everything, but falling short in most areas, at least compared to stand alone email and IRC applications.

Re:Why?! (4, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#29916499)

Because a lot of people like having that integration.

You don't? Then use something else and quit whining.

It did what once? (4, Informative)

glwtta (532858) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914691)

Wait, this is the final release and it crashed within a few hours?

That's... not good.

FOSS standards are slipping (-1, Troll)

petrus4 (213815) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914745)

I remember a time, only a few years ago, where even one crash in several hours of use would be seen as unacceptable for software at a major version number release.

I guess it's unavoidable, though. When you have a culture where SLOC alone is the sole metric of what is considered good software, instability is an inevitable result.

It's ironic. Microsoft could become insolvent tomorrow and vanish off the face of the Earth, and still, at this point, ultimately they would have won.

They've won by subverting FOSS developers' internal definition of what constitutes good software. Stability, correctness, minimalism...these are no longer seen as elements of sound development practice.

Instead, it's purely about pleasing the lowest common denominator of mindless end users. Whatever said demographic screams for the loudest, they get.

It's also about programmers wanting to be able to use the most visible possible metric as reason, on its' own, for them to flex their epeens; without realising that, given the relationship between code quantity and bugs, it's exactly the opposite approach to the one that they really ought to be taking.

Re:FOSS standards are slipping (0, Troll)

Disgruntled Goats (1635745) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914837)

I remember a time, only a few years ago, where even one crash in several hours of use would be seen as unacceptable for software at a major version number release.

What the hell are you talking about? This has been a hallmark of FOSS software for over a decade.

It's ironic. Microsoft could become insolvent tomorrow and vanish off the face of the Earth, and still, at this point, ultimately they would have won.

Yeah, cause it's Microsoft's fault that a bunch of anti-Microsoft script kiddies have been producing shitty software for longer than they've even had dominance on the desktop. *yawn* get a new schtick you fucking turd.

Instead, it's purely about pleasing the lowest common denominator of mindless end users. Whatever said demographic screams for the loudest, they get.

That pretty much sums up Linux development since when it started.

Re:FOSS standards are slipping (1)

Lucid 3ntr0py (1348103) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914981)

I remember a time, only a few years ago, where even one crash in several hours of use would be seen as unacceptable for software at a major version number release.

What the hell are you talking about? This has been a hallmark of FOSS software for over a decade.

Are you implying that FOSS is all about the crashes? I've got some BSD boxes that beg to differ there, bub

It's ironic. Microsoft could become insolvent tomorrow and vanish off the face of the Earth, and still, at this point, ultimately they would have won.

Yeah, cause it's Microsoft's fault that a bunch of anti-Microsoft script kiddies have been producing shitty software for longer than they've even had dominance on the desktop. *yawn* get a new schtick you fucking turd.

I mean either you're trolling or you..god please say you're a troll.

Instead, it's purely about pleasing the lowest common denominator of mindless end users. Whatever said demographic screams for the loudest, they get.

That pretty much sums up Linux development since when it started.

For cereal?

Re:FOSS standards are slipping (1)

Disgruntled Goats (1635745) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915013)

I mean either you're trolling or you..god please say you're a troll.

Yeah because Microsoft has fuck all to do with Seamonkey's development, but it's clearly Microsoft's fault that it crashes. Totally logical argument.

Re:FOSS standards are slipping (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29916551)

Cuz yer a nigger faggot?

Re:FOSS standards are slipping (1)

murdocj (543661) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914851)

Wow... I knew where this was headed, and yet I still couldn't believe it. An open source program that has absolutely nothing to do with Microsoft crashes, and guess what, it's all MS's fault.

There's plenty of legitimate gripes with Microsoft. Blame them for a secretive culture, monopolistic practices, failure to follow standards, bugs, etc etc etc. But don't blame them for the failings of FOSS software. Next thing you know, MS will be the reason GNU/Hurd hasn't taken over.

Re:FOSS standards are slipping (1)

Disgruntled Goats (1635745) | more than 4 years ago | (#29914893)

Petrus4 has a history of blaming anything wrong in the Linux world or FOSS world at large as being Microsoft's fault. KDE sucks? Oh that's cause of Microsoft. Gnome sucks? Oh yeah, that's always Microsoft's fault. Lather, rinse, repeat for any other program/distro/etc that he dislikes.

What I use seamonkey for (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29915053)

While Iuse Firefox 99.99% of the time, I still use SeaMonkey for accessing sites that may be less 'safe'. That way I KNOW that my cookies, passwords and other info is protected, and I can quickly erase the cache and history of me ever visiting these unsafe sites.

This has already been done... (0)

nimid (774403) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915087)

...here [gnu.org] .

No iceape for Debian/Ubuntu yet (1)

lanner (107308) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915237)

I have filed a bug under Debian where I am offering $250 if someone can get a .deb out before the end of next week.

If you are not already aware, the Firefux/Thunderturd/Seamonkey art licensing prohibits it's use under Debian/Ubuntu. As such, the packages must be renamed Iceweasle/Icedove/Iceape with new art.

Re:No iceape for Debian/Ubuntu yet (1)

b0bby (201198) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915689)

Maybe Debian, but Ubuntu uses Firefox.

chromium kills them all (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29915315)

already a lost battle when you see chromium outperforming from far FF. So seamonkey is few years late...

Nice suite (1)

sootman (158191) | more than 4 years ago | (#29915465)

Overall it's pretty nice. Takes a while to load on older hardware, though. Maybe they could release just the browser as a separate component? ;-)

The Real Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29915791)

The real question is, "If I start the browser and had more then 1 tab open does it take 5 years to load the ALL the pages (including slow ass ads on overloaded servers) and render the browser useless until it finishes loading, or I can actually use the browser in a reasonable amount of time after opening it."

If not, i'll just stick with Opera.

Yu0 faIl it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29915905)

you down. It was MAKES ME SICK JUST is perhaPs volume of NetBSD THEY'RE GONE CAME the most. LLok at code sharing are about 7000/5

You Fail i@t (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29916005)

I think... (1)

Crashspeeder (1468723) | more than 4 years ago | (#29916157)

I think I just threw up a little. I hated Netscape more than I hate FF3. I'll stick to FF2 and Google Chrome.

WARNING for users with several profiles (2, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#29916465)

When it asks you to import profiles, it will ONLY work if you select a profile that comes with Seamonkey i.e. default. This is not intuitive and counter to all previous upgrades.

You have to manual crate a new profile with the profile name you want, and then use the command line to import that ONE profile.

c:\%APPATH%\mozilla\seamonkey -P -migration

The profile name is case sensitive and MUST be in dbl quotes.

This was a pain in the ass for people like me that have a profile for each person in their home. It's LAZY DEVELOPMENT and the should be ashamed of themselves.

I know, you're thinking 'So you have to got o the command line, so what?" well that's a deal killer for a lot of people. There is NO GOOD REASON why this is a manual process.
The documentation that explains this comes across as hubris and with a too damn bad attitude. People want to know why OS hasn't defeated MS? it's because of shit like this, I actually considered loading outlook.

No, this is NOT a troll or flame bait, it's facts.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>