Re: 2.0 ?
Phillip Jones schrieb: As you are an applications Developer, you will never think like a user. I'm more of a user than a developer, actually. Still, primarily I'm a project manager, then a user, and sometimes I might peek into development for a bit. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Robert Kaiser wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: In a wor, yes. The form manager was left out, ant Phil Chee explained why. He also posted here that the form manager is being reconsidered, which is a good thing. Just as a note, I think it's clear to most people here, but I want to clearly state that we're of course not bringing the old form manager back - what we are considering (and we talked about that from the first minute, releasing 2.0 at all was just higher priority) is to integrate/adopt/build a new form data management that allows viewing, searching and deleting stored form data, similar (perhaps basing on) that existing add-on out there (can't remember the name right now) - you probably know which one I'm talking about. Also, we might look into possibilities to fill out multiple form fields with saved data at once, but we can't guarantee we find or adopt a good solution for that. I think that's exactly what Philip explained, just wanted to make that clear to put into perspective what is being reconsidered means here. And, this is of course stuff for a 2.1, which still has a few months until it comes out, and, also of course, help from you in the community is highly wanted on this! Robert Kaiser I am not say bring back the old code. That's silly. What I am saying is for two or three sit down and run SM 1.1.18 and the Forms Manager (and other options) and see what it actually does. If I could figure out how to open a copy without downloading some emails I would have to copy over, I'd open the old forms Manager and takes some screen shots. I am all for progress and if you can come up with new code to mimic it great. What gets at my craw is because the developers don't use a Feature they assume no one use that feature. What needs to be done is when creating a design is a year before the new design is to hit the air waves is is for the old version be opened and each menu item and preference be documented on paper and Items that would be useful for the messes of users figure out a way to do the same or similar in the new one. The forum Manager must have been useful for even FireFox, or some enterprising young person (or creaky old man for that matter) would not have come up with an extension. As soon as I found out about forms history Manager I downloaded it and installed it, in a Heart beat. It is not quite as easy to use as the previous, but I will make do. I have no choice. The problem with software design is everyone takes a meat axe approach whacking way and removing anything and everything the developers don't like, or don't use and see no use for. when the should be using a scalpel approach. Features were originally put in for a purpose. To make the user life better when using a browser or email Client. Developers should think like end users. Especially open Source developers where they are coding for the users; as opposed to the investors, and BOD, rather than the customers for purchased software. One reason I am such a poster boy for Forms Manager. Is I unlike most here are, I am not perfect. I make typing mistakes all the time. especially since I am a hunt and peck typist. I went to school back in the day when your manhood was question if you took typing, and I never was any great shakes at English, composition, and especially spelling. So it very easy and quite common to make mistakes in spelling. In fact with the Forms history extension I've already corrected a bunch of mistakes and need to run it again to tweak some more as I've added more entries. As an example I was a big fan of intuits Quicken from the day it was first introduced. I have quit using it in last few years when they changed the file format the banks were suppose to use to send and receive information about my accounts, to my quicken software. Well my bank is many of the 100's if not thousands of Banks that have refused to switch over. First because that means new software they must deploy and previously Intuit was just supplying it now they have to pay hundreds of dollars for it. Quicken has lost a big following. -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Ray_Net a écrit : Therefore, you consider SM2.0 all ok, because you were not affected. No. I consider SM2.0 OK because it does what it's meant to. S. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
S. Beaulieu wrote: Ray_Net a écrit : Therefore, you consider SM2.0 all ok, because you were not affected. No. I consider SM2.0 OK because it does what it's meant to. S. So you consider per exemple that the migration problems are normal ... and should not be avoided. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Robert Kaiser wrote: Ray_Net wrote: In my opinion, the migration issues are MAJOR ISSUES ... They are, but 1) they are really hard to get a grip on, as most people don't repeatedly test them, and being well-reproducible and well-reproduced is one of the major things to get well-reported specific problems fixed (I'll leave out for the moment that many of those problems are not well-reported bugs and not specificly enough described to even be able to try and reproduce them). 2) Once data is being migrated or otherwise moved to a new 2.0 profile, people are over those problems and never see them again - so while they are _very_ painful for the moment when they happen, the pain is completely gone once the data gets over to 2.0 in some way. Of course, we all would be happy if we didn't see those problems in the first place, but the only scenario I can see that we go mostly pain-free there is if someone comes up and spends a whole lot of time on the migration code, and we at the same time have some very specific reports of where we go wrong with exact circumstances that lead to the failures. And, as unfortunate as that is, I really doubt that someone will come up that easily - unless you are that someone and are lurking around here waiting to become the next SeaMonkey superstar. If you are, I'm all for casting you in that role as migration superman! We're trying to find solutions for some of the migration problems where we find out what exactly the problems are and where we know good ways to solve them. Still, please don't expect miracles from us. We're producing the best software we can with our relatively small team, but we know it might not be good enough for everybody - still we hope it is for most of you. Thanks for this clear explanation ... i agree with your point of vue. BTW i am reluctant for migration, because my profile has been corrupted by some SM bugs leaving me with an extra News (empty) channel visible and also some others empty and ghost ones ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Ray_Net a écrit : So you consider per exemple that the migration problems are normal ... and should not be avoided. No, they are a problem. It's just hard to pinpoint as the vast majority of people don't have them. It doesn't mean that no one is trying to solve them. But it's besides the point as we were talking about the Forms Manager. S. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Phillip Jones wrote: What I am saying is for two or three sit down and run SM 1.1.18 and the Forms Manager (and other options) and see what it actually does. Well, what I forgot to mention in the other message is that we just don't have those two or three people that can take aside a few days each to work on this. We are a very small team of people only working on anything SeaMonkey in their free time next to having a completely different day job, you know. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Phillip Jones wrote: The problem with software design is everyone takes a meat axe approach whacking way and removing anything and everything the developers don't like, or don't use and see no use for. Well, even if you don't want to hear this, I'd much rather use well-maintained code that doesn't exactly what the old code did than using a pile of code nobody does maintain, has grave flaws and which is breaking in unexpected ways with the environment changing around it - which was the case with the old wallet code (which for some strange reason did entangle form and password managers into a single thing code-wise). I for one am using the new form filling code a lot, while I never did use the old stuff because it was too complicated for what I wanted and didn't really prefill the stuff that I really cared about, while the new code mostly does (not that it can't be improved - help is wanted, as always). Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Ray_Net wrote: BTW i am reluctant for migration, because my profile has been corrupted by some SM bugs leaving me with an extra News (empty) channel visible and also some others empty and ghost ones Those problems that lead to corruption should be less in the new code we're using in SeaMonkey 2.0, from all we know, and we're working on improving that situation further in the future. From all we know, using 2.0 is safer in terms of profile data than 1.1.18 - that is, once your data is migrated over, which works fine for many people, but unfortunately not everyone. :-/ Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
John Boyle wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: question wrote: Is 2.0 a beta ? At this point official no. To the newsgroup: But from a USERS standpoint, a definite YES! :-( Only to a minority groups point of view I think. Mark (no real problems with SM 2 so far) -- http://www.masadsign.nl/logout/ ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Interviewed by CNN on 2/12/2009 23:36, John Boyle told the world: Phillip Jones wrote: question wrote: Is 2.0 a beta ? At this point official no. To the newsgroup: But from a USERS standpoint, a definite YES! :-( Speaking as someone who had *no* problems at all, whose migration went flawlessly (despite having a somewhat complex mail setup) and who now enjoys a lot of stuff that simply wasn't available for the old version, I have to disagree. No software *ever* hits the public in a perfect form. Bugs *will* be found. But calling it a beta because of it... well, by that logic, *all* software is beta. -- MCBastos This message has been protected with the 2ROT13 algorithm. Unauthorized use will be prosecuted under the DMCA. -=-=- ... I'm in a very clever and adorable insane asylum! * TagZilla 0.0661 * http://tagzilla.mozdev.org on Seamonkey 2.0 ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
M van Ketel a écrit : John Boyle wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: question wrote: Is 2.0 a beta ? At this point official no. To the newsgroup: But from a USERS standpoint, a definite YES! :-( Only to a minority groups point of view I think. Mark (no real problems with SM 2 so far) Ditto. S. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
M van Ketel wrote: John Boyle wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: question wrote: Is 2.0 a beta ? At this point official no. To the newsgroup: But from a USERS standpoint, a definite YES! :-( Only to a minority groups point of view I think. Mark (no real problems with SM 2 so far) no really true forms manager built in. Newsgroup post that suddenly mark themselves as read but you even read the first post, having to constantly rest the the msf files in newsgroups. Download manger that works but does not activate show up on top as did in SM 1.1.18 hit either N key or next button while in email or news does go to Director but does not open first message (I have a bug filled on this) Default Theme does not have grippies where you can click and drop to topic list so you can mass mark as read then click again so you can reopen the text box to read messages (in Mac version) because designers wanted to follow to the letter some stupid guideline Apple put out for look and feel). Simple email messages take for ever and a day to load. progress bar keeps running until I hit reload. Sending messages Progress bar keeps running then shows message copied successfully but I have to dismiss the window. Not knowing until it shows up whether it was sent. This is to name but a few. I could find some others or think of some others but I don't have time or inclination. It is faster, though -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Phillip Jones a écrit : no really true forms manager built in. That seems to be a feature people liked that hot discontinued. I won,t deny it's frustrating when it's something one uses constantly. That being said, considering the number of times it's been mentioned, either they'll re-add in a later version or someone will create an add-on for it. Doesn't make SM2.0 a beta. Newsgroup post that suddenly mark themselves as read but you even read the first post, having to constantly rest the the msf files in newsgroups. I don't have that problem. Newsgroups behave as they should. Maybe some of your settings are causing this? Download manger that works but does not activate show up on top as did in SM 1.1.18 The download manager acts as it should over here. There are some settings for it in Preferences, so you might want to look into that. hit either N key or next button while in email or news does go to Director but does not open first message (I have a bug filled on this) That I confirm. It's inconvenient, true, but I'd hardly call it a major bug. Default Theme does not have grippies where you can click and drop to topic list so you can mass mark as read then click again so you can reopen the text box to read messages (in Mac version) because designers wanted to follow to the letter some stupid guideline Apple put out for look and feel). Well, then the Apple guideline is to blame, not SM itself. Simple email messages take for ever and a day to load. progress bar keeps running until I hit reload. Sending messages Progress bar keeps running then shows message copied successfully but I have to dismiss the window. Not knowing until it shows up whether it was sent. No such problems here. This is to name but a few. I could find some others or think of some others but I don't have time or inclination. I'm sorry you seem to have such a miserable time of it, but it seems to be mostly a matter of preference about how things do work versus what you'd like them to (and I,m wondering if something in your systen or your settings might not explain some other of the problems you are experiencing). It doesn't make SM a bad or inadequate product. It more than mostly works as it should. It is faster, though Definitely! That's the first thing I noticed about it. And on my Win2K P4, it was much appreciated! S. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
S. Beaulieu wrote: Ray_Net a écrit : Ant wrote: On 12/2/2009 7:18 AM PT, question typed: Is 2.0 a beta ? No. But looks like :-) Why? Read all the posts in this newsgroup, you will see a *lot* of complains. Too much complains ... ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
MCBastos wrote: Interviewed by CNN on 2/12/2009 23:36, John Boyle told the world: Phillip Jones wrote: question wrote: Is 2.0 a beta ? At this point official no. To the newsgroup: But from a USERS standpoint, a definite YES! :-( Speaking as someone who had *no* problems at all, whose migration went flawlessly (despite having a somewhat complex mail setup) and who now enjoys a lot of stuff that simply wasn't available for the old version, I have to disagree. No software *ever* hits the public in a perfect form. Bugs *will* be found. But calling it a beta because of it... well, by that logic, *all* software is beta. when we see so much complains it would be better to maintain the beta status some time longer ... ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Ray_Net a écrit : Read all the posts in this newsgroup, you will see a *lot* of complains. Too much complains ... What I see is a lot of the same people complaining about the same problem many times. Or even just situations where we have to learn to do things in a different way. It looks like a lot of complaints even though there only are several. Minor problems are troublesome, but all new software have them. SM is no exception here. The more people use a software, the more stuff will show up. I don't think that's abnormal. Let me give you an example: do you know www.moviemistakes.com? As its name implies, it aims to list mistakes in movies. But the fact that a movie has hundreds of mistakes doesn't mean that the movie is bad or wasn't well-made: when you look at the list of the titles with the most entries, you realise that they are the most popular movies. So since way more people watched them, way more mistakes got submitted. Same thing here. Bugs will always be more obvious once a software is officially relesed than when only developers and beta testers are preparing it since way more people using way more specific system configurations will be using it. Features that people liked that got discontinued—it's definitely annoying, but it's not a problem or a bug. The one major problem I personally have was the CP one and as soon as it got reported, people got cracking and found a solution in no time. But as not everyone uses the same antivirus products, I don't think anyone could blame the developers for not seeing that one coming before the official launch. Plus, I'm still unconviced SM is to blame in this specific case. All in all, I honestly believe that no matter the bugs currently reported, SM2.0 is in no way a beta-quality product. Just consider the amount of outstanding bugs for current and previous versions of FF, TB, IE, etc. Sure, it should aim to be as bug-free as possible, but I don't think any software can ever achieve that stage. All in all, SM2.0 does what it's meant to do. S. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Ray_Net wrote: MCBastos wrote: Interviewed by CNN on 2/12/2009 23:36, John Boyle told the world: Phillip Jones wrote: question wrote: Is 2.0 a beta ? At this point official no. To the newsgroup: But from a USERS standpoint, a definite YES! :-( Speaking as someone who had *no* problems at all, whose migration went flawlessly (despite having a somewhat complex mail setup) and who now enjoys a lot of stuff that simply wasn't available for the old version, I have to disagree. No software *ever* hits the public in a perfect form. Bugs *will* be found. But calling it a beta because of it... well, by that logic, *all* software is beta. when we see so much complains it would be better to maintain the beta status some time longer ... I strongly disagree. They went through, I think 3 RC's. Versions were tested in house, then went to public alphas, betas, and RCs. The testing showed some major issues, which were corrected. most of the problems we are seeing here are minor, the exceptions being the migration issues, and the form manager. Any product that goes through a really major revision, and, under the hood, this might as well be a new product, is going to have issues like this. You think you are seeing complaints now? Wait til Thunderbird 3 reaches release. They are testing like crazy and fixing things,and delaying. I predict there will still be storm when it hits release. Wait til the software is perfect, and you might as well never release anything. Lee ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Ray_Net wrote: S. Beaulieu wrote: Ray_Net a écrit : Ant wrote: On 12/2/2009 7:18 AM PT, question typed: Is 2.0 a beta ? No. But looks like :-) Why? Read all the posts in this newsgroup, you will see a *lot* of complains. Too much complains ... Newsgroups are used mostly by users to seek answers to problems, so most posters will be people who have problems. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
S. Beaulieu wrote: Phillip Jones a écrit : no really true forms manager built in. That seems to be a feature people liked that not discontinued. I won't deny it's frustrating when it's something one uses constantly. That being said, considering the number of times it's been mentioned, either they'll re-add in a later version or someone will create an add-on for it. Doesn't make SM2.0 a beta. Newsgroup post that suddenly mark themselves as read but you even read the first post, having to constantly rest the the msf files in newsgroups. I don't have that problem. Newsgroups behave as they should. Maybe some of your settings are causing this? Download manger that works but does not activate show up on top as did in SM 1.1.18 The download manager acts as it should over here. There are some settings for it in Preferences, so you might want to look into that. hit either N key or next button while in email or news does go to Director but does not open first message (I have a bug filled on this) That I confirm. It's inconvenient, true, but I'd hardly call it a major bug. Wasn't in SM 1.1.18 I'd consider it a bug. Default Theme does not have grippies where you can click and drop to topic list so you can mass mark as read then click again so you can reopen the text box to read messages (in Mac version) because designers wanted to follow to the letter some stupid guideline Apple put out for look and feel). Well, then the Apple guideline is to blame, not SM itself. No the blame is following the guideline to the letter to the point of destroying a useful feature. thing is any add on themes have them. Is Apple jumping up and down. No. what they are more interested in its that items such a File, edit. view, options, tools, window, and help and other items on main menu are in exactly the same place and that the control items on each of the menus are in the exact same Place. Simple email messages take for ever and a day to load. progress bar keeps running until I hit reload. Sending messages Progress bar keeps running then shows message copied successfully but I have to dismiss the window. Not knowing until it shows up whether it was sent. No such problems here. Didn't show up in SM1.1.18. This is to name but a few. I could find some others or think of some others but I don't have time or inclination. I'm sorry you seem to have such a miserable time of it, but it seems to be mostly a matter of preference about how things do work versus what you'd like them to (and I,m wondering if something in your systen or your settings might not explain some other of the problems you are experiencing). It doesn't make SM a bad or inadequate product. It more than mostly works as it should. It is faster, though Definitely! That's the first thing I noticed about it. And on my Win2K P4, it was much appreciated! S. I've checked all my settings and they are carbon copies of setting I used in 1.1.18 -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
S. Beaulieu wrote: ---snip--- Features that people liked that got discontinued—it's definitely annoying, but it's not a problem or a bug. It is when people depend upon them. ---snip--- -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Phillip Jones a écrit : Well, then the Apple guideline is to blame, not SM itself. No the blame is following the guideline to the letter to the point of destroying a useful feature. But what's the point of having a guideline if no one uses it? Standards are standards. You can't pick and choose which part of them to keep. It's all or nothing. If you want to complain, complain to Apple. The SM team did what they were required to and should be lauded for it. S. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Phillip Jones a écrit : Features that people liked that got discontinued—it's definitely annoying, but it's not a problem or a bug. It is when people depend upon them. it's a problem *for them*, but it's not a SeaMonkey problem as the software acts as it's meant to. That's what I meant. S. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
My sole complaint about SM 2. is the removal of form manger - my objections come from two directions: 1) the feature was used by many of us for many years and was somewhat unique among browsers, and 2) the removal of a feature is not an improvement, and adding insult to injury, some here seem ready to dismiss those of us who used that function- telling us to make do with a firefox handme down. Firefox is nice - I have a copy on one my machines, but if SM's claim to fame is to be reduced to saying were firefox and thunderbird in one package, what's the point? The number of complaints here and other places about the removal of form manger is just the tip of the iceberg- most don't complaint, they vote with their feet and go looking for a replacement. I've said before, but it bears repeating I am very aware of the debt I owe the unsung heroes who have kept SM going, my rumbling here in no way reduces that, but at the same time I feel it appropriate to remind those here that SM IN ITS ORIGINAL concept was part of the true linage of Netscape and that is its true claim to fame. Restore form manager ... isOn Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:35:27 -0500, Phillip Jones pjon...@kimbanet.com wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Ray_Net wrote: MCBastos wrote: Interviewed by CNN on 2/12/2009 23:36, John Boyle told the world: Phillip Jones wrote: question wrote: Is 2.0 a beta ? At this point official no. To the newsgroup: But from a USERS standpoint, a definite YES! :-( Speaking as someone who had *no* problems at all, whose migration went flawlessly (despite having a somewhat complex mail setup) and who now enjoys a lot of stuff that simply wasn't available for the old version, I have to disagree. No software *ever* hits the public in a perfect form. Bugs *will* be found. But calling it a beta because of it... well, by that logic, *all* software is beta. when we see so much complains it would be better to maintain the beta status some time longer ... I strongly disagree. They went through, I think 3 RC's. Versions were tested in house, then went to public alphas, betas, and RCs. The testing showed some major issues, which were corrected. most of the problems we are seeing here are minor, the exceptions being the migration issues, and the form manager. Any product that goes through a really major revision, and, under the hood, this might as well be a new product, is going to have issues like this. You think you are seeing complaints now? Wait til Thunderbird 3 reaches release. They are testing like crazy and fixing things,and delaying. I predict there will still be storm when it hits release. Wait til the software is perfect, and you might as well never release anything. Lee Actually 2 RC a notice was put up after the second one about it being wrong wait for the third which followed a day later. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
S. Beaulieu wrote: Phillip Jones a écrit : Features that people liked that got discontinued—it's definitely annoying, but it's not a problem or a bug. It is when people depend upon them. it's a problem *for them*, but it's not a SeaMonkey problem as the software acts as it's meant to. That's what I meant. Therefore, you consider SM2.0 all ok, because you were not affected. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Leonidas Jones wrote: Ray_Net wrote: MCBastos wrote: Interviewed by CNN on 2/12/2009 23:36, John Boyle told the world: Phillip Jones wrote: question wrote: Is 2.0 a beta ? At this point official no. To the newsgroup: But from a USERS standpoint, a definite YES! :-( Speaking as someone who had *no* problems at all, whose migration went flawlessly (despite having a somewhat complex mail setup) and who now enjoys a lot of stuff that simply wasn't available for the old version, I have to disagree. No software *ever* hits the public in a perfect form. Bugs *will* be found. But calling it a beta because of it... well, by that logic, *all* software is beta. when we see so much complains it would be better to maintain the beta status some time longer ... I strongly disagree. They went through, I think 3 RC's. Versions were tested in house, then went to public alphas, betas, and RCs. The testing showed some major issues, which were corrected. most of the problems we are seeing here are minor, the exceptions being the migration issues, and the form manager. In my opinion, the migration issues are MAJOR ISSUES ... ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Ray_Net wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Ray_Net wrote: MCBastos wrote: Interviewed by CNN on 2/12/2009 23:36, John Boyle told the world: Phillip Jones wrote: question wrote: Is 2.0 a beta ? At this point official no. To the newsgroup: But from a USERS standpoint, a definite YES! :-( Speaking as someone who had *no* problems at all, whose migration went flawlessly (despite having a somewhat complex mail setup) and who now enjoys a lot of stuff that simply wasn't available for the old version, I have to disagree. No software *ever* hits the public in a perfect form. Bugs *will* be found. But calling it a beta because of it... well, by that logic, *all* software is beta. when we see so much complains it would be better to maintain the beta status some time longer ... I strongly disagree. They went through, I think 3 RC's. Versions were tested in house, then went to public alphas, betas, and RCs. The testing showed some major issues, which were corrected. most of the problems we are seeing here are minor, the exceptions being the migration issues, and the form manager. In my opinion, the migration issues are MAJOR ISSUES ... They are major for those who are experiencing them, which not everyone by any means. I migrated profiles on five machines, all without issue, Macs and Windows. If you think that the people who post here represent a majority of users, you are sadly mistaken. It is an issue surely, and a major one for those who experience it, but for most it has gone smoothly. Perhaps if some of the people who had migration problems had participated in the testing phase and shown a problem, something might have been done. I tested from the alphas on and reported no problem with the migration because I had none. Every time I installed a build from alpha 1 up, I trashed the previous profile to run the migration again, and every time it worked smoothly. It took a long time, since I have 20 email accounts and 11 new accounts, and the data is stored in a non default location. With that involved email profile, I fully expected the migration to fail, but it didn't. I did send a couple of crash reports during the alphas, but it really only crashed a couple of times. It would be fair to say that the project could have benefited from a wider body of testers, but based on those people who did test it wasn't broken. Lee ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Ray_Net wrote: S. Beaulieu wrote: Phillip Jones a écrit : Features that people liked that got discontinued—it's definitely annoying, but it's not a problem or a bug. It is when people depend upon them. it's a problem *for them*, but it's not a SeaMonkey problem as the software acts as it's meant to. That's what I meant. Therefore, you consider SM2.0 all ok, because you were not affected. In a wor, yes. The form manager was left out, ant Phil Chee explained why. He also posted here that the form manager is being reconsidered, which is a good thing. Firefox has gone a long time without a form manager, and it is the second most popular browser out there. Many people, myself included, really never used it. I didn't even notice it was gone until it was pointed out here. Now that I see how people have used it, obviously it is lacking, and the prospect of it being restored is good. HOwever to cite it as a cause to leave SeaMonkey in beta is just not sensible. By your logic, no software would ever reach a release point. Lee ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Ray_Net wrote: In my opinion, the migration issues are MAJOR ISSUES ... They are, but 1) they are really hard to get a grip on, as most people don't repeatedly test them, and being well-reproducible and well-reproduced is one of the major things to get well-reported specific problems fixed (I'll leave out for the moment that many of those problems are not well-reported bugs and not specificly enough described to even be able to try and reproduce them). 2) Once data is being migrated or otherwise moved to a new 2.0 profile, people are over those problems and never see them again - so while they are _very_ painful for the moment when they happen, the pain is completely gone once the data gets over to 2.0 in some way. Of course, we all would be happy if we didn't see those problems in the first place, but the only scenario I can see that we go mostly pain-free there is if someone comes up and spends a whole lot of time on the migration code, and we at the same time have some very specific reports of where we go wrong with exact circumstances that lead to the failures. And, as unfortunate as that is, I really doubt that someone will come up that easily - unless you are that someone and are lurking around here waiting to become the next SeaMonkey superstar. If you are, I'm all for casting you in that role as migration superman! We're trying to find solutions for some of the migration problems where we find out what exactly the problems are and where we know good ways to solve them. Still, please don't expect miracles from us. We're producing the best software we can with our relatively small team, but we know it might not be good enough for everybody - still we hope it is for most of you. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Leonidas Jones wrote: In a wor, yes. The form manager was left out, ant Phil Chee explained why. He also posted here that the form manager is being reconsidered, which is a good thing. Just as a note, I think it's clear to most people here, but I want to clearly state that we're of course not bringing the old form manager back - what we are considering (and we talked about that from the first minute, releasing 2.0 at all was just higher priority) is to integrate/adopt/build a new form data management that allows viewing, searching and deleting stored form data, similar (perhaps basing on) that existing add-on out there (can't remember the name right now) - you probably know which one I'm talking about. Also, we might look into possibilities to fill out multiple form fields with saved data at once, but we can't guarantee we find or adopt a good solution for that. I think that's exactly what Philip explained, just wanted to make that clear to put into perspective what is being reconsidered means here. And, this is of course stuff for a 2.1, which still has a few months until it comes out, and, also of course, help from you in the community is highly wanted on this! Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
On 12/2/2009 7:18 AM PT, question typed: Is 2.0 a beta ? No. -- Ladies and gentlemen, hoboes and tramps...Crosseyed Mosquitoes and bow-legged ants...I've come to tell you the story... --Bob Holman /\___/\ / /\ /\ \ Phil/Ant @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site) | |o o| | Ant's Quality Foraged Links (AQFL): aqfldotnet (use .) \ _ / Nuke ANT from e-mail address: phi...@earthlink.netant ( ) or ant...@zimage.com Ant is currently not listening to any songs on his home computer. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Ant wrote: On 12/2/2009 7:18 AM PT, question typed: Is 2.0 a beta ? No. But looks like :-) ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Ray_Net a écrit : Ant wrote: On 12/2/2009 7:18 AM PT, question typed: Is 2.0 a beta ? No. But looks like :-) Why? S. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
question wrote: Is 2.0 a beta ? At this point official no. -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 ?
Phillip Jones wrote: question wrote: Is 2.0 a beta ? At this point official no. To the newsgroup: But from a USERS standpoint, a definite YES! :-( ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 is buggy as hell and I'm not going to use it anymore
JAS wrote: I am using SM2 and have no problems with passwords, I have 11 accounts and all load automatically. No problems at all. Using Walnut theme and Win XP Pro. Maybe I tried to condense too much and my meaning was lost on the way! I have no problem with the passwords themselves, just with the boxes in which I type them. Since I refuse to save my passwords, I have to type them the forst time I launch Mail every day. In the previous versions of SM, one password window would appear, I'd type my password, press enter and then the next window would appear. Lather, rince, repeat. In 2.0, though, all the windows appear nonstop, one over another. That means that originally, I'd see the first window appear, start typing my password, but by the time I was done, several other windows had also appeared, successively stealing focus. Thus, my password was spread over several windows and by the time I pressed enter, I would always get a wrong password message (obviously). So now, I simply wait until all the windows have appeared, then go through them one by one, having to click on the next one every time since focus doesn't get passed over. It's a very minor problem IMHO, but it's the only one I still have. I remember seing a bug for it since 2.0 was launched, but I can't seem to find it again. I'm running on Win2K SP4 (and will hopefully get my new computer tomorrow—I'm keeping my fingers crossed!) S. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 is buggy as hell and I'm not going to use it anymore
S. Beaulieu wrote: JAS wrote: I am using SM2 and have no problems with passwords, I have 11 accounts and all load automatically. No problems at all. Using Walnut theme and Win XP Pro. Maybe I tried to condense too much and my meaning was lost on the way! I have no problem with the passwords themselves, just with the boxes in which I type them. Since I refuse to save my passwords, I have to type them the forst time I launch Mail every day. In the previous versions of SM, one password window would appear, I'd type my password, press enter and then the next window would appear. Lather, rince, repeat. In 2.0, though, all the windows appear nonstop, one over another. That means that originally, I'd see the first window appear, start typing my password, but by the time I was done, several other windows had also appeared, successively stealing focus. Thus, my password was spread over several windows and by the time I pressed enter, I would always get a wrong password message (obviously). So now, I simply wait until all the windows have appeared, then go through them one by one, having to click on the next one every time since focus doesn't get passed over. It's a very minor problem IMHO, but it's the only one I still have. I remember seing a bug for it since 2.0 was launched, but I can't seem to find it again. I'm running on Win2K SP4 (and will hopefully get my new computer tomorrow—I'm keeping my fingers crossed!) S. OK- I misunderstood and see your problem. I save my passwords and don't experience your problem. I hope they get it fixed for you. Happy Thanksgiving -- You either teach people to treat you with dignity and respect, or you don't. This means you are partly responsible for the mistreatment that you get at the hands of someone else. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 is buggy as hell and I'm not going to use it anymore
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 07:29:08 -0800 (PST), Jim jlong...@jaguar1.usouthal.edu in mozilla.support.seamonkey wrote: I'm extremely disappointed in Seamonkey 2.0. The mail program bugs are too severe to warrant continued use. ... Until the major bugs are fixed, I'll stick with version 1.18. I agree. jim ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 is buggy as hell and I'm not going to use it anymore
On 11/25/2009 9:48 AM PT, jim typed: I'm extremely disappointed in Seamonkey 2.0. The mail program bugs are too severe to warrant continued use. ... Until the major bugs are fixed, I'll stick with version 1.18. I agree. I miss this conversation. What issues are there right now? I am still using v1.1.18. -- If they are offered winged ants, people will eat them. --African /\___/\ / /\ /\ \ Phil/Ant @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site) | |o o| |Ant's Quality Foraged Links (AQFL): http://aqfl.net \ _ / Nuke ANT from e-mail address: phi...@earthlink.netant ( ) or ant...@zimage.com Ant is currently not listening to any songs on his home computer. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 is buggy as hell and I'm not going to use it anymore
Ant wrote: I miss this conversation. What issues are there right now? I am still using v1.1.18. I had the CP problem, but that was solved a while ago. The only problem I still have—and it's really minor—is that of the loss of control over the various successive password boxes for my multiple email accounts when I launch the Mail client. I have to wait until they have all appeared to input my password, clicking on each box separately instead of the control being treansferred automatically to the next one. Nothing more on my end, so I have no idea what those severe bugs are meant to be. S. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 is buggy as hell and I'm not going to use it anymore
S. Beaulieu wrote: Ant wrote: I miss this conversation. What issues are there right now? I am still using v1.1.18. I had the CP problem, but that was solved a while ago. The only problem I still have—and it's really minor—is that of the loss of control over the various successive password boxes for my multiple email accounts when I launch the Mail client. I have to wait until they have all appeared to input my password, clicking on each box separately instead of the control being treansferred automatically to the next one. Nothing more on my end, so I have no idea what those severe bugs are meant to be. S. I am using SM2 and have no problems with passwords, I have 11 accounts and all load automatically. No problems at all. Using Walnut theme and Win XP Pro. -- You either teach people to treat you with dignity and respect, or you don't. This means you are partly responsible for the mistreatment that you get at the hands of someone else. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 is buggy as hell and I'm not going to use it anymore
jim wrote: On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 07:29:08 -0800 (PST), Jim jlong...@jaguar1.usouthal.edu in mozilla.support.seamonkey wrote: I'm extremely disappointed in Seamonkey 2.0. The mail program bugs are too severe to warrant continued use. ... Until the major bugs are fixed, I'll stick with version 1.18. I agree. jim One bug they have fixed on the Mac side was clicking command -S to bring up Save menu and the Command -S again actually saving the file. It had been broken since SM 1.1.2 -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 is buggy as hell and I'm not going to use it anymore
Leonidas Jones wrote: Jim wrote: I'm extremely disappointed in Seamonkey 2.0. The mail program bugs are too severe to warrant continued use. I've come to expect better from Mozilla releases. I didn't use Firefox or Thunderbird because I didn't like the feel and they weren't integrated as a suite. Now Seamonkey has lost it's original feel. Things that I liked about Seamonkey are gone (quick launch, quick mail filter 'clear' button). I've reported two or three of the glaring problems (folder listings disappearing, compact related issues). Until the major bugs are fixed, I'll stick with version 1.18. I really do understand your frustration. To be completely honest with you, you can certainly return to 1.1.18. But you do have to realize that you are sticking with a complete dead end. You can do that. Heck there are people out there still running the last version of the Mozilla suite, Netscape 7.2, even a few still trying to get Communicator to work. The older the abandoned product gets, the less functional it becomes. For a good while, probably quite a while, 1.1.18 will continue to work, and work quite well. But the days are numbered and the clock is ticking. I doubt that you will see any security updates for the 1.1 line. If you value the suite approach, and if you want to have a product that is going to carry you into the future with any certainty, making 2.0 work is the only real way to go. The only other real option is to go Firefox/Thunderbird. Its a good option, but I am willing to bet that you will have just as much conversion problems going that route as you will staying with SeaMonkey. I am sorry this has been so difficult for you. Lee I believe that the biggest problem, is that bugs are most of the time never solved. Or ..too late. Per exemple did you expect a good date for the patch to solve the copy/cut problem https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=525601 ??? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 is buggy as hell and I'm not going to use it anymore
Interviewed by CNN on 4/11/2009 21:20, Ray_Net told the world: Leonidas Jones wrote: I believe that the biggest problem, is that bugs are most of the time never solved. Or ..too late. Per exemple did you expect a good date for the patch to solve the copy/cut problem https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=525601 ??? Actually, I had a look at that bug. Jens Hatlak suggested checking another bug ( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=334500 ), for a nearly identical problem that plagued Firefox back in 2006... which turned out to be caused by spyware. So, there's a fair chance that it isn't a Seamonkey bug at all, but a problem caused by spyware. Try some spyware scanner; some good free ones are Ad-Aware, Spybot and Malwarebytes. -- MCBastos This message has been protected with the 2ROT13 algorithm. Unauthorized use will be prosecuted under the DMCA. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 is buggy as hell and I'm not going to use it anymore
Jim wrote: I'm extremely disappointed in Seamonkey 2.0. The mail program bugs are too severe to warrant continued use. I've come to expect better from Mozilla releases. I didn't use Firefox or Thunderbird because I didn't like the feel and they weren't integrated as a suite. Now Seamonkey has lost it's original feel. Things that I liked about Seamonkey are gone (quick launch, quick mail filter 'clear' button). I've reported two or three of the glaring problems (folder listings disappearing, compact related issues). Until the major bugs are fixed, I'll stick with version 1.18. I really do understand your frustration. To be completely honest with you, you can certainly return to 1.1.18. But you do have to realize that you are sticking with a complete dead end. You can do that. Heck there are people out there still running the last version of the Mozilla suite, Netscape 7.2, even a few still trying to get Communicator to work. The older the abandoned product gets, the less functional it becomes. For a good while, probably quite a while, 1.1.18 will continue to work, and work quite well. But the days are numbered and the clock is ticking. I doubt that you will see any security updates for the 1.1 line. If you value the suite approach, and if you want to have a product that is going to carry you into the future with any certainty, making 2.0 work is the only real way to go. The only other real option is to go Firefox/Thunderbird. Its a good option, but I am willing to bet that you will have just as much conversion problems going that route as you will staying with SeaMonkey. I am sorry this has been so difficult for you. Lee ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 is buggy as hell and I'm not going to use it anymore
Jim wrote: I'm extremely disappointed in Seamonkey 2.0. The mail program bugs are too severe to warrant continued use. I've come to expect better from Mozilla releases. I didn't use Firefox or Thunderbird because I didn't like the feel and they weren't integrated as a suite. Now Seamonkey has lost it's original feel. Things that I liked about Seamonkey are gone (quick launch, quick mail filter 'clear' button). I've reported two or three of the glaring problems (folder listings disappearing, compact related issues). Until the major bugs are fixed, I'll stick with version 1.18. I will 2nd the Motion ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 is buggy as hell and I'm not going to use it anymore
Bush wrote: Jim wrote: I'm extremely disappointed in Seamonkey 2.0. The mail program bugs are too severe to warrant continued use. I've come to expect better from Mozilla releases. I didn't use Firefox or Thunderbird because I didn't like the feel and they weren't integrated as a suite. Now Seamonkey has lost it's original feel. Things that I liked about Seamonkey are gone (quick launch, quick mail filter 'clear' button). I've reported two or three of the glaring problems (folder listings disappearing, compact related issues). Until the major bugs are fixed, I'll stick with version 1.18. I will 2nd the Motion I'm not happy about Forms Manager as was in 1.1.8 being gone. I've been told you can correct mistakes by highlighting entry and then his delete. But it doesn't work. I've tried. I'll deal with it because I am not going back. But I don't like it. -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 - Forwarding Email does not pick up my Sig, the Sig works as expected in Compose
Pat Welch wrote: And neither does straight compose in this NG Compose works and the Sig appears as usual in my regular Email account. Huh? Go into account settings, Composition Addressing, and check Include signature for forwards. HTH Jens -- Jens Hatlak http://jens.hatlak.de/ SeaMonkey Trunk Tracker http://smtt.blogspot.com/ ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 - Forwarding Email does not pick up my Sig, the Sig works as expected in Compose
Jens Hatlak wrote: Pat Welch wrote: And neither does straight compose in this NG Compose works and the Sig appears as usual in my regular Email account. Huh? Go into account settings, Composition Addressing, and check Include signature for forwards. HTH Jens Huh - where did that setting come from? But big thanks! - that fixed the problem with all BUT this NG. WTF?? Checking that box fixed the no sig in all cases except for this NG. All settings appear the same as my other Email and NG accounts. Perhaps SM is prejudged against NG's with Mozilla in the name? :) -Pat insert sig here ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 - Forwarding Email does not pick up my Sig, the Sig works as expected in Compose
Pat Welch wrote: Jens Hatlak wrote: Pat Welch wrote: And neither does straight compose in this NG Compose works and the Sig appears as usual in my regular Email account. Huh? Go into account settings, Composition Addressing, and check Include signature for forwards. Huh - where did that setting come from? It's new in SM 2. But big thanks! - that fixed the problem with all BUT this NG. WTF?? Checking that box fixed the no sig in all cases except for this NG. All settings appear the same as my other Email and NG accounts. You understood that this is a per-account setting, no? ;-) HTH Jens -- Jens Hatlak http://jens.hatlak.de/ SeaMonkey Trunk Tracker http://smtt.blogspot.com/ ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 - Forwarding Email does not pick up my Sig, the Sig works as expected in Compose
Jens Hatlak wrote: Pat Welch wrote: Jens Hatlak wrote: Pat Welch wrote: And neither does straight compose in this NG Compose works and the Sig appears as usual in my regular Email account. Huh? Go into account settings, Composition Addressing, and check Include signature for forwards. Huh - where did that setting come from? It's new in SM 2. But big thanks! - that fixed the problem with all BUT this NG. WTF?? Checking that box fixed the no sig in all cases except for this NG. All settings appear the same as my other Email and NG accounts. You understood that this is a per-account setting, no? ;-) HTH Jens Umm, yep. I've even gone through a reboot after just updating my Ad-Aware, double checked all accounts (and especially this one) and in this reply there is no sig other than my manually typed in one. The sig here is a .txt file, but my other NG's are also the same .txt file and the sig appears when posting the other Ng's. Very weird. I'm on Vista 32 bit (sorry should have mentioned previously) -Pat Official two finger typed sig ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 and favicons
Stanimir Stamenkov wrote: You may also need to check Aggressively look for website icons when the page does not define one. NO. That preference shouldn't even exist. It enables non-standard behaviour that pisses people hosting the sites off. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 and favicons
Al wrote: Am I correct that SM 2.0 still cannot display favicons on the personal toolbar? No. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 RC1 theme
chicagofan wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: chicagofan wrote: LOL! They are pretty small on my laptop too, and that's what I use all the time now. I'll eventually remember them, but what drives me crazy is that they keep moving around. ;) Does that help anyone? If they move without any userChrome.css rules or such, then that's definitely a bug and should be filed, that's not intended. If that means, any rules that *I* have changed, then I have not, and I don't have any extensions that I have added either. If that means anything. :) It means you should file a bug then, yes. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 RC1 theme
chicagofan wrote: Gerald Ross wrote: Arnie Goetchius wrote: Gerald Ross wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Gerald Ross wrote: On installing RC1 the theme changed. The familiar icons for browser, address book, etc in the lower left are no longer there. In their place are strange icons of which only the envelope is at all familiar. Is there any way to get the old theme back? The icons that shouldn't have been there in any beta because they didn't fit with the rest of the new icons are gone and replaced with the now familiar look of the new icon set of the default theme. You know, SeaMonkey 2.0 is not Netscape Communicator 4 any mo I have three XP computers running Beta2 and all have the old Icons as did this one before changing to RC1. Guess I'll have to get over it. Thanks, Bob. I have the same thing plus a laptop. I got over it and am 77. Can you beat that? Arnie, you're my hero. But it is hard to tell what the little blobs are on a notebook, as two of mine are, and on a little netbook they will be meaningless. I can still tell that one is an envelope. LOL! They are pretty small on my laptop too, and that's what I use all the time now. I'll eventually remember them, but what drives me crazy is that they keep moving around. ;) Does that help anyone? bj MS showed us in XP that icons should be hazy blue and look like something off an Olmec calendar. Now Seamonkey has one-upped Microsoft. It has a built in shell game! Actually this is not a complaint--I did nothing to bring SM 2 to fruition so how can I complain? Overall I like it. -- Gerald Ross Cochran, GA I'm out of bed and dressed. What more do you want? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 RC1 theme
Gerald Ross wrote: On installing RC1 the theme changed. The familiar icons for browser, address book, etc in the lower left are no longer there. In their place are strange icons of which only the envelope is at all familiar. Is there any way to get the old theme back? I'm too old to like change just for the hell of it. :) The icons that shouldn't have been there in any beta because they didn't fit with the rest of the new icons are gone and replaced with the now familiar look of the new icon set of the default theme. You know, SeaMonkey 2.0 is not Netscape Communicator 4 any more. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 RC1 theme
Robert Kaiser wrote: Gerald Ross wrote: On installing RC1 the theme changed. The familiar icons for browser, address book, etc in the lower left are no longer there. In their place are strange icons of which only the envelope is at all familiar. Is there any way to get the old theme back? I'm too old to like change just for the hell of it. :) The icons that shouldn't have been there in any beta because they didn't fit with the rest of the new icons are gone and replaced with the now familiar look of the new icon set of the default theme. You know, SeaMonkey 2.0 is not Netscape Communicator 4 any more. Robert Kaiser I have three XP computers running Beta2 and all have the old Icons as did this one before changing to RC1. Guess I'll have to get over it. Thanks, Bob. -- Gerald Ross Cochran, GA You have been selected for a secret mission. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 RC1 theme
Gerald Ross wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Gerald Ross wrote: On installing RC1 the theme changed. The familiar icons for browser, address book, etc in the lower left are no longer there. In their place are strange icons of which only the envelope is at all familiar. Is there any way to get the old theme back? I'm too old to like change just for the hell of it. :) The icons that shouldn't have been there in any beta because they didn't fit with the rest of the new icons are gone and replaced with the now familiar look of the new icon set of the default theme. You know, SeaMonkey 2.0 is not Netscape Communicator 4 any more. Robert Kaiser I have three XP computers running Beta2 and all have the old Icons as did this one before changing to RC1. Guess I'll have to get over it. Thanks, Bob. I have the same thing plus a laptop. I got over it and am 77. Can you beat that? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 RC1 theme
Arnie Goetchius wrote: Gerald Ross wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Gerald Ross wrote: On installing RC1 the theme changed. The familiar icons for browser, address book, etc in the lower left are no longer there. In their place are strange icons of which only the envelope is at all familiar. Is there any way to get the old theme back? I'm too old to like change just for the hell of it. :) The icons that shouldn't have been there in any beta because they didn't fit with the rest of the new icons are gone and replaced with the now familiar look of the new icon set of the default theme. You know, SeaMonkey 2.0 is not Netscape Communicator 4 any more. Robert Kaiser I have three XP computers running Beta2 and all have the old Icons as did this one before changing to RC1. Guess I'll have to get over it. Thanks, Bob. I have the same thing plus a laptop. I got over it and am 77. Can you beat that? Arnie, you're my hero. But it is hard to tell what the little blobs are on a notebook, as two of mine are, and on a little netbook they will be meaningless. I can still tell that one is an envelope. -- Gerald Ross Cochran, GA ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 RC1 theme
Gerald Ross wrote: Arnie Goetchius wrote: Gerald Ross wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Gerald Ross wrote: On installing RC1 the theme changed. The familiar icons for browser, address book, etc in the lower left are no longer there. In their place are strange icons of which only the envelope is at all familiar. Is there any way to get the old theme back? The icons that shouldn't have been there in any beta because they didn't fit with the rest of the new icons are gone and replaced with the now familiar look of the new icon set of the default theme. You know, SeaMonkey 2.0 is not Netscape Communicator 4 any mo I have three XP computers running Beta2 and all have the old Icons as did this one before changing to RC1. Guess I'll have to get over it. Thanks, Bob. I have the same thing plus a laptop. I got over it and am 77. Can you beat that? Arnie, you're my hero. But it is hard to tell what the little blobs are on a notebook, as two of mine are, and on a little netbook they will be meaningless. I can still tell that one is an envelope. LOL! They are pretty small on my laptop too, and that's what I use all the time now. I'll eventually remember them, but what drives me crazy is that they keep moving around. ;) Does that help anyone? bj ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 RC1 theme
chicagofan wrote: LOL! They are pretty small on my laptop too, and that's what I use all the time now. I'll eventually remember them, but what drives me crazy is that they keep moving around. ;) Does that help anyone? If they move without any userChrome.css rules or such, then that's definitely a bug and should be filed, that's not intended. I've not seen them move on my computers, but that's on Linux. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 RC1 theme
Robert Kaiser wrote: chicagofan wrote: LOL! They are pretty small on my laptop too, and that's what I use all the time now. I'll eventually remember them, but what drives me crazy is that they keep moving around. ;) Does that help anyone? If they move without any userChrome.css rules or such, then that's definitely a bug and should be filed, that's not intended. If that means, any rules that *I* have changed, then I have not, and I don't have any extensions that I have added either. If that means anything. :) The only thing different in the 2.o version/s from my 1.1.14 that was updated, is that I allowed Chatzilla to be installed and I've never done that before. I don't use it, but it's in the 2.0 RC1, and was not in the l.l. versions, if that matters or helps. BTW... I use html in e-mail, because all of my friends do... if that matters. However, the icons move around when I open messages, and when I close them, in html e-mails or newsgroup text posts. Is there any other info I can provide? :) Oh, yes... this is Windows XP2. bj ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 RC1 theme
Jens Hatlak wrote: On 10/12/2009 12:12 AM chicagofan wrote: However, the icons move around when I open messages, and when I close them, in html e-mails or newsgroup text posts. I see that the order of task icons is wrong in standalone message windows (Composer, AB, cZ, Mail, Browser instead of Browser, Mail, Composer, AB, CZ as in the rest of the application). Is that what you see? I see the above on WinXP, haven't checked Linux yet. KaiRo? I get the same condition (task icon order changes) on a laptop with Win XP SP3 @Karsten: Do you have an idea what could be wrong there? Tabmail regression perhaps? Greetings, Jens ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 RC1 theme
Jens Hatlak wrote: On 10/12/2009 12:12 AM chicagofan wrote: However, the icons move around when I open messages, and when I close them, in html e-mails or newsgroup text posts. I see that the order of task icons is wrong in standalone message windows (Composer, AB, cZ, Mail, Browser instead of Browser, Mail, Composer, AB, CZ as in the rest of the application). Is that what you see? I see the above on WinXP, haven't checked Linux yet. Yes, that's what I see in WinXP2... with messages opened. It switches when I compose mail or go back to the main window, to Browser, Mail, Composer, AB, CZ. bj ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 alpha 2 and v1.1.14
On 03/16/2009 08:14 PM, NoOp wrote: On 03/14/2009 03:29 PM, Stéphane Grégoire wrote: Stéphane Grégoire a tapoté, le 13.03.2009 10:24: The test would be nearer to my configuration by printing on the network. I should also test by cups on the network with a live CD. I will also test with XP Home and with this netgear. It works with an Ubuntu 8.10 Live CD with Seamonkey 2.0b1-pre :) May my Ubuntu with Lxde is wrong configured or LXDE has a bug? Stéphane Don't know... I've lxde on another system I can try tomorrow to see if I run into any printer issues. I just tried w/lxde across 2 routers (1 wireless, 1 fixed) and printed with no issues. Your problem isn't a SeaMonkey issue. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 alpha 2 and v1.1.14
NoOp wrote: On 03/13/2009 02:24 AM, Stéphane Grégoire wrote: Hi, NoOp a tapoté, le 12.03.2009 22:40: 1. Ubuntu 8.10 to networked 8.04 w/usb attached Canon MP750. 2. Ubuntu 8.04 to networked 8.10 w/usb attached Canon MP750. 3. Ubuntu 8.04 to wireless 8.04 w/usb attached Canon MP750. But the printer is on a router printer : http://www.netgear.com/Products/VPNandSSL/WirelessVPNFirewallRouters/FWG114P.aspx The test would be nearer to my configuration by printing on the network. I should also test by cups on the network with a live CD. I will also test with XP Home and with this netgear. Not sure why... all of my networked connections go via a linkys BEFVP41. And the wireless goes to both the BEFVP41 and a Netgear WGR614. I also occasionally print to a Brother printer that is connected only via an ethernet port (access both via wired and wireless routers). Do any of your other applications print via your FWG114P? In my situation, my printer is using cups: Description: Epson WorkForce 600 Device URL: usb://EPSON/WorkForce%20600 Make and Model: Epson LITE, Photo Image Print... I've provided a ppd file: eklite.ppd. Printing test pages via gnome's Printer Properties display works. Printing a So far, the only printing problem I had was via Seamonkey 2.0alpha on Fedora Core 9. OK, just found another app with printing problems: evince. So presumably something is wrong with my set up; I have no idea what could be wrong nor how to find it. It was hard enough just to find a combination to get printing to work, period. BTW, after a reboot, Seamonkey 2.0alpha finally went away and I had Seamonkey 1.1.14 back, so apparently Seamonkey 2.0alpha was cached. Is there a better way to clear the cache than to reboot? Regards, Chip Campbell Regards, Chip Campbell ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 alpha 2 and v1.1.14
Hi, Stéphane Grégoire a tapoté, le 13.03.2009 10:24: I will also test with XP Home and with this netgear. With XP Home it works fine! Stéphane -- http://pasdenom.info ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 alpha 2 and v1.1.14
Stéphane Grégoire a tapoté, le 13.03.2009 10:24: The test would be nearer to my configuration by printing on the network. I should also test by cups on the network with a live CD. I will also test with XP Home and with this netgear. It works with an Ubuntu 8.10 Live CD with Seamonkey 2.0b1-pre :) May my Ubuntu with Lxde is wrong configured or LXDE has a bug? Stéphane -- http://pasdenom.info ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 alpha 2 and v1.1.14
On 03/13/2009 02:24 AM, Stéphane Grégoire wrote: Hi, NoOp a tapoté, le 12.03.2009 22:40: 1. Ubuntu 8.10 to networked 8.04 w/usb attached Canon MP750. 2. Ubuntu 8.04 to networked 8.10 w/usb attached Canon MP750. 3. Ubuntu 8.04 to wireless 8.04 w/usb attached Canon MP750. But the printer is on a router printer : http://www.netgear.com/Products/VPNandSSL/WirelessVPNFirewallRouters/FWG114P.aspx The test would be nearer to my configuration by printing on the network. I should also test by cups on the network with a live CD. I will also test with XP Home and with this netgear. Not sure why... all of my networked connections go via a linkys BEFVP41. And the wireless goes to both the BEFVP41 and a Netgear WGR614. I also occasionally print to a Brother printer that is connected only via an ethernet port (access both via wired and wireless routers). Do any of your other applications print via your FWG114P? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 alpha 2 and v1.1.14
Hi, Robert Kaiser a tapoté, le 11.03.2009 15:02: Firefox 3 and SeaMonkey 2 directly hook into GNOME printing functionality there, so this sounds to me like GNOME printing isn't correctly set up... I will test it with Ubuntu 9.04 when the beta will be released (whith Gnome 2.26). Thanks for your reply. Stéphane -- http://pasdenom.info ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 2.0 alpha 2 and v1.1.14
On 03/12/2009 02:10 AM, Stéphane Grégoire wrote: Hi, Robert Kaiser a tapoté, le 11.03.2009 15:02: Firefox 3 and SeaMonkey 2 directly hook into GNOME printing functionality there, so this sounds to me like GNOME printing isn't correctly set up... I will test it with Ubuntu 9.04 when the beta will be released (whith Gnome 2.26). Thanks for your reply. Stéphane Rather than add more to the closed bug report; I tested with no issues (other than the standard SM print issues): 1. Ubuntu 8.10 to networked 8.04 w/usb attached Canon MP750. 2. Ubuntu 8.04 to networked 8.10 w/usb attached Canon MP750. 3. Ubuntu 8.04 to wireless 8.04 w/usb attached Canon MP750. All connections are cups ipp connections via port 631. Tested using SM 1.1.14, 1.1.15, 2.0a3, FireFox 3.0.7. I agree with Robert; you have other issues regarding your printing rather than SeaMonkey. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
