7/16/2023 0 Comments Mozilla seamonkey vs firefoxThere are millions of people in the world who use web browsers. > IMHO, are both stable and sufficiently robust to allow us - as developersĪs a user I don't think anything was ever off track. I have yet to see a GUI-based application that I can use as a filter in a data pipeline like I can with a tool such as sed. The unix-y way of doing things has more to do with being able to chain together small programs that act as filters than it does to large GUI-based applications. > But Firefox and Thunderbird are more in-keeping with the Unix-y way of I prefer the browser in the suite over Firefox. I use the suite, although I only have the browser installed. That's all fine and dandy save for the fact that the interface to Seamonkey's browser and Firefox are different. Posted 5:49 UTC (Thu) by TwoTimeGrime (guest, #11688) (Sea)Monkeys would have to fly out of my "you-know-where", before I'd go back to Mozilla. Today, if/when either Firefox or Thunderbird crash/lock-up (and that sometimes happens), the one doesn't take the other down with it. I moved from Mozilla to Phoenix/Minotaur from the start, with their shortcomings and bugs, and I've never looked back. In a Unix-y world of Free Open-Source Software, where Elm/Pine/Mutt are still standards for email MUAs, and the same for USENET readers, Mosaic begat Netscape, which begat Mozilla, and it was good.īut Firefox and Thunderbird are more in-keeping with the Unix-y way of doing things and, IMHO, are both stable and sufficiently robust to allow us - as developers and users - to get back on-track. Unix: where developers create multiple single-use applications, both character-based and GUI-based."it dices, it slices, it Juliennes fries!" Windows: where developers strive to conceptualize and create a single "killer app", which would be the Vegematic of software.Since the late 1980s, when Microsoft Windows was first introduced, there have been two paradigms for user applications: Posted 2:57 UTC (Thu) by horen (guest, #2514) Reason to expect that both projects will thrive in a year or two, thisĭecision may be seen as a good thing by all parties involved. Support code used by the Mozilla suite) is an added bonus. Support infrastructure (and, of course, Gecko engine and the rest of the The fact that the Foundation is providing the That suite is free software, however, so it can surviveĪbandonment by its creator as long as there are developers with the timeĪnd interest to maintain it. More successful (in terms of user adoption) than the full-blown Mozilla The Foundation's resources are limited, so it wants toĬoncentrate those resources on the standalone applications which are at theĬore of its stated plans - and which, it must be said, have been rather The Mozilla Foundation's motives in making this decision are easy to Primary concern, it seems, is that the SeaMonkey releases cannot appear to be New project about naming before this is all over. Name, though it appears that there may be a significant debate within the It also appears that it will be able to use the SeaMonkey SeaMonkey will be able to use the Mozilla support infrastructure - CVS,īugZilla, etc. The Mozilla Foundation claims to support this course of action. Porting back some of the better Firefox and Thunderbird features is also on AĬommonly-mentioned longer-term goal is moving over to XULRunner The developers are already looking beyond that milestone. The first priority will be to get a real 1.8 release out, but That group isĪlready organizing itself, and has posted a plan of sorts on the SeaMonkey home What's next, it seems, is that the Mozilla suite gets a new name (almostĬertainly "SeaMonkey," its longstanding name within the Mozilla Project)Īnd is developed and maintained by a group of volunteers. Have reason to believe that things would happen differently. And that decision isĬonsistent with the project's stated long-term goals, even if people did In any case, the decision has now been made. Left as an open item for discussion at the February 28 staff meeting. The confusion was also clearly to be found within the project itself, asĬan be seen by the fact that the question of whether a 1.8 release would Thinking this would be part of an official Mozilla Foundation People have done a non-trivial amount of work on 1.8 features, Product released by the Mozilla Foundation. Have caused some confusion about whether there would be a 1.8 There is no doubt that the series of 1.8 alpha and beta releases
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |