Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Ask Slashdot: Seamonkey vs. Firefox — Any Takers?

timothy posted about a year ago | from the problem-with-a-chromebox dept.

Firefox 302

Rexdude writes "Firefox continues to be criticized for their new versioning system and being a memory hog. People talk about Chrome, IE9, Opera as alternatives — but do Slashdotters ever use Seamonkey? I've never seen anyone mention it in any discussion on browsers. The successor to the original Mozilla Suite, it has a full-blown email/news/RSS client, Chatzilla, and an HTML editor. Also several other default features that would require separate extensions for Firefox. And they don't update their versions like crazy either; the current version is 2.13.1. I've been quite happy with it so far — it's snappier to use than Firefox. How many people on Slashdot use Seamonkey, and what has been your experience? (Note — I'm not affiliated with the project.)"

cancel ×

302 comments

Seriously? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742149)

Look, it's a version number. Who cares?

Re:Seriously? (5, Funny)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about a year ago | (#41742199)

Add-on developers.

Re:Seriously? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742553)

Set the maxversion to 50 and STFU

Re:Seriously? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742651)

Ok, but what are you going to do in a week from now? :)

Re:Seriously? (4, Funny)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about a year ago | (#41742933)

Use unsigned long long for version tracking. :P

Re:Seriously? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742233)

I think the point is you won't be getting interrupted every time you open the browser to update.

Couldn't care less if they just decided to skip to version 100, but I'm not using it again until they figure out how to be less annoying then a pop up penis pill ad.

Re:Seriously? (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#41742339)

Look, it's a version number. Who cares?

That wasn't his main point.

It has a WYSIWYG editor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742167)

and it is weak. As a browser and an editor.

Might be why it's so snappy?

Re:It has a WYSIWYG editor (2)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#41742421)

Actually I remember a year or two ago someone in Slashdot claiming the WYSIWYG editor of Seamonkey being one of the best. Dunno though, have not tried it.

Re:It has a WYSIWYG editor (1)

devjoe (88696) | about a year ago | (#41742433)

When I want a WYSIWYG HTML editor, which is not all the time, I use Seamonkey. The rest of the time I don't use it.

Re:It has a WYSIWYG editor (5, Funny)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year ago | (#41742813)

I dont always do WSIWYG HTML, but when I do, I prefer Seamonkey
FTFY

Re:It has a WYSIWYG editor (1)

Megane (129182) | about a year ago | (#41742543)

I would prefer that the editor simply not be there. Or at least remove the freaking menu key binding. I don't need to edit pages on a whim with a keystroke, much less at all, and control-E is too close to control-W and gets hit too much by accident. It can be changed, but you have to go in and unzip the right file, and remove the menu key binding, but then your work gets wiped a week later when there's an update.

Release weekly (5, Informative)

vlm (69642) | about a year ago | (#41742183)

And they don't update their versions like crazy either

LOL they release weekly just like FF, only difference being they increment the version # by less than 0.01 usually, instead of 1 like FF. Big deal.

http://www.seamonkey-project.org/news [seamonkey-project.org]

Re:Release weekly (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742341)

Yes. Big deal. Firefox versioning is utterly retarded.

Re:Release weekly (4, Interesting)

Vlad_the_Inhaler (32958) | about a year ago | (#41742415)

Seamonkey releases *Monthly*, along with Firefox - normally a day behind FF.
I use Seamonkey 80% of the time. They are often a release late in introducing new goodies but I see that as a good thing - new Firefox features are not always ready for the big time when first released. The UI does not change the way Firefox does, another good thing. I don't like having to work out the new way of doing something which worked perfectly well before.

Re:Release weekly (4, Interesting)

NReitzel (77941) | about a year ago | (#41742785)

What Vlad said.

I use a browser (seamonkey in fact) daily, however, perhaps 5% of my work involves looking up stuff on the internet, and almost none of my work involves "browsing" for something. Seamonkey is just functional. No Windows Dressing (sic), no Ferrocious Lion, just solid day to day use.

It ain't pretty, but it ain't broken, either.

Default Interface (2)

confusedwiseman (917951) | about a year ago | (#41742191)

The interface in the screenshots remind me of Netscape! for some reason.

Re:Default Interface (2)

AuMatar (183847) | about a year ago | (#41742461)

Because it is. Mozilla Suite was Netscape. SeaMonkey is the old Mozilla Suite. So the lineage is direct (although stuff has obviously been added). The question in my mind is what would you want out of a browser GUI that wasn't in Netscape/Mozilla? I haven't seen a single feature that's worth adding in any of the newer browsers, UI wise.

Re:Default Interface (1)

coats (1068) | about a year ago | (#41742547)

I agree -- and I like the unified environment. That's why I use seamonkey.

Re:Default Interface (2)

confusedwiseman (917951) | about a year ago | (#41742625)

Over time, browsers have evolved to utilize screen space more efficiently. SeaMonkey still has the massive navigation bar at the top with bookmarks. Consider current versions of Chrome, Firefox, and Internet Explorer. All have reduced the size of the navigation buttons at the top to allow focus on the content of the webpage. The ironic part is that now, people have cheap access to large screens. The first time I used Netscape, I think it was on a 13 inch monitor.

There's no feature that I feel is left out that should be demanded. I was hoping to encounter a discovery like the first time I found mouse gestures in Opera. Something different and fun for me to become attached.

Re:Default Interface (2)

AuMatar (183847) | about a year ago | (#41742969)

The navigation bar isn't that big, and can be minimized. But really the amount of screen space you save is negligible and I want that bar open- the back button is something I use every few minutes. The icons could probably be made a bit smaller, but eh, why bother?

Something different/new isn't the point of SeaMonkey. The point is *not* integrating all of the new fluff of Firefox/Chrome/Opera on the outside and keeping the same UI that's been working for 15 years. It's a browser for those of us who are sick of changes for the sake of change.

Re:Default Interface (1)

Sable Drakon (831800) | about a year ago | (#41742521)

Perhaps because Firefox and the Gecko engine as a whole is spawned from Netscape Navigator? Oh wait! It is.

*Crickets* (1)

Flipstylee (1932884) | about a year ago | (#41742193)

5 Minutes and no takers?

Re:*Crickets* (2, Funny)

vlm (69642) | about a year ago | (#41742241)

5 Minutes and no takers?

They're all trying to use seamonkey to fake the user-agent string so the apple keynote can be viewed.

Re:*Crickets* (4, Funny)

leromarinvit (1462031) | about a year ago | (#41742359)

They've already used their 5 minute data allowance for this month.

Nope (0)

elfprince13 (1521333) | about a year ago | (#41742205)

I'd heard of Seamonkey before but I'd never heard it explained what it was. I just assumed it was Firefox's unloved little brother, and that all the cool stuff was in Firefox. The fact that I'm getting first post for the first time in my /. career suggests I'm not alone in this.

Re:Nope (0)

elfprince13 (1521333) | about a year ago | (#41742225)

Dammit, sniped by logging in. Oh well.

Re:Nope (0)

Megane (129182) | about a year ago | (#41742659)

Sorry, but I beat you by a few years. I never hopped on the Firefox bandwagon, sticking with the old Mozilla through its renaming, and I was proven right by the absurd variety of UI and other changes that have been made to FF over the years. Seamonkey's UI now is where Firefox was in the 3.x days before they started chasing Chrome. As long as I can run ABP, I'm happy. (FWIW, I can't run it on my old PowerMac that I use for file storage and downloads because 2.1 for OS X is x86 only, and ABP is 2.1+ only.)

Re:Nope (5, Informative)

cant_get_a_good_nick (172131) | about a year ago | (#41742919)

A billion years ago.. well, maybe not.... This is all from memory. I didn't have anything specific to do with any of these groups, though my job depended on HTTP, HTML and web server programming, so I kept an interest.

Netscape as a company was toast. They had been beaten by IE, they weren't moving servers (I used Netscape's webserver once, and found it was pretty clunky compared to Apache even in those days). As they shrank, they what code they could to the Mozilla project.

So, now you have these smart and fast engineers, and with less corporate management you can let them run free and produce the greatest browser ever! Well, not really... it looked like Navigator, but with no market researchers telling them no, they're free to jam even more features in it. Lets keep usenet there, even though only geeks know what an NNTP server is. Lets keep mail and a web browser together. And lets add IRC chat, cause everyone uses IRC right? As for the shiny stuff under, lets rewrite COM to be cross platform! Lets write a cross platform XML based GUI! In short, it was a mess. It was crash prone, and even the shiny cool tech under was shiny and cool (the XML based GUI layout engine has been copied by many now, including Microsoft) it was not ready for prime time. It was just too big, too bulky to get right. And too much for the timelines they wanted to use. The fact that they coded a lot of other tools (Bugzilla, Tinderbox) didn't help timelines either. They had good ideas, its just the three goals "code everything", "code perfectly", and "release early and often" just don't mix.

As it stuttered, a group of Mozilla folks forked some of the code and made a lean mean browser. Since they thought Mozilla was bogged down, they wanted to rise from the ashes of Netscape and Mozilla, and called their fork Phoenix. Even early on, it was fast, lean, and got a lot of attention. Very early, it was obvious that this was the direction of Mozilla. Then the name changes. Eventually, Phoenix tech, the guys that make the BIOS on your box sued. They might want to have a webclient in the BIOS, and a Phoenix web browser may be confusing. OK, lets call it Firebird. And then we call the mail client Thunderbird, very cool. But wait, there is already an OpenSource project called Firebird. So, we get Firefox.

I like spankmymonkey (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742215)

FAP FAP bitches.

Re:I like spankmymonkey (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742257)

FAP FAP bitches.

While under the sea with the seamonkeys?

Re:I like spankmymonkey (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742301)

FAP FAP bitches.

While under the sea with the seamonkeys?

No with your mom.

I love it (2, Interesting)

AuMatar (183847) | about a year ago | (#41742221)

It doesn't have the asinine upgrade cycle of Firefox, it doesn't have the horrible GUI of firefox, and it's UI is stable. And that's what I want- I've been using a web browser for almost 2 decades, I don't want it to change unless there's a HUGE benefit. The last time that happened was tabs. Oh, and it crashes less, uses less memory, and seems to be more responsive. I see no reason for Firefox to even exist when SeaMonkey is such a better project, except that it keeps the idiots in charge of Mozilla busy.

Re:I love it (1)

dsavitsk (178019) | about a year ago | (#41742395)

I used SM for years, and I really liked it. I switched to Firefox when I got a new laptop with a smallish 16x9 screen. Firefox, when maximized, uses less of the screen's Y axis for chrome. Otherwise, I'd still use it.

Re:I love it (1)

Hatta (162192) | about a year ago | (#41742647)

Is Seamonkey plugin compatible with Firefox? Adblock Plus, NoScript, and Ghostery are the only reasons I still use Firefox. I make Firefox more usable with Pentadactyl, so I'd need something like that too.

Re:I love it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742841)

Depends on the plugin, but Adblock Plus & Ghostery definitely are no issue. I'm using them with Seamonkey as I write this.

Re:I love it (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742913)

When I started using SeaMonkey I was afraid of having to ditch my beloved trifecta of add-ons, but I found that Adblock Plus, NoScript, and Ghostery are available for SeaMonkey. Not sure about Pentadactyl.

Re:I love it (3, Informative)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year ago | (#41742857)

https://wiki.mozilla.org/SeaMonkey:Release_History#SeaMonkey_2.3_and_beyond [mozilla.org]
Stable releases will be more frequent (6-week release schedule) but with fewer changes, eliminating the need for minor releases. The aim is to release the stable versions right around a week of the release of the equivalent Firefox and Thunderbird.

You were saying? (and for the record, 2.2 was released a year ago)

Re:I love it (1)

nickittynickname (2753061) | about a year ago | (#41742937)

What UI issue? Its a web browser, it has tabs, forward and back button. If something changes slightly who cares. For me it never crashes and runs fast. I never run into memory issues -- it seems to use the same as chrome. Also, since when is a frequent upgrade cycle a bad thing.

Slashdot logo (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742227)

No wireless. Less space than a Nomad.

Lame.

No, thanks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742243)

Web-browser, advanced e-mail, newsgroup and feed client, IRC chat, and HTML editing made simple—all your Internet needs in one application.

I'll pass.

Maybe years of using Unix-like operating systems have rubbed off on me, but Seamonkey can die in a fire with every other multipurpose chimeric software abomination.

Re:No, thanks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742527)

I rubbed off a semon monkey this morning.

Seamonkey's great (1)

bpechter (2885) | about a year ago | (#41742263)

My kid and I both use it.
It's handy as both a browser, nntp and email client in one.
Even the html editor comes in handy for occasional quick stuff...

It's a good throwback to the old Netscape Navigator days and it's still being updated regularly.
I've been using that and Chrome.

Re:Seamonkey's great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742599)

But, is your kid 3 years old and running it on Windows 8?

Love It (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742267)

Never used firefox, still using seamonkey on 6 computers and install it on every computer I need to service.

Extra features prevent use (1)

54mc (897170) | about a year ago | (#41742275)

Unfortuantely for me, all of Seamonkey's "extra features" make it less desirable for me.

In fact, I can't use it at all on my work machine - no software that can access IRC allowed = no Seamonkey :(

Re:Extra features prevent use (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742455)

irc client is an add on - same as thunderbird - heck there is prob an IRC add on for firefox

Your work can (try) and lockdown seamonkey the same way but the fact is the whole user installable extensions / addons in both mozilla and to a lesser extent libreoffice is a bloody security nightmare.

Re:Extra features prevent use (1)

Megane (129182) | about a year ago | (#41742771)

The IRC client is built in. (I can see the "CZ" logo on my status bar.) I wish I could install it without the editor and e-mail client. It's a real pain in the ass when you accidentally click on "mail this link", then have to figure out how to cancel that properly. Back in the old days when it was still called Mozilla, the installer would let you prevent most of that stuff from installing.

Re:Extra features prevent use (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742883)

You can do that. I'm using it for daily browsing at work & at home on Linux & Windows, At work e-mail is Outlook only. No problem at all for the "Send this link" function.

Re:Extra features prevent use (2)

bolthole (122186) | about a year ago | (#41742593)

SO, you cant use a web browser then? what a shame.

(There are web-based irc clients/gateways. all that's required is javascript. cf: http://webchat.freenode.net/ [freenode.net] )

Yes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742297)

I use the composer. It's quick and easy for casual use.

One opinion (0)

mewsenews (251487) | about a year ago | (#41742305)

Why would I switch back to the full suite when Firefox was originally the leaner meaner version of the Mozilla suite?

Firefox started imitating Chrome so much that I just said screw it and switched to Chrome, why limit yourself to a poor imitation..

Re:One opinion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742495)

Chrome isn't open-source and Chromium has no actual releases.

Chromium (1)

coats (1068) | about a year ago | (#41742583)

...and is hard to build on non-*buntu systems.

My experience with semen (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742307)

Nothing too queer (I've never swallowed). Well, I usually don't.

Memory hog? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742317)

Firefox is not a memory hog anymore. In fact, it is one of the most (if not the most) frugal mainstream browsers today.

People should stop spreading 5 year old information without bothering to check first.

Re:Memory hog? (1)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | about a year ago | (#41742467)

Uh, say what? I regularly hit 800 MB with just 5-6 tabs, not immediately but since I don't reboot every day, it routinely still leaks memory and that adds up over a couple days. I'm at 16.0.1. Won't say it isn't my addons but since the behavior hasn't changed and Firefox 'supposedly' fixed the memory issues it doesn't appear they didn't solved them.

Re:Memory hog? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742621)

> Won't say it isn't my addons

I will: It's your addons.

Did you try disabling them all and running your long sessions?

Re:Memory hog? (3, Funny)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about a year ago | (#41742663)

Uh, say what? I regularly hit 800 MB with just 5-6 tabs, ...

Browse p0rn sites w/thinner girls. It uses less RAM.

Re:Memory hog? (1)

BZ (40346) | about a year ago | (#41742745)

Which tabs? Note that some web apps keep allocating more and more memory until you reload the page (e.g. Google Reader will do this) because they "cache" all sorts of stuff in global variables and whatnot.

So it's pretty easy to hit 800MB in all browsers with 5-6 tabs, especially if you leave them open for a while. :(

That said, I'd be interested in how the output of about:compartments for you compares to the list of 5-6 tabs you have open. What does about:memory say about where the memory is being used?

Re:Memory hog? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742503)

To do this they cheated, they won't maintain a tab in memory but will reload the website when you switch to the tab. It can be forced to maintain each tab but it is an obscure text file modification. You can't get to it from the UI period.

Firefox is still a memory hog if you don't allow the cheap tricks.

Their conceited destruction of the UI has stopped our shop from allowing them to update shit unless it's been tested and signed off by the CIO and he won't sign unless it's a security fix, any UI 'fixes' are shot down. We patch our own version of Firefox so that's reasonably trivial to do.

Re:Memory hog? (-1, Flamebait)

Dog-Cow (21281) | about a year ago | (#41742667)

You are a retarded idiot. And you're lying. Seriously, go kill yourself, or something else productive.

Hello AdBlock devs?? (4, Insightful)

rodrigoandrade (713371) | about a year ago | (#41742321)

I need ABP to block Slashvertisements!!

Re:Hello AdBlock devs?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742773)

How about a custom CSS style that blocks the summary and any sort of non slashdot link? I think it would really benefit the overall quality of the discussion.

Re:Hello AdBlock devs?? (1)

Megane (129182) | about a year ago | (#41742805)

WTF are you talking about? ABP works fine with Seamonkey 2.1 and later. The only difference I see is that the stop sign icon is in the lower right corner of the window instead of the upper right corner.

Re:Hello AdBlock devs?? (1)

Nimey (114278) | about a year ago | (#41742859)

Whoosh!

Careful! This is a trick!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742331)

It's really a choice of Blue vs Red.....

very sneaky rexdude

Seamonkey (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742345)

seamonkey every day of the week.

why have 2 memory hungry applications (thunderbird and FF) to maintain and manage/lockdown

when you can have just one.

Puppy Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742351)

I use Puppy Linux on a USB flash stick for all my "Live CD" needs. The only browser on there is Seamonkey, and it works great for my needs (which are typically related to troubleshooting and recovering from a dead Windows install).

eh (1)

Simmeh (1320813) | about a year ago | (#41742381)

Some of us never stopped using Mozilla.

I'm just switching to Seamonkey (1)

jez9999 (618189) | about a year ago | (#41742389)

I've used Firefox for ages, but they're so obsessed with turning the UI into Chrome I'm switching to Seamonkey to get the UI back to the Firefox 3 days. Tabs on bottom, and tou even get a proper status bar back again! It's designed for people that have a monitor larger than a postage stamp. And it's not designed for "the masses" - it's designed for (and by) more advanced users like myself, which hopefully means it won't start pandering to the latest UI gimmicks further down the line, either.

Re:I'm just switching to Seamonkey (1)

Microlith (54737) | about a year ago | (#41742435)

they're so obsessed with turning the UI into Chrome

But unlike Chrome you can reconfigure the UI. I run Release at work and Nightly at home, and since version 4 my UI has looked pretty much the same as it did under FF 3.6.

Re:I'm just switching to Seamonkey (1)

jez9999 (618189) | about a year ago | (#41742529)

Wait until they terminate tabs on bottom.

Re:I'm just switching to Seamonkey (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742631)

But unlike Chrome you can reconfigure the UI. I run Release at work and Nightly at home, and since version 4 my UI has looked pretty much the same as it did under FF 3.6.

What about:config settings have you tweaked? I've got a long list for 3.6, but stopped paying attention to Fx after that. I've thought about trying the newer Fx releases, but the thought of spending a few days to reconfigure it to look/feel like 3.6 fills me with dread.

Never had memory issues with 3.6, but I rarely enable JS and Flash. Usually tops out at about a gig, and I have my 3.6 configured to maximize memory use. (with 8G RAM, why the hell not have a 256M cache, and why the hell not cache 50 tabs in RAM?)

fu3k A trollkore (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742405)

I use IceCat 4.0.1 for daily browsing (1)

VAElynx (2001046) | about a year ago | (#41742413)

and seamonkey for things like opening URL on click, and other uses.

No one mentions it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742473)

It's funny you say that because I actually switched to it just recently due to a comment I read on /.

I'm not super tech savvy, I just want a browser that starts and works quickly, and doesn't crash when view a page with flash. Seamonkey fit the bill for me plus it has the nice old interface I remember from Firefox days of yore. I get all to use all my favorite Firefox plugins without trying to find some kind of half-assed version for Chrome (which I tried to use for about six months before giving up completely, it's just as bloated as Firefox with less community support.)

I am not affiliated with any tech company, I just like to use programs that work.

still great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742477)

I've been used Seamonkey since the Netscape Suite days. The main advantage, for me, it's that it did not suffer the dumbing down of interface that was a major design decision in Firefox. It's a browser for pros.

I use Pale Moon. (1)

kayditty (641006) | about a year ago | (#41742493)

I tried SeaMonkey quite a while back, having become overly annoyed at Firefox's increasing bloat and other antics (the inevitable feature creep trend of randomly changing around UI elements to no obvious benefit, for one.) it's essentially just what Netscape was to Navigator, or what Mozilla was to Phoenix/Thunderbird/Firefox. I think it's just as bloated and obnoxious on the whole.

there are plenty of lighter-weight Firefox forks without all the crud. I've enjoyed Pale Moon quite a bit. there are similar alternatives for Chrome users as well, such as Comodo (but it's proprietary.)

Re:I use Pale Moon. (1)

Megane (129182) | about a year ago | (#41742863)

it's essentially just what Netscape was to Navigator, or what Mozilla was to Phoenix/Thunderbird/Firefox

It's not "essentially" Mozilla. It IS main-line trunk Mozilla. They simply changed the name a few years ago.

Seamonkey is fine and stable but..... (3, Informative)

gelfling (6534) | about a year ago | (#41742555)

The latest turn of the crank is highly incompatible with most add ons. 75% of existing add ons, easily are incompatible. It's a bit less clunky and sluggish than FF.

more conservative UI and features (1)

Skylinux (942824) | about a year ago | (#41742557)

I like to use it because it is more conservative with features.
No "awesome bar" and when I open a new tab I will not share my browsing history with the people around me.

Seamonkey and Opera are my favorite browsers but I keep hitting a lot of rough edges with Opera lately so SM tends to be my primary browser.

SeaMonkey has the ugly new icons (1)

InvisiBill (706958) | about a year ago | (#41742581)

I'm sticking with my Firefox (actually Waterfox) because it has my old Qute-style them and looks just like it did years ago. SeaMonkey has the new icon style (combined with a few antique Netscape-style icons), so I'd just have to redo all my customizations again, with the only benefit being a bunch of other apps that I don't need in my browser (bloat).

The only reason to use SeaMonkey over Firefox is if you want the extra apps that it includes, as they're both based on the same core and the interface is completely customizable. Rather than switching away from Firefox because you don't like the interface, why not simply change it to your liking? Works for me anyway...

I've been using it since the beginning... (4, Interesting)

c.r.o.c.o (123083) | about a year ago | (#41742603)

I started off on Netscape, then Mozilla and now Seamonkey mainly because they all had a similar UI and set of features. When everybody was moving to IE6, I stuck with Netscape Communicator 4.72 for years while Mozilla was completely rewriting the code base. I think the first Mozilla I ran was M18. And when Mozilla decided to release FF as their main project, I switched to Seamonkey.

I still use an email client, so if I were to use FF or Chrome today I'd have to install two programs instead of one. There is another benefit. I always had Linux on my desktops, but not on laptops due to their weird hardware (try getting Optimus working in Linux). Mozilla and Seamonkey use the mbox file format both in Windows and Linux, so moving mail between the OSes was simple after a reinstall. Just copy over the files and you'd be done. I think Seamonkey is still the only cross platform email client.

That should be enough, but there are other reasons.

The bookmark structure in Seamonkey has remained the same since Communicator and until recently moving to a new computer was as simple as replacing an html file in the profile folder. Now it's a bit more complicated, to the extent that I have to import/export that same html file.

Seamonkey also has a lot of extra config options in the Preferences window compared to FF. In this respect FF feels completely dumbed down. I am aware FF and Seamonkey have virtually the same options in about:config, but modifying things means looking up values instead of just clicking an option.

TL;DR? I'm just too lazy to retrain my muscle memory with a new browser when I've been using Seamonkey and its predecessors for at least a decade and a half.

Re:I've been using it since the beginning... (1)

Nimey (114278) | about a year ago | (#41742921)

I think Seamonkey is still the only cross platform email client.

You'd be wrong. Thunderbird is. Likewise Alpine, Claws, Evolution, Gnus, GroupWise, IMP, KMail, Mulberry, Mutt, Opera Mail, Pine, and Sylpheed.

Nice and comfortable (1)

mcohrs (1044844) | about a year ago | (#41742623)

My home desktop runs Seamonkey. I have an archive of many years worth of emails on it, so I use it and Seamonkey as my mail history "way back machine". I do not suggest it is faster or better, but it is easy and, after long use, very comfortable - never had a major glitch with it. I think it is a good program.

Not again (1)

StripedCow (776465) | about a year ago | (#41742685)

Aaahh not another browser! We need fewer browsers, not more of them!
Please pull this story from Slashdot as soon as possible!

Re:Not again (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742849)

Seamonkey is a continuation of the Mozilla Suite. It was around long before Firefox. Firefox is the newb in this comparison! ;)

Pale Moon (1)

Michael O-P (31524) | about a year ago | (#41742689)

I've been using Pale Moon (a Firefox derivative) for about a year now as my primary browser, and I'm very happy with it. It has some stuff stripped out of it that seems to make it more stable, and there's a 64-bit version. http://www.palemoon.org/ [palemoon.org] for more info.

Tried it (1)

J_Darnley (918721) | about a year ago | (#41742717)

I tried it once and then stopped using it straight away when I saw that fraps was trying to render a frame rate on its windows. I'm fine with my Firefox 3.6

SeaMonkey is a step backward (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742743)

SeaMonkey is a step backward, to the old idea of needing a separate desktop app for every task. The 21st century way of doing things is much better, with HTML5+ based Web Apps for things like mail, chat, newsgroups / forums, etc.

Chromium / Chrome beats Firefox in performance benchmarking [futuremark.com] , compatibility [html5readiness.com] , security [theregister.co.uk] , and innovative features, not to mention that it's an improvement over Firefox in licensing freedom. Chrome has highest browser market share [wikipedia.org] and growing, which means it should be the first browser used by Web developers for testing, and thus its users get a more polished Web experience. Firefox used to have more add-ons, but that's no longer the case.

It's just silly to still be using Firefox (or a Firefox / Gecko based browser) instead of Chrome.

--libman

Old-timer (1)

Dynamoo (527749) | about a year ago | (#41742763)

I've been using Seamonkey from the days when it was just the Mozilla browser. All the important Firefox extensions seem to work with it, and it renders most things just fine. It's more stable than Firefox and more traditional in its layout. Is it a lot better than Firefox? No. But it is a little different.. and it has a web editor and email client built in that are fine for occassional use.

Switched about 10 days ago (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742793)

Been using Firefox since version 0.8 (Firebird back then) and I was getting increasingly fed up with the bloating, stupid version numbering, UI changes and several nonsense they have been introducing lately. 10 days ago I gave SeaMonkey a try and I've couldn't been happier.

No Thanks (1)

PhillyMeeks (884443) | about a year ago | (#41742829)

Having recently switched from Firefox to Chrome, I'm not looking to make another change. It would have to have exclusive features which save me time or solve a need for me to even take a look at this point. I haven't seen anything suggesting SeaMonkey does either.

Extension support (1)

partyguerrilla (1597357) | about a year ago | (#41742873)

Does it support extensions yet? I remember that being the main issue with the, formerly known as, mozilla suite. I also find it hilarious how Firefox started as a lightweight version of seamonkey.

I do (4, Interesting)

chebucto (992517) | about a year ago | (#41742879)

I never switched from Netscape, really -

Netscape
Mozilla Suite
Seamonkey

The switch from Mozilla Suite to Seamonkey was made against a cacophony of support for Firefox. Firefox then was like Chrome now - lean, mean, the future, in a word: cool.

People bitched and moaned about how the Mozilla Suite (and, by extension, Seamonkey) was burdened by bundling its mail, news, chat, and html edit programs together; people wanted a lean-and-mean browser.

The tables are turned now, though. By avoiding all the pointless cool chrome (to use an expression), Seamonkey has managed to stay feeling light and purposeful.

Add to that the fact that
- the UI is stable
- the version numbers are sane (and the release schedule is sane, unlike what the current top post on this story says - maybe one minor release per month. very manageable)
- the prefs don't talk down to you
- it has mail and chat attached by default (I like that!)
- it has a single address/search bar
- it uses Gecko, so under-the-hood it's up-to-date
- when you spawn a new tab, the new tab appears at the extreme right, instead of displacing the existing tabs by spawning to the immediate right of your current tab
- the new-tab button is fixed in the extreme left of the tab bar, and doesn't jump around depending on how many tabs you have open atm

There are probably other things I could list. But in general, it _is_ a browser for people who know what they want: a browser that has a perfectly workable UI and does not change based on fashion. And a browser that has a modern HTML engine.

Unless and until the HTML engine becomes stale, I see no reason to change. I like my menu bars, I like spending a few extra horizontal pixels up to have back, forward, reload and stop buttons, I like having an attached mail client. Good design is good design no matter what decade it is.

I use seamonkey (1)

u17 (1730558) | about a year ago | (#41742895)

I've used it ever since they renamed mozilla to seamonkey. I've always liked searching from inside the address bar, which has been the main reason I did not switch to Firefox. I don't talk about it much in the same way I don't talk about using libgettext: it's just a browser, it gets the job done. Browsers and web development are overrated and overhyped.

Abandoned Firefox last yeary, I wish I did before (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742903)

My life is so much easier with SeaMonkey.

Less is more, indeed. But only when the user can customize it.

Yes i use seamonkey (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742923)

Its been my one and only browser since 2009. No complaints here!

Waterfox (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41742959)

Ive been using waterfox for maybe 6-8 months now. Its a purely 64bit version of firefox, built for speed with many of the increasingly annoying firefox parts left out. No forced plugin check or constant updating

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...