×

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 Thunderbird 5

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the fly-little-bird dept.

Mozilla 154

supersloshy writes "Mozilla has released the latest version of Thunderbird, their popular email client, now in sync with their new rapid-release versioning system. Among the new features are the new add-ons manager from Firefox 4, revised account creation, faster response times, the ability to load plugins in RSS feeds and over 390 platform fixes. For more information, read the release notes"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

154 comments

But let me guess (1)

plunderscratch (2169382) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614482)

Next week - Thunderbird 6! ...okay maybe not

Re:But let me guess (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36614514)

It's simply a synchronization of release cycles, why complain?

Too Many Updates (3, Insightful)

Normal Dan (1053064) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614736)

It seems like every time I look at my computer something else is asking to be updated. Flash, Java, Adobe, Firefox, Windows itself, etc. Can we just knock it off already and update once every 6 months or so? That would be nice.

Also, get off my lawn.

Re:Too Many Updates (4, Insightful)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614930)

It seems like every time I look at my computer something else is asking to be updated. Flash, Java, Adobe, Firefox, Windows itself, etc. Can we just knock it off already and update once every 6 months or so? That would be nice..

You'd like Debian Stable.

Re:Too Many Updates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615368)

I've used Chrome for more than a year, and I'm glad to say that I have no idea WTF version I'm even running :). Likewise for Flash.

Do yourself a favor and uninstall Java. Minecraft and Android dev are probably its last two major non-enterprise uses.

Re:Too Many Updates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36616910)

I agree.

These guys need better QA, better coders, and more focus on making what they have work, rather than adding stupid features no one needs or wants (now with even MORE bugs!)

I'm just going to start uninstalling stuff that is so poorly written it needs to be updated daily.

The Mozilla 5's (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614494)

So Thunderbird and Firefox are now both "5's". Version? Stars? Out of 10?

Re:The Mozilla 5's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615066)

out of 100...

There wasn't even a version 4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36614540)

Everyone who was saying "Hey, Firefox should just bring out version 13 to be the highest" are now validated because Thunderbird skipped a version, as mobile Firefox went from 1.1 to 4.0

Re:There wasn't even a version 4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36614674)

It's all by the gecko version it uses. So it's stupid to complain.

Who uses Thunderbird? (3, Insightful)

Warlord88 (1065794) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614568)

Can someone give me a good reason to use Thunderbird or any other mail client. I haven't felt the need for it ever since gmail arrived. I can access it from any machine, mobile or tablet. Attachments are becoming easier, yadda yadda. I genuinely trying to figure out when I would want to use a mail client. Maybe in an office environment where I would not like to forward emails to gmail?

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36614644)

I want my email local, fast and accesible. Thunderbird gives me easy rules and a chance for easy archiving. I also can handle my website email accounts (webmaster, sales, info, etc) much easier. Google is slow and cumbersome (for me).

Not everything is better online.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36614664)

To access a non-gmail account, perhaps?

(Gmail's import-from-other-accounts feature still seems slow and requires a lot of work to set up 'send as')

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (5, Informative)

BZ (40346) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614684)

gmail's offline capabilities are still pretty poor, for one thing. Support for S/MIME isn't quite there yet (though there are browser extensions that try to do it). Latencies are way higher than a local mail client, at least for me. The "conversation" model it uses is not something everyone likes.

Gmail doesn't have NNTP support. Gmail doesn't try to remind you when you forget an to attach an attachment that you mention in the mail. Gmail sticks you with a crappy editing widget for your mail (granted, Thunderbird's is not much better).

Most importantly, not using gmail means Google doesn't have access to your mail. This is something some people actually care about, even if you don't. And not just for "office" mails.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (2)

TechnoFrood (1292478) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615180)

Gmail doesn't try to remind you when you forget an to attach an attachment that you mention in the mail.

Sorry to be picky, but Gmail does do that now and has for a while I believe (although may have only been an optional Labs feature until recently).

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (1)

BZ (40346) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615682)

Ah, interesting. Indeed, it does. Good to see people stealing feature ideas from each other. ;)

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615268)

Gmail doesn't try to remind you when you forget an to attach an attachment that you mention in the mail.

Actually, it's had this feature for over a year now:

http://www.techcular.com/gmail-attachment-reminder/ [techcular.com]

It was in Labs for a couple of years before that.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (3, Insightful)

Steauengeglase (512315) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614712)

Backups and Liability. I don't think I'm the only person who has lost random messages in Gmail. Also, call me old, but there is some stuff you just don't want sitting on a Gmail account or I should say, there is some stuff that your clients would think about suing you if they knew your employees were just forwarding it off to their Gmail accounts.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614824)

Precisely why I use a mail client. I like the web interface, but having a copy on my disk makes it that much less likely that I'll lose any emails due to some sort of hardware failure on either end.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (2)

numbski (515011) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615384)

I will likely run my own mail server until the day I die or the technology becomes obsolete. It's my mail, hands off.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36614724)

As an automatic backup of Gmail, in case Google loses your email for some reason. Also, if Gmail is your only email address, bravo. Personally I have many email addresses, and t-bird lets me check them all in one place.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (1)

Sylak (1611137) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614744)

Only reason i think to ever use an e-mail client is on a corporate or university network where you have an exchange or other local mail/calendar server.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (4, Informative)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614790)

There's probably not a great reason. But there are a few differences that make it worthwhile to some people. The big thing to remember is Gmail and Thunderbird are not mutually exclusive. I use Gmail through Thunderbird and through a web interface.

Reasons Thunderbird might be useful to some people vs web based Gmail:
Interface preference. Neither is superior, but some folks prefer Thunderbird.
Multiple accounts. Thunderbird lets you manage multiple accounts with multiple providers easily.
Plugins. I can only think of one: openPGP. And most people can live without it.
Search. Believe it or not, Thunderbird gives you better control of search than Gmail
Offline. Thunderbird lets you mess with your email while you are offline.

So my advice is to give Thunderbird a try, don't expect to be blown away, but who knows, you might like it.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615812)

Offline. Thunderbird lets you mess with your email while you are offline.

Yes, because here in 1991, I still have to disconnect my 14.4k modem from the phone line after downloading my mail, as it's very expensive to pay-per-minute and it ties up my phone line.

Maybe in the future someone will invent some other mechanism of internet connectivity that allows me to maintain a connection permanently?

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (5, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614834)

Can someone give me a good reason to use Thunderbird or any other mail client. I haven't felt the need for it ever since gmail arrived.

Because we don't want to give all our email to Google?

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (1)

operator_error (1363139) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615400)

I do not WANT to give my email to Google. I really don't. But I need a multi-PC/mobile solution (i.e. an IMAP server), and I ran my own (hosted) server for my own domain for years, until the spam completely overwhelmed me. I used Tuffmail for awhile, although their spam controls are not-user friendly and I find their documentation very hard to apply. Tuffmail is reasonably priced, although not long ago I went on a cost-cutting spree and Tuffmail got hit.

To-date I use gmail, because they are managing my spam effectively, and for free. (Except for the privacy thing, so I must 'trust' the GOOG for what they claim). I still don't like Google Mail though; they are an advertising company, and I am the product being delivered to their clients.

I use Thunderbird mostly, via gmail IMAP. I wish fighting IMAP-spam were easier.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (1)

Glendale2x (210533) | more than 2 years ago | (#36616246)

My guess is that it's easier for Google to do content spam filtering because Google is intentionally scanning/storing/aggregating the mail of *everyone* who uses it so they have that much more to compare to. I don't think Tuffmail does that with their customer's mail; I know I don't.

Reasons to use a desktop email client: (1)

Chemisor (97276) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614922)

  • Offline mode. You can read your mail offline, write your mail offline, and queue it all up for sending all at once. This is particularly useful for those of us who still have no broadband in our area and have to rely on dialup or satellite instead of an always-on connection.
  • Speaking of offline mode: you also edit your emails in a decent editor which doesn't suck like all Web 2.0 usually does. It also auto-saves your progress, so if you lose network connectivity, you don't lose your message.
  • Push email. Thunderbird uses IMAP IDLE protocol to notify you of email as soon as it comes in. This way you don't have to keep checking it.
  • Plugins. Encryption in particular is not easy to do with gmail. There used to be a firefox plugin for it, but it is not maintained any more. With thunderbird you get enigmail which can automatically handle encryption for you.

Re:Reasons to use a desktop email client: (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615306)

I love enigmail, but my friends hate me for it ("What's this digital signature crap at the end of all your emails?").

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615194)

There's no GPG extensions available for GMail.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615218)

Because webmail sucks ass?

Seriously, I couldn't imagine using a web browser for email. It's like using a screwdriver to drive a nail.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615340)

Uh, you can also access any other email account from any machine, mobile or tablet. That's a feature of the freakin' internet, and not of gmail.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (3, Informative)

vux984 (928602) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615514)

Thunderbird is free.
Gmail is "free".

Thunderbird also handles receiving mail from multiple accounts better in my opinion. Yes gmail has all kinds of features to do this, but i like COMPLETELY separate inboxes for some stuff; and stuff like multiple-imap account support is better in thunderbird.

Thunderbird is an application. Gmail is a web application.Its a good web app, but its still feels like a webapp. Its window handling in particular is REALLY annoying compared to a native app.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615912)

Sorry you got modded down because it's a legitimate question. For me, though, the converse is true: I don't want to use any webmail sites when I have a perfectly good local app. I've used Gmail and it's a nice attempt at emulating a local client, but it doesn't offer me any advantages over Thunderbird on my netbook, or my iPhone's inbox, or Mail.app on my Mac. I use IMAP everywhere so all of my email is accessible and synchronized from all of those devices, and attachments download in the background while I'm doing other stuff. Almost all the time when I check my inbox, those attachments are ready for loading in an instant; I don't have to wait for my sister's vacation pics to start transferring whenever I open a message.

If I had extremely limited storage, or a very slow machine, Gmail would make more sense to me. However, I don't see any need for it right now.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (1)

Paracelcus (151056) | more than 2 years ago | (#36616082)

GSA (General Services Administration) is switching to Gmail as part of their migration to the "cloud" you wonder who got the bribe to make this stupidity happen. After many relatively trouble free years with Lotus Notes, the airheads hear the new marketing-speak buzzwords "Cloud Computing" and to impress their equally airheaded managers and to look smart they decided to move from a proven enterprise class application to somthing oriented towards small business and end user applications.

If the lack of any serious security wasn't enough, the fact that a US government function now is at the whim of all the civilian (non governmental) connectivity issues that keep popping up from time to time!

Good thing their keeping their Notes servers up for the time being.

Every time I hear some luser mention the "cloud" I want to scream!

     

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (1)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#36616410)

Since I host my own mail accounts, and don't want to have to maintain my own web interface to them, having a mail client comes in rather handy.

Also, assuming adequately skilled programmers, a purpose-built locally-running app is almost always going to work better than something kludged together in a web browser.

Re:Who uses Thunderbird? (1)

tftp (111690) | more than 2 years ago | (#36616750)

Since I host my own mail accounts, and don't want to have to maintain my own web interface to them, having a mail client comes in rather handy.

It takes maybe 15 minutes to install Open-Xchange [oxpedia.org] and it works just fine.

Postbox 2.5 came out today too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36614574)

http://www3.postbox-inc.com/?/blog/tags/tag/postbox+2.5

The release notes didn't mention one thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36614596)

...how horrifically ugly it is.

And yet on Windows 7 at least, it looks like an abomination. I hope you like LOTS of Aero Glass!

http://i.imgur.com/tptrF.png

Re:The release notes didn't mention one thing (1)

trum4n (982031) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614720)

Everybody needs to stop this tabs shit. Chrome sucked for a reason. Also, exchange? please? my damn school uses it.

Also has same weakness as FireFox X.X (1)

sehlat (180760) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614650)

Namely, plug-in compatibility still sucks. Plugins that do really really useful things, such as email redirect, have quit working.

A system of happy volunteers sounds like a great idea until you find out that the volunteers stop maintaining things for whatever reason.

Version jump? (1)

Vlijmen Fileer (120268) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614654)

I have 3.1.10 and thought I was quite up to date :s. Did I miss a whole version?

Re:Version jump? (2)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614706)

Nope! Thunderbird pulled a Winamp and skipped version 4 altogether.

Re:Version jump? (1)

Vlijmen Fileer (120268) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615348)

Hmmm, interesting. Would that indicate that skipping version numbers is somehow connected to producing non-standard, totally crappy user interfaces? :p

Re:Version jump? (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614876)

Because it uses the same Gecko version as Firefox, they opted to skip a version in the numbering system. It wouldn't have been as obnoxious had they not also skipped Firefox 4.1 in favor of Firefox 5.0.

Re:Version jump? (1)

Vlijmen Fileer (120268) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615274)

I feel skipping version numbers is only one step removed from the absolute worst versioning system of using random, not necessarily increasing numbers for each new update. Were these guys drunk or so?

Plugins for RSS feeds? (1)

WD (96061) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614682)

Um, no. Am I the only one who thinks this is a bad idea?

Re:Plugins for RSS feeds? (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614898)

I'm not sure why an email client should have an RSS reader incorporated into it. Seems more appropriate for a web browser, but that's just me.

Re:Plugins for RSS feeds? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615288)

Mail on Mac OS X has an RSS feed reader, and I find it useful to hit one place to get my news. It makes as much sense as having newsgroups and mail in the same client. Suppose it depends on what you're using RSS feeds for? Mine are mainly business related, so it fits in well alongside my morning read of my mail.

Re:Plugins for RSS feeds? (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615854)

To be honest I used to think that, but when you have a very old RSS field with 1000+ entries stored as bookmarks, its rather irritating.

Now with thunderbird its rather like receiving an email. In fact, RSS basically replaces the "sending newsletter by email", so its also more natural.

Support lifecycle? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36614738)

Anyone got a link to the current support lifecycle of Thunderbird?

Do we lose support for the previous version when the new version is released like we do with Firefox?

OK, and what is new? (3, Interesting)

mseeger (40923) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614816)

After having read the release notes, the improvement to the ordinary user still remains unclear. Sounds more like a patch than a new version...

The greatest change seems to be the gecko engine. But anyone who sends me HTML mail gets a reprimand anyway. Does anyone really uses HTML in emails? I mean seriously? I get and read about 100 mails per day and write 30-50. Percentage of HTML mail is, once you throw out the marketing spam, well below 1%.

What i really miss from Thunderbird is a better search interface. I want search terms like "from contains dummy.com and body contains upgrade and to is not me". For more complex searches, i currently create virtual folders (based on one search result) and then search within that folder. But even this method has its limits.

I have most of my emails (now 18 years) archived. Saved my ass on at least half a dozen occasions. But this means 12.000 mails archived per year (much less in 1993, but always growing). So searching becomes the main problem now.

CU, Martin

Re:OK, and what is new? (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614956)

Does anyone really uses HTML in emails?

Embedded pictures. Which of course is why spammers exclusively use HTML email.

Re:OK, and what is new? (1)

mseeger (40923) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615056)

Well, if you attach Images to a non HTML mail, they get shown by default too.... So even spammers could do without HTML mails, can't they?

Re:OK, and what is new? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615850)

The reason spammers use HTML images in emails is because if the image is loaded the spammer will automatically know that:
1. The client read the email
2. The client is now automatically worth more money because it was proven valid.

Re:OK, and what is new? (HTML) (1)

oldCoder (172195) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615794)

For rich text effects. Bold, code font, italic, decent looking quote of previous mail.

The GUI is 3D-accelerated (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615060)

and now it's got partial transparency. Those are the biggest things I notice.

Re:OK, and what is new? (1)

McLoud (92118) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615070)

Working with people on organizations over here, everyone uses a simple html template with their sig (simple html plus embedded company logo)

Re:OK, and what is new? (1)

callmebill (1917294) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615074)

I use HTML in email from time to time. I have scripts that generate small business reports (sales, basically) and use HTML to tabulate them, and then send that report in HTML form. The audience is business people, so they don't want a "table" made with monospace-fonts, and it would be overkill to attach a CSV or something like that. Ideally I would have a general purpose webserver where I could have my report hosted (or generated on demand), and just tell people "Look here when you're interested", rather than spamming them. But I'm not expecting a miracle! So anyway, as a /.er I am of the "plain text email only please" mindset, but I'm in the minority in my organisation and must adapt.

Re:OK, and what is new? (1)

mseeger (40923) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615618)

Valid example, but rarely used. I expected to see it more often when Netscape first announced HTML mail. They even showed off examples like the ones you mentioned...

Re:OK, and what is new? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615116)

What i really miss from Thunderbird is a better search interface. I want search terms like "from contains dummy.com and body contains upgrade and to is not me". For more complex searches, i currently create virtual folders (based on one search result) and then search within that folder. But even this method has its limits.

That is still in Thunderbird. Ctrl+Shift+F or Edit -> Find -> Search Messages

Re:OK, and what is new? (1)

mseeger (40923) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615412)

Not really, that search lets me create relatively simple querys. But you are right in so far, that my example is covered.

It can "and" or "or" all sub-searches but not mix both.

A typical problem is: I know the sending company but it has changed name and domain (in some cases several times). So i want to include several from-searches by "or". Then i want to nail down the content of the email by applying several keywords and "and"ing them.

I don't want a GUI but a query language. The GUI doesn't hurt me, so it can be left in the code ;-).

Also i would like to nail down the attachment type in the search, e.g. i know it was a PDF.

Another thing that would help would be regular expressions as search terms.

You see, i am always complaining :-).

CU, Martin

Faster UI (1)

pavon (30274) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615146)

Most of the user interface for Thunderbird and Firefox is implemented in XUL [wikipedia.org] which is rendered using Gecko. Any improvements to the engine, and in particular with JavaScript, will boost the performance of the application as a whole.

Re:Faster UI (1)

mseeger (40923) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615496)

I never noticed a performance problem with the GUI, but you may be right there for people with less powerfull machines....

Re:Faster UI (1)

pavon (30274) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615790)

Yeah, I haven't used it since version 1, when I was evaluating a replacement for Eudora on my parent's computer. Back then it was dirt slow on a P4, and I ended up recommending Pegasus for that reason, even though I thought Thunderbird was more user friendly. It's probably gotten a lot better since then.

I was just pointing out why a Gecko upgrade is more significant than just improved HTML emails.

Re:OK, and what is new? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615222)

I want search terms like "from contains dummy.com and body contains upgrade and to is not me". For more complex searches, i currently create virtual folders (based on one search result) and then search within that folder. But even this method has its limits.

CTRL + SHIFT + F

Re:OK, and what is new? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615828)

I index my OEM Mail (imap) usimg Solr, and searching with the Solr velocity, including carrot2-Basedow clustering. Nö Need for Thunderbird.

Re:OK, and what is new? (1)

ljw1004 (764174) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615842)

As a developer and program-manager, I use HTML for most of my email...

* When I'm sending code snippets, it's nice to have them colorized
* When I'm sending a list of feature options along with their pros/cons, it's nice to tabulate this
* When I'm sending normal prose, it's nice to use italic/bold
* When I'm sending a list of bugs, it's nice to make that a table
* When I'm sending action items, it's nice to highlight the "Must Act Now" recipient's name in yellow
* When I'm reporting bugs, it's nice to have screenshots in the email so I can write around them (rather than just referring to attachments by name)

Oh, and I'd prefer to write a numbered list in HTML rather than text, since that way it will wrap+flow properly on receipients' screens.

Re:OK, and what is new? (1)

firewrought (36952) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615936)

But anyone who sends me HTML mail gets a reprimand anyway. Does anyone really uses HTML in emails? I mean seriously?

I used to be like you (reprimanding people for not living in my black-and-white monospaced world) until I realized that colors, hyperlinks, inline images, and weighted fonts of varying sizes are helpful in communicating clearly and getting one's message across.

At one time these features were new (not readable by all recipients) and dangerous (not sandboxed appropriately), but that was years ago... it's time to leave the people using mutt and Outlook Express 5.5 behind.

Re:OK, and what is new? (1)

mseeger (40923) | more than 2 years ago | (#36616132)

I realized that colors, hyperlinks, inline images, and weighted fonts of varying sizes are helpful in communicating clearly and getting one's message across.

True, but those are usually longer texts which are attachments but not mails. But i have to confess that i can use underline and boldface without using HTML is something i use....

it's time to leave the people using mutt and Outlook Express 5.5 behind.

What's with the users of pine and elm? I know some of them ;-).

Thunderbird search SUCKS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36616264)

> What i really miss from Thunderbird is a better search interface.

Search is seriously broken. I don't want the pretty and sparse search results of recent versions.
There also is no indication of progress while a search is running

Re:OK, and what is new? (1)

paulkoan (769542) | more than 2 years ago | (#36616376)

Does anyone really uses HTML in emails? I mean seriously?

Certainly. Hopefully every email I send and receive is rich text aside from mailing lists and notifications.

Welcome to the new millennium where we don't *have* to use plain text for everything.

I bet they are holding their breath... (1)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614826)

...and hoping Asa doesn't go spouting off about how Thunderbird is horrible for managed email systems.

"releasing" doesn't really sound right (4, Interesting)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#36614940)

I think at this point, it's more of a "projectile vomited" rather then "released". Or at least it describes both the desirability of the stuff being excreted and the speed.

When it comes to email, reliability and functionality is FAR more important then any new features. Losing important/mission critical plug-ins to version crap can impact your real life in a vastly negative way.

Oh well, there's always outlook. Can't believe I'd actually consider moving back to MS software on email. But if Mozilla is hell-bent to ensure that I don't want to use plug-ins because they will be killed every month for several days if I'm lucky, and never released on time if not (finnish dictionary add-on, I'm looking at you), then I might as well go back to outlook.

At least it has proper spell checking in languages I need for my daily functioning.

Re:"releasing" doesn't really sound right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615432)

I hate to say this but I aggree with you. I love thunderbird but if they are going to screw it up what the point of using it.

Re:"releasing" doesn't really sound right (2)

starwed (735423) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615442)

I'm not saying you don't have reasons for considering switching back, but your post is incoherent to the point that I haven't the slightest idea what they are.

Fonts messed up - as in FIrefox (1)

jira (451936) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615124)

So they have caught up with Firefox having the fonts messed up. One has to manually set gfx.direct2d to false in config editor to have readable fonts (at least on Windows).

The whole Mozilla suite seems to go downhill.

Dropped support for PPC OSX (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36615304)

..once again
following Skype [slashdot.org] and Firefox 4 [mozilla.com], now Mozilla officially drops PPC to go Intel only. Same with Opera.

Sad. Now I have no choice but to use unpatched software.

Didn't we just get 3.1 two weeks ago? (1)

Tridus (79566) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615454)

Seriously. This update schedule is even more innane for email clients then it is for the web browser (where at least there might be something new in one of these releases). Now they're just releasing stuff for the sake of sticking to some retarded schedule, no matter how little sense it makes.

There's only one thing I ask for above all else in an email client: stability. I want it to work, and I want it to hassle me as little as possible. Mozilla seems like their new goal is to annoy people into submission.

Re:Didn't we just get 3.1 two weeks ago? (1)

Shark (78448) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615718)

Mozilla seems like their new goal is to annoy people into submission.

In the open software world, that's annoying people into finding better alternatives. When the numbers start dwindling, they'll pay attention to the problem. Let's hope for them it won't be too late.

3.x EOL? (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615574)

Is Tbird 3.x end of life like FF4? I can still see some 3.1.11 versions for some languages, but English is 5.0 only, and it doesn't seem that anything has 3.1.12 or 3.2. I let my distro update me; can anyone confirm if 3.1.11 auto updates to 5.0 (that will royally confuse my mom who computes by number).

version numbers (0)

utkonos (2104836) | more than 2 years ago | (#36615758)

Hey developers! It's much more annoying when you have version numbers like 0.9.3 or 0.10.1. Why are you afraid of version 1.x.x?

The new account setup continues to suck (3, Insightful)

Kargan (250092) | more than 2 years ago | (#36616012)

It won't let you create an account (even for testing purposes) using servers and settings that it can't "probe".

Working at a tech support firm as I do, the new account wizard that was implemented with TB3 is an absolute nightmare for users. I like TB better than MS mail clients in general, but they make us and our users' lives far more difficult than need be.

Do away with the "autoconfiguration" crap and just let people specify what they want, or at least make it optional to have TB "autodetect" everything, for cripes' sake. What's wrong with letting the end-user configure an account using any settings they want?

Re:The new account setup continues to suck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36616474)

You can create accounts that it can't probe. I'm not sure why you haven't seen this yet. After hitting continue on the first screen, click manual config on the lower left side. You can not save the account unless you change the auto detect drop downs to actual values, but that's not an issue for someone that wants to manually config. It should drop to this screen anyway if it can't figure out the settings. This was available in 3.0 and 4.0 (oh wait we skipped 4.0 for version envy) and 5.0.

Re:The new account setup continues to suck (1)

supersloshy (1273442) | more than 2 years ago | (#36616962)

True true. I've gotten that screen after it failed to automatically find the proper servers and it let me manually input my information just fine.

How is the new MS Live (vs Outlook Express?) (1)

Vegan Cyclist (1650427) | more than 2 years ago | (#36616954)

Curious if there are any other OE (Outlook Express) fans still out there - it's a nearly perfect mail no-frills client, imo... The only thing i'd like to see updated is an insta-spell feature like in practically every other program...

I know they've got an MS Live email client, how does it compare to OE?

Sorry this is off-topic from Thunderbird (i've tried a few releases, but never been happy with it), but obviously fans of mail clients (vs browser mail) will be reading this. =)

- Dave

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...