Re: Back to 1.18 - More
Philip Chee wrote: On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:16:19 +0100, Ray_Net wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: YMMV, but in any case, if we would not have moved to it, SeaMonkey would be dead by now. Why ? The Gecko 1.8 branch was abandoned by the Mozilla Core devs a long, long time ago. Only security and stability patches were then backported to that branch, not by Mozilla but by Linux distributors with long lived branches, but even that source of bug fixes seem to have dried up in the middle of 2009. Without a SeaMonkey 2.0 to migrate our users to. SeaMonkey would have died on the wine before the end of 2009. That's why the original plan to release SeaMonkey 2.0 in sync with Thunderbird 3.0 became fatal when Mozilla Messaging kept pushing back their release schedules, and pushing and pushing, until January 2010. So we took the decision to release SeaMonkey 2.0 at around Thunderbird 3.0b4 with the risk of a slightly unstable mailnews backend. But as the alternative was to let SeaMonkey die it wasn't really a choice. You will say the same after switching to SM 2.1 ? Unfortunately we may be forced to do that as well. Chrome seems to have lit a fire under the Firefox devs and they plan to abandon the 3.5 (Gecko 1.9.1) branch once Firefox 3.6 is out in early 2010 and Firefox 3.7 in late 2010. We had originally planned to keep 2.0 as our current branch for most of 2010. However it looks like we will need to release a 2.1 based on 1.9.2 (Firefox 3.6) somewhere in summer this year whether we like it or not. Phil Phil, I have waited several months to see the improvements in SM 2.x, but all I saw was a severely broken product. SM 2.x trashed my address books, pass words, forms, and all of the extensions I used for creating and testing we pages. In addition, SM2.x did not import my e-mail accounts and trashed all my business mail. I have gone back to SM 1.1.18 for the time being until I have the time to install FireFox and ThunderBird as individual programs and rebuild my business accounts and tools (extensions), or third party applications. Good luck with SM, I hope the developers finally get it right; what the had core users really want. Regards, Michael Gordon ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
Michael Gordon a écrit : SM 2.x trashed my address books, pass words, forms, and all of the extensions I used for creating and testing we pages. For the extensions, fair enough: not all of them are compatible (yet). And much have been said about doing away with the much loved form manager. But I don't see how version 2 could have trashed anything if you haven't done anything weird with either it or version 1 (or either or both of their profiles). The version 1 profile isn't used at all by version 2 (because it simply *can't* use it) and so sits untouched for you to go back to if needed, without anything changed in it. If version 2 trashed your version 1 address book and such, then I'd say it's a case of PEBKAC. S. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 12:56:20 -0600, Michael Gordon wrote: I have waited several months to see the improvements in SM 2.x, but all I saw was a severely broken product. SM 2.x trashed my address books, pass words, forms, and all of the extensions I used for creating and testing we pages. That's impossible. SeaMonkey 2.0 does not use the same profile or install location as SeaMonkey 1.1. SM 2.0 does not touch your 1.1 extensions, address books, passwords, etc at all. Perhaps what you meant is that 2.0 failed to import your 1.1 profile. You might not known that you can manually force migration using the -migration command line switch but if you had asked here we could have given you the right advice. Phil -- Philip Chee phi...@aleytys.pc.my, philip.c...@gmail.com http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief, oh Night, and so be good for us to pass. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
Philip Chee wrote: On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 13:07:33 -0500, Phillip Jones wrote: Philip Chee wrote: Fortunately now that we have made the big move from the old XPFE backend to the new toolkit, subsequent upgrades won't be as traumatic. If things work out upgrades will be as seamless as Firefox upgrades. For one thing there will not be any more profile migrations. You mean if the is a 3, 4, 5, 6 and so on of SM That it will just read your current Profiles?? If so that would be wonderful Just install the new application and star right where you left off. Well Firefox 3.6 uses the same profile system as Firefox 1.0. Although it is strongly recommended that you don't try to go back to Firefox 1.0 (or 2.0 or 3.0) with a profile that has been updated by Firefox 3.6. Ditto for Thunderbird. And of course Mozilla Suite profiles all the way back from 1.7 or even earlier are forward compatible until the end of the XPFE line at SeaMonkey 1.1. I don't see it being any different for SeaMonkey 2.0 going forward. Phil That's wonderful. No more worrying about having to convert profiles just install the new application and go. The way it should be. Just use what you already created. -- 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: Back to 1.18 - More
Philip Chee wrote: On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:16:19 +0100, Ray_Net wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: YMMV, but in any case, if we would not have moved to it, SeaMonkey would be dead by now. Why ? The Gecko 1.8 branch was abandoned by the Mozilla Core devs a long, long time ago. Only security and stability patches were then backported to that branch, not by Mozilla but by Linux distributors with long lived branches, but even that source of bug fixes seem to have dried up in the middle of 2009. Without a SeaMonkey 2.0 to migrate our users to. SeaMonkey would have died on the wine before the end of 2009. That's why the original plan to release SeaMonkey 2.0 in sync with Thunderbird 3.0 became fatal when Mozilla Messaging kept pushing back their release schedules, and pushing and pushing, until January 2010. So we took the decision to release SeaMonkey 2.0 at around Thunderbird 3.0b4 with the risk of a slightly unstable mailnews backend. But as the alternative was to let SeaMonkey die it wasn't really a choice. You will say the same after switching to SM 2.1 ? Unfortunately we may be forced to do that as well. Chrome seems to have lit a fire under the Firefox devs and they plan to abandon the 3.5 (Gecko 1.9.1) branch once Firefox 3.6 is out in early 2010 and Firefox 3.7 in late 2010. We had originally planned to keep 2.0 as our current branch for most of 2010. However it looks like we will need to release a 2.1 based on 1.9.2 (Firefox 3.6) somewhere in summer this year whether we like it or not. Phil Thanks for this clear answer ... But we don't like to chenge, change and change again the versions this looks like Linux people compiling the kernel each month ... may be not this frequency, however we prefer to use a product instead of installing, installing .. again and again. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
Stanimir Stamenkov wrote: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:41:01 +0100, /Ray_Net/: Thanks for this clear answer ... But we don't like to chenge, change and change again the versions this looks like Linux people compiling the kernel each month ... may be not this frequency, however we prefer to use a product instead of installing, installing .. again and again. Don't you thinkg updating SeaMonkey, Firefox or Thunderbird through the automated updates mechanism is a piece of cake? I hate automatic updates. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
Ray_Net wrote: Stanimir Stamenkov wrote: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:41:01 +0100, /Ray_Net/: Thanks for this clear answer ... But we don't like to chenge, change and change again the versions this looks like Linux people compiling the kernel each month ... may be not this frequency, however we prefer to use a product instead of installing, installing .. again and again. Don't you thinkg updating SeaMonkey, Firefox or Thunderbird through the automated updates mechanism is a piece of cake? I hate automatic updates. If they work properly I love auto updates. In the past I've seen where an auto update was Bad and I ended having to go to site and download the application. On Mac its a piece of cake to replace the application with another version Drag the old application Icon (which is actually the entire application to trash open the .DMG file (Disk Image) drag the new version to application folder , double click to open and your set. -- 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: Back to 1.18 - More
Martin Freitag wrote: Philip Chee schrieb: On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:16:19 +0100, Ray_Net wrote: You will say the same after switching to SM 2.1 ? Unfortunately we may be forced to do that as well. Chrome seems to have lit a fire under the Firefox devs and they plan to abandon the 3.5 (Gecko 1.9.1) branch once Firefox 3.6 is out in early 2010 and Firefox 3.7 in late 2010. We had originally planned to keep 2.0 as our current branch for most of 2010. However it looks like we will need to release a 2.1 based on 1.9.2 (Firefox 3.6) somewhere in summer this year whether we like it or not. Is that bad? (e.g. that SM2.1 will be based on gecko 1.9.2) I guess (as a non-developer), the biggest change was the one from the old SM to the new toolkit stuff and won't cause severe changes while living in Gecko 1.9.x, especially not for the users. (like: oh, we have to abandon form-manager and half of the SM users crying, etc.) regards Martin Not Crying Pissed off (pardon my French). -- 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: Back to 1.18 - More
John Doue wrote: On 1/10/2010 12:13 PM, Stanimir Stamenkov wrote: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:41:01 +0100, /Ray_Net/: Thanks for this clear answer ... But we don't like to chenge, change and change again the versions this looks like Linux people compiling the kernel each month ... may be not this frequency, however we prefer to use a product instead of installing, installing .. again and again. Don't you thinkg updating SeaMonkey, Firefox or Thunderbird through the automated updates mechanism is a piece of cake? Yes, provided the update does not make incompatible extensions you are not prepared to do without ... Some extensions' author may have trouble updating as fast as the main product does. A point to consider and an important one, given the pivotal role customizing plays in the popularity of those products. Install MrTech extension that way you can block the compatibility check. Most that have been altered to work on SM 2 simply need the version check updated. -- 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: Back to 1.18 - More
On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:41:01 +0100, Ray_Net wrote: Thanks for this clear answer ... But we don't like to chenge, change and change again the versions this looks like Linux people compiling the kernel each month ... may be not this frequency, however we prefer to use a product instead of installing, installing .. again and again. Fortunately now that we have made the big move from the old XPFE backend to the new toolkit, subsequent upgrades won't be as traumatic. If things work out upgrades will be as seamless as Firefox upgrades. For one thing there will not be any more profile migrations. Phil -- Philip Chee phi...@aleytys.pc.my, philip.c...@gmail.com http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief, oh Night, and so be good for us to pass. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:41:01 +0100, Martin Freitag wrote:
Philip Chee schrieb:
On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:16:19 +0100, Ray_Net wrote:
You will say the same after switching to SM 2.1 ?
Unfortunately we may be forced to do that as well. Chrome seems to have
lit a fire under the Firefox devs and they plan to abandon the 3.5
(Gecko 1.9.1) branch once Firefox 3.6 is out in early 2010 and Firefox
3.7 in late 2010.
We had originally planned to keep 2.0 as our current branch for most of
2010. However it looks like we will need to release a 2.1 based on 1.9.2
(Firefox 3.6) somewhere in summer this year whether we like it or not.
Is that bad? (e.g. that SM2.1 will be based on gecko 1.9.2)
I guess (as a non-developer), the biggest change was the one from the
old SM to the new toolkit stuff and won't cause severe changes while
living in Gecko 1.9.x, especially not for the users. (like: oh, we
have to abandon form-manager and half of the SM users crying, etc.)
regards
The ability to import/migrate *some* data (I think global history) from
1.x profiles will be lost in 1.9.2. We had hoped to have most of our 1.x
users migrated to SeaMonkey 2.0 before switching to 2.1. As a workaround
I guess we can make a release note for 1.x users to upgrade to 2.0 first.
Other than that 1.9.2 is a significant improvement which will enable us
to do more fancy stuff (if only we had the developers to do it of course).
Phil
--
Philip Chee phi...@aleytys.pc.my, philip.c...@gmail.com
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
[ ]%{ 1 fish, %{ 2 fish, %{ red fish, %{ blue fish
* TagZilla 0.066.6
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
Philip Chee schrieb: The ability to import/migrate *some* data (I think global history) from 1.x profiles will be lost in 1.9.2. Download history actually. From all I know, global history will work for a longer time. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
Philip Chee wrote: On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:41:01 +0100, Ray_Net wrote: Thanks for this clear answer ... But we don't like to chenge, change and change again the versions this looks like Linux people compiling the kernel each month ... may be not this frequency, however we prefer to use a product instead of installing, installing .. again and again. Fortunately now that we have made the big move from the old XPFE backend to the new toolkit, subsequent upgrades won't be as traumatic. If things work out upgrades will be as seamless as Firefox upgrades. For one thing there will not be any more profile migrations. Phil You mean if the is a 3, 4, 5, 6 and so on of SM That it will just read your current Profiles?? If so that would be wonderful Just install the new application and star right where you left off. -- 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: Back to 1.18 - More
Phillip Jones wrote: Ray_Net wrote: Stanimir Stamenkov wrote: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:41:01 +0100, /Ray_Net/: Thanks for this clear answer ... But we don't like to chenge, change and change again the versions this looks like Linux people compiling the kernel each month ... may be not this frequency, however we prefer to use a product instead of installing, installing .. again and again. Don't you thinkg updating SeaMonkey, Firefox or Thunderbird through the automated updates mechanism is a piece of cake? I hate automatic updates. If they work properly I love auto updates. In the past I've seen where an auto update was Bad and I ended having to go to site and download the application. On Mac its a piece of cake to replace the application with another version Drag the old application Icon (which is actually the entire application to trash open the .DMG file (Disk Image) drag the new version to application folder , double click to open and your set. I don't mind auto updates if they give me a notice and choice to say no to them - I just trashed Google Chrome for that reason...stealth updates. I don't like that about Google Earth either, but I'm putting up with it just because I mostly trust where it's coming from and who's doing it - but I don't like the way they're doing it. Yeah - manual updates on a Mac are a breeze. And I recently grabbed a couple (free!) Widgets that will review and check all of my installs (both apps and widgets) and let me know what the latest versions are and link me to where I can grab them. -- - Rufus ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
Interviewed by CNN on 10/1/2010 16:07, Phillip Jones told the world: Philip Chee wrote: On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:41:01 +0100, Ray_Net wrote: Thanks for this clear answer ... But we don't like to chenge, change and change again the versions this looks like Linux people compiling the kernel each month ... may be not this frequency, however we prefer to use a product instead of installing, installing .. again and again. Fortunately now that we have made the big move from the old XPFE backend to the new toolkit, subsequent upgrades won't be as traumatic. If things work out upgrades will be as seamless as Firefox upgrades. For one thing there will not be any more profile migrations. Phil You mean if the is a 3, 4, 5, 6 and so on of SM That it will just read your current Profiles?? If so that would be wonderful Just install the new application and star right where you left off. Well, let me put it this way: SM now is using the same infrastructure as Firefox and Thunderbird, and plans on keeping doing so. If FF+TB ever decide to change their profiles substantially so that a profile migration will be necessary, *they* will have to solve that headache first. And it will be a *big* headache, since there are hundreds of millions of Firefox users out there. Personally, I think they will try to find ways to make it work with the current profiles. Even if a migration is needed, by the time the need to migrate reaches Seamonkey (SM can wait a few months to a year before migrating without much of a problem) the migrating subroutines will be very well debugged. So, while there *might* be future profile migrations some time in the far future (although none in the perceived horizon), it should be way less traumatic than this one. -- MCBastos This message has been protected with the 2ROT13 algorithm. Unauthorized use will be prosecuted under the DMCA. -=-=- ... BOFH excuse #261: The Usenet news is out of date * 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: Back to 1.18 - More
MCBastos wrote: Interviewed by CNN on 10/1/2010 16:07, Phillip Jones told the world: Philip Chee wrote: On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:41:01 +0100, Ray_Net wrote: Thanks for this clear answer ... But we don't like to chenge, change and change again the versions this looks like Linux people compiling the kernel each month ... may be not this frequency, however we prefer to use a product instead of installing, installing .. again and again. Fortunately now that we have made the big move from the old XPFE backend to the new toolkit, subsequent upgrades won't be as traumatic. If things work out upgrades will be as seamless as Firefox upgrades. For one thing there will not be any more profile migrations. Phil You mean if the is a 3, 4, 5, 6 and so on of SM That it will just read your current Profiles?? If so that would be wonderful Just install the new application and star right where you left off. Well, let me put it this way: SM now is using the same infrastructure as Firefox and Thunderbird, and plans on keeping doing so. If FF+TB ever decide to change their profiles substantially so that a profile migration will be necessary, *they* will have to solve that headache first. And it will be a *big* headache, since there are hundreds of millions of Firefox users out there. Personally, I think they will try to find ways to make it work with the current profiles. Even if a migration is needed, by the time the need to migrate reaches Seamonkey (SM can wait a few months to a year before migrating without much of a problem) the migrating subroutines will be very well debugged. So, while there *might* be future profile migrations some time in the far future (although none in the perceived horizon), it should be way less traumatic than this one. Hurray! No more Worrying about something breaking (fingers and toes, and legs, Crossed). -- 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: Back to 1.18 - More
Graham schrieb: Robert Kaiser wrote: All cases where you get a list on double-click on the field are the same cases that show a selection when starting to type. Password (and user name) fields also get automatically filled in if you only have exactly one username/password saved for that website. Once you know that, it actually is predictable. It may appear so, but in practice, it just does not work out like that. It most certainly does not have the consistent and predictable operation that SM1 had. I know you are highly resistant to the persistent criticism of password and forms handling, but for many people it has made SM2 a huge disappointment. I'm highly resistant to it becuase moving to the new components for thos was needed for survival of SeaMonkey, independent of us liking it or not - interestingly, after a few weeks of using the new stuff, I couldn't dream of going back to the old functionality, which I discovered to work worse for me than the new ones. YMMV, but in any case, if we would not have moved to it, SeaMonkey would be dead by now. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
Robert Kaiser wrote: YMMV, but in any case, if we would not have moved to it, SeaMonkey would be dead by now. Why ? You will say the same after switching to SM 2.1 ? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:16:19 +0100, Ray_Net wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: YMMV, but in any case, if we would not have moved to it, SeaMonkey would be dead by now. Why ? The Gecko 1.8 branch was abandoned by the Mozilla Core devs a long, long time ago. Only security and stability patches were then backported to that branch, not by Mozilla but by Linux distributors with long lived branches, but even that source of bug fixes seem to have dried up in the middle of 2009. Without a SeaMonkey 2.0 to migrate our users to. SeaMonkey would have died on the wine before the end of 2009. That's why the original plan to release SeaMonkey 2.0 in sync with Thunderbird 3.0 became fatal when Mozilla Messaging kept pushing back their release schedules, and pushing and pushing, until January 2010. So we took the decision to release SeaMonkey 2.0 at around Thunderbird 3.0b4 with the risk of a slightly unstable mailnews backend. But as the alternative was to let SeaMonkey die it wasn't really a choice. You will say the same after switching to SM 2.1 ? Unfortunately we may be forced to do that as well. Chrome seems to have lit a fire under the Firefox devs and they plan to abandon the 3.5 (Gecko 1.9.1) branch once Firefox 3.6 is out in early 2010 and Firefox 3.7 in late 2010. We had originally planned to keep 2.0 as our current branch for most of 2010. However it looks like we will need to release a 2.1 based on 1.9.2 (Firefox 3.6) somewhere in summer this year whether we like it or not. Phil -- Philip Chee phi...@aleytys.pc.my, philip.c...@gmail.com http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief, oh Night, and so be good for us to pass. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
Graham schrieb: Robert Kaiser wrote: Could you define the actual problem you're having and what's not decent in SM2 for that matter? My personal beef with SM2's forms and password handling is that it is entirely unpredictable. On a few sites, things are automatically filled in. On some, a double click in a field will get it filled. On some sites if you start typing you'll get a selection. All cases where you get a list on double-click on the field are the same cases that show a selection when starting to type. Password (and user name) fields also get automatically filled in if you only have exactly one username/password saved for that website. Once you know that, it actually is predictable. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
Robert Kaiser wrote: All cases where you get a list on double-click on the field are the same cases that show a selection when starting to type. Password (and user name) fields also get automatically filled in if you only have exactly one username/password saved for that website. Once you know that, it actually is predictable. It may appear so, but in practice, it just does not work out like that. It most certainly does not have the consistent and predictable operation that SM1 had. I know you are highly resistant to the persistent criticism of password and forms handling, but for many people it has made SM2 a huge disappointment. Graham. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 17:28:47 -0800, Rufus n...@home.com wrote: JohnW-Mpls wrote: In Dec I went back to 1.18 because my XP had a half dozen BSODs since I installed 2.0 in late Oct. I have not had a BSOD since returning to 1.18. Someone suggested running Ramtest incase the BSODs were caused by some RAM weakness. I did that - no ram errors. However, when removing and reinstalling SM versions, some other of my USB connected components seemed to run slowly - and it was plugged in via an old expansion hub. My internet (ethernet) was plugged into that same expansion hub and I wondered if some other internet activities were being affected by a slow expansion hub. So I swapped USB connections to get my internet on a USB port right on the motherboard. Eureka - all my internet action now seemed more crisp! My current postulation is the BSODs were caused by timing problems between the USB handling and SM 2.0. Not illogical that the new SM 2.0 base code expects tighter signal timing. (I could try proving this using Firefox Thunderbird on the old USB setup but...) I debated going back to SM 2.0 now but I'm spoiled by 1.18's much simpler handling of passwords for apps that require them. Question: is SM 2 going to be modified to handle passwords decently? And if so, about when might that change be expected? ...funny, I had a USB hub die on one of my Macs and also had a lot of issues until I figured out what the problem was, but I never really tied it to an app - it was just general problems. And I wouldn't figure that any problem would/could arise from a browsing suite unless your modem is networked via USB instead of wifi or Ethernet. Was/is that your case? No. I have ethernet/10baseT from my cable modem to a Belkin adapter which provides the USB for the computer (XP). -- JohnW-Mpls ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:39:20 -0600, Jay Garcia j...@jaynospamgarcia.com wrote: On 06.01.2010 07:13, JohnW-Mpls wrote: --- Original Message --- In Dec I went back to 1.18 because my XP had a half dozen BSODs since I installed 2.0 in late Oct. I have not had a BSOD since returning to 1.18. Someone suggested running Ramtest incase the BSODs were caused by some RAM weakness. I did that - no ram errors. However, when removing and reinstalling SM versions, some other of my USB connected components seemed to run slowly - and it was plugged in via an old expansion hub. My internet (ethernet) was plugged into that same expansion hub and I wondered if some other internet activities were being affected by a slow expansion hub. So I swapped USB connections to get my internet on a USB port right on the motherboard. Eureka - all my internet action now seemed more crisp! My current postulation is the BSODs were caused by timing problems between the USB handling and SM 2.0. Not illogical that the new SM 2.0 base code expects tighter signal timing. (I could try proving this using Firefox Thunderbird on the old USB setup but...) I debated going back to SM 2.0 now but I'm spoiled by 1.18's much simpler handling of passwords for apps that require them. Question: is SM 2 going to be modified to handle passwords decently? And if so, about when might that change be expected? What is your OS, not listed in the header. Running XP-Pro SP3 here and have not experienced any issues that you are having with USB - SM2 and so on. I also run remote desktop quite often with no problems. USB connections - 12 devices. I'm using XP with SP3. My PC has 8 USB ports on the montherboard. I think my problem was an old USB expansion hub. I got a new 4 port expansion hub ($4.95) and all hubs at the store were advertised to handle 480 Mbps. That speed may be only marketing hype but I cannot help but think that my old hub may well be slower. -- JohnW-Mpls ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 15:35:40 +0100, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: JohnW-Mpls schrieb: I debated going back to SM 2.0 now but I'm spoiled by 1.18's much simpler handling of passwords for apps that require them. Question: is SM 2 going to be modified to handle passwords decently? And if so, about when might that change be expected? Could you define the actual problem you're having and what's not decent in SM2 for that matter? Robert Kaiser Be happy to - but that will take a few minutes to properly describe. I'll post that when I get back from shopping. -- JohnW-Mpls ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
JohnW-Mpls wrote: On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:39:20 -0600, Jay Garcia j...@jaynospamgarcia.com wrote: On 06.01.2010 07:13, JohnW-Mpls wrote: --- Original Message --- In Dec I went back to 1.18 because my XP had a half dozen BSODs since I installed 2.0 in late Oct. I have not had a BSOD since returning to 1.18. Someone suggested running Ramtest incase the BSODs were caused by some RAM weakness. I did that - no ram errors. However, when removing and reinstalling SM versions, some other of my USB connected components seemed to run slowly - and it was plugged in via an old expansion hub. My internet (ethernet) was plugged into that same expansion hub and I wondered if some other internet activities were being affected by a slow expansion hub. So I swapped USB connections to get my internet on a USB port right on the motherboard. Eureka - all my internet action now seemed more crisp! My current postulation is the BSODs were caused by timing problems between the USB handling and SM 2.0. Not illogical that the new SM 2.0 base code expects tighter signal timing. (I could try proving this using Firefox Thunderbird on the old USB setup but...) I debated going back to SM 2.0 now but I'm spoiled by 1.18's much simpler handling of passwords for apps that require them. Question: is SM 2 going to be modified to handle passwords decently? And if so, about when might that change be expected? What is your OS, not listed in the header. Running XP-Pro SP3 here and have not experienced any issues that you are having with USB - SM2 and so on. I also run remote desktop quite often with no problems. USB connections - 12 devices. I'm using XP with SP3. My PC has 8 USB ports on the montherboard. I think my problem was an old USB expansion hub. I got a new 4 port expansion hub ($4.95) and all hubs at the store were advertised to handle 480 Mbps. That speed may be only marketing hype but I cannot help but think that my old hub may well be slower. The extra overhead needed to convert ethernet from / to usb can be a big slow down. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
JohnW-Mpls wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 15:35:40 +0100, Robert Kaiserka...@kairo.at
wrote:
JohnW-Mpls schrieb:
I debated going back to SM 2.0 now but I'm spoiled by 1.18's much
simpler handling of passwords for apps that require them. Question:
is SM 2 going to be modified to handle passwords decently? And if so,
about when might that change be expected?
Could you define the actual problem you're having and what's not
decent in SM2 for that matter?
Robert Kaiser
I hope the following helps, Robert. If not enough, what would you
like?
SM 1.18 vs 2.0 Password Insertion
SM 1.18
Within 2 seconds after getting a website's opening screen, 1.18 has
inserted the User ID and Password for that site. (This assumes that I
have clicked to save the password when at that site previously.) When
I go to GoDaddy where I have over a half dozen accounts, it can take 5
seconds for SM to bring up a little screen listing all my accounts,
from which screen I select the one account I want to open. At some
sites where I had not logged out from my previous visit, I never even
see the opening screen requesting ID P/W - I go right to their home
screen. At banking sites like Wells Fargo, the ID P/W are never
saved so never inserted by SM.
SM 2.0
(The following assumes that I have clicked to save the User ID
password when at that site previously.) All sites stop at the opening
screen waiting for the ID P/W. I don't remember ever seeing their
insertion without a bunch of clicking by me (right left clicks) to
get any saved data from SM. That takes 5-20 seconds, sometimes never,
and typically just the ID and that I have to move to the proper box on
the screen for the P/W to appear.
While using 2.0, I started to save sites IDs PWs so I could enter
them manually - I could do that faster and without the frustration of
hoping for SM to do something. I have over 100 sites in the password
manager and some vendors like to assign their own IDs so I cannot rely
on just a few for manual insertion. (I also have many passwords but
that is no problem - SM fills those in quickly once the ID is
identified.)
+ + + + + +
Note that I'm surprised that this situation is not well known to you.
It was mentioned in a number of messages right after 2.0 went from
beta to live at the end of October.
--
JohnW-Mplsjohn...@comcast.net 952-593-0954
It is known. its a new feature that was demanded by Bank/Financial
institutions. (Of course everyone assumes that if your saving
username/Passwords That you not encrypting and using a Master password.
(anyone not has rocks in their head). even if you save User
names/passwords they want show up until click in username box and type
at least the first letter of Username and same for password.
There is a couple of things to get back the old style:
Open Bookmarks and create a new Bookmark and give the name Remember Password
in location type the or copy/paste the following (all on the same line):
javascript:(function(){var%20ca,cea,cs,df,dfe,i,j,x,y;function%20n(i,what){return%20i+%22%20%22+what+((i==1)?%22%22:%22s%22)}ca=cea=cs=0;df=document.forms;for(i=0;idf.length;++i){x=df[i];dfe=x.elements;if(x.onsubmit){x.onsubmit=%22%22;++cs;}if(x.attributes[%22autocomplete%22]){x.attributes[%22autocomplete%22].value=%22on%22;++ca;}for(j=0;jdfe.length;++j){y=dfe[j];if(y.attributes[%22autocomplete%22]){y.attributes[%22autocomplete%22].value=%22on%22;++cea;}}}alert(%22Removed%20autocomplete=off%20from%20%22+n(ca,%22form%22)+%22%20and%20from%20%22+n(cea,%22form%20element%22)+%22,%20and%20removed%20onsubmit%20from%20%22+n(cs,%22form%22)+%22.%20After%20you%20type%20your%20password%20and%20submit%20the%20form,%20the%20browser%20will%20offer%20to%20remember%20your%20password.%22)})();
Then go to this Site and follow the direction given.
http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-remember-passwords/
Note the second Item you will have to repeat every time SM is updated.
Note these methods are not recommended by the SeaMonkey group.
But if your like me being 60 years old, and having 50-100 sites or more
I go to that require usernames and passwords if I had to remember all of
them I would be in an insane asylum and I don't feel like writing them
down in a log book. And If I did and it was to get stolen Then I would
be less secure.
--
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: Back to 1.18 - More
Robert Kaiser wrote: Could you define the actual problem you're having and what's not decent in SM2 for that matter? My personal beef with SM2's forms and password handling is that it is entirely unpredictable. On a few sites, things are automatically filled in. On some, a double click in a field will get it filled. On some sites if you start typing you'll get a selection. Finally, on some sites (which worked with SM1) nothing works at all. True, on SM1 some sites would not allow passwords to be saved, but how passwords (for the majority of sites, where they could be saved) and other form fields were handled was very consistent and it *worked*. Loss of functionality coupled with unpredictable behaviour (from one site to the next) makes SM2 very unpleasant to use. Graham. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
JohnW-Mpls wrote: On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 17:28:47 -0800, Rufusn...@home.com wrote: JohnW-Mpls wrote: In Dec I went back to 1.18 because my XP had a half dozen BSODs since I installed 2.0 in late Oct. I have not had a BSOD since returning to 1.18. Someone suggested running Ramtest incase the BSODs were caused by some RAM weakness. I did that - no ram errors. However, when removing and reinstalling SM versions, some other of my USB connected components seemed to run slowly - and it was plugged in via an old expansion hub. My internet (ethernet) was plugged into that same expansion hub and I wondered if some other internet activities were being affected by a slow expansion hub. So I swapped USB connections to get my internet on a USB port right on the motherboard. Eureka - all my internet action now seemed more crisp! My current postulation is the BSODs were caused by timing problems between the USB handling and SM 2.0. Not illogical that the new SM 2.0 base code expects tighter signal timing. (I could try proving this using Firefox Thunderbird on the old USB setup but...) I debated going back to SM 2.0 now but I'm spoiled by 1.18's much simpler handling of passwords for apps that require them. Question: is SM 2 going to be modified to handle passwords decently? And if so, about when might that change be expected? ...funny, I had a USB hub die on one of my Macs and also had a lot of issues until I figured out what the problem was, but I never really tied it to an app - it was just general problems. And I wouldn't figure that any problem would/could arise from a browsing suite unless your modem is networked via USB instead of wifi or Ethernet. Was/is that your case? No. I have ethernet/10baseT from my cable modem to a Belkin adapter which provides the USB for the computer (XP). -- JohnW-Mpls ...so then, you do actually have USB connectivity between your computer and the WAN net, right? Then I can see why you had a problem. -- - Rufus ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
Graham wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Could you define the actual problem you're having and what's not decent in SM2 for that matter? My personal beef with SM2's forms and password handling is that it is entirely unpredictable. On a few sites, things are automatically filled in. On some, a double click in a field will get it filled. On some sites if you start typing you'll get a selection. Finally, on some sites (which worked with SM1) nothing works at all. True, on SM1 some sites would not allow passwords to be saved, but how passwords (for the majority of sites, where they could be saved) and other form fields were handled was very consistent and it *worked*. Loss of functionality coupled with unpredictable behaviour (from one site to the next) makes SM2 very unpleasant to use. Graham. The big Password issue I have is the random requests for my Master Password that either freeze or crash SM. I put random in quotes because SM appears to ask for my Master when it is not required - I have my Pref set to ask for the Master only on first requirement, but the request comes up during downloads, reading NG, and/or navigating to sites which don't even need a password...then SM either freezes or crashes. The freezes were happening with 1.1.18, the crashes started with 2.0.1. If it would just behave as my Pref is set, all would be ok with me. -- - Rufus ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
On 06.01.2010 07:13, JohnW-Mpls wrote: --- Original Message --- In Dec I went back to 1.18 because my XP had a half dozen BSODs since I installed 2.0 in late Oct. I have not had a BSOD since returning to 1.18. Someone suggested running Ramtest incase the BSODs were caused by some RAM weakness. I did that - no ram errors. However, when removing and reinstalling SM versions, some other of my USB connected components seemed to run slowly - and it was plugged in via an old expansion hub. My internet (ethernet) was plugged into that same expansion hub and I wondered if some other internet activities were being affected by a slow expansion hub. So I swapped USB connections to get my internet on a USB port right on the motherboard. Eureka - all my internet action now seemed more crisp! My current postulation is the BSODs were caused by timing problems between the USB handling and SM 2.0. Not illogical that the new SM 2.0 base code expects tighter signal timing. (I could try proving this using Firefox Thunderbird on the old USB setup but...) I debated going back to SM 2.0 now but I'm spoiled by 1.18's much simpler handling of passwords for apps that require them. Question: is SM 2 going to be modified to handle passwords decently? And if so, about when might that change be expected? What is your OS, not listed in the header. Running XP-Pro SP3 here and have not experienced any issues that you are having with USB - SM2 and so on. I also run remote desktop quite often with no problems. USB connections - 12 devices. -- Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion www.ufaq.org Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
JohnW-Mpls schrieb: I debated going back to SM 2.0 now but I'm spoiled by 1.18's much simpler handling of passwords for apps that require them. Question: is SM 2 going to be modified to handle passwords decently? And if so, about when might that change be expected? Could you define the actual problem you're having and what's not decent in SM2 for that matter? Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - More
JohnW-Mpls wrote: In Dec I went back to 1.18 because my XP had a half dozen BSODs since I installed 2.0 in late Oct. I have not had a BSOD since returning to 1.18. Someone suggested running Ramtest incase the BSODs were caused by some RAM weakness. I did that - no ram errors. However, when removing and reinstalling SM versions, some other of my USB connected components seemed to run slowly - and it was plugged in via an old expansion hub. My internet (ethernet) was plugged into that same expansion hub and I wondered if some other internet activities were being affected by a slow expansion hub. So I swapped USB connections to get my internet on a USB port right on the motherboard. Eureka - all my internet action now seemed more crisp! My current postulation is the BSODs were caused by timing problems between the USB handling and SM 2.0. Not illogical that the new SM 2.0 base code expects tighter signal timing. (I could try proving this using Firefox Thunderbird on the old USB setup but...) I debated going back to SM 2.0 now but I'm spoiled by 1.18's much simpler handling of passwords for apps that require them. Question: is SM 2 going to be modified to handle passwords decently? And if so, about when might that change be expected? ...funny, I had a USB hub die on one of my Macs and also had a lot of issues until I figured out what the problem was, but I never really tied it to an app - it was just general problems. And I wouldn't figure that any problem would/could arise from a browsing suite unless your modem is networked via USB instead of wifi or Ethernet. Was/is that your case? -- - Rufus ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
On 27.12.2009 23:55, Ken Rudolph wrote: --- Original Message --- I have to say that last week I experienced the identical BSOD to the above while running SM 2.0.1. It's one of the only times in 28 years of running DOS and Windows on 11 different computers that this has happened. It hasn't recurred so far and my fingers are crossed. Interesting .. 28 years puts you at 1981, six years *prior* to the release of Windows 2.0 ... :-D And of course MS-DOS IBM PC Compatible was released in 1981 but didn't produce any BSOD's that I can remember. And in fact I still have a NEW copy of MS-DOS first release in a sealed box as well as Windows 2.0 in a new sealed box. Hmmm, eBAY ?? :-) Followup set to .general -- Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion www.ufaq.org Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
Jay Garcia wrote: On 27.12.2009 23:55, Ken Rudolph wrote: --- Original Message --- I have to say that last week I experienced the identical BSOD to the above while running SM 2.0.1. It's one of the only times in 28 years of running DOS and Windows on 11 different computers that this has happened. It hasn't recurred so far and my fingers are crossed. Interesting .. 28 years puts you at 1981, six years *prior* to the release of Windows 2.0 ... :-D And of course MS-DOS IBM PC Compatible was released in 1981 but didn't produce any BSOD's that I can remember. And in fact I still have a NEW copy of MS-DOS first release in a sealed box as well as Windows 2.0 in a new sealed box. Hmmm, eBAY ?? :-) Followup set to .general Given a choice of MSDOS or Windows if all applications would work on both systems I would chose DOS in a heart beat. :) ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
John wrote: Jay Garcia wrote: On 27.12.2009 23:55, Ken Rudolph wrote: --- Original Message --- I have to say that last week I experienced the identical BSOD to the above while running SM 2.0.1. It's one of the only times in 28 years of running DOS and Windows on 11 different computers that this has happened. It hasn't recurred so far and my fingers are crossed. Interesting .. 28 years puts you at 1981, six years *prior* to the release of Windows 2.0 ... :-D And of course MS-DOS IBM PC Compatible was released in 1981 but didn't produce any BSOD's that I can remember. And in fact I still have a NEW copy of MS-DOS first release in a sealed box as well as Windows 2.0 in a new sealed box. Hmmm, eBAY ?? :-) Followup set to .general Given a choice of MSDOS or Windows if all applications would work on both systems I would chose DOS in a heart beat. :) OH, so would I in a heartbeat! :) bj ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
In qi6dnwi9a_tfaaxwnz2dnuvz_i1i4...@mozilla.org, on 12/28/09 at 01:11 PM, chicagofan m...@privacy.net said: And of course MS-DOS IBM PC Compatible was released in 1981 but didn't produce any BSOD's that I can remember. And in fact I still have a NEW copy of MS-DOS first release in a sealed box as well as Windows 2.0 in a new sealed box. Hmmm, eBAY ?? :-) Followup set to .general Given a choice of MSDOS or Windows if all applications would work on both systems I would chose DOS in a heart beat. :) OH, so would I in a heartbeat! :) OS/2 would be even better, had IBM not given up on it. Alan -- -- ** Please use address alanh77[at]comcast.net to reply via e-mail. ** Posted using registered MR/2 ICE Newsreader #564 and eComStation 1.2R -- ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 18:22:55 -0600, John jmcken...@cableone.net wrote: JohnW-Mpls wrote: I switched back from 2.01 because it MAY have been the culprit that caused my system to crash 6 times in the last 2 months (after I moved to 2.0). Crashes were immediate appearance of a full blue screen with white text stating memory had been dumped and a cold boot is required - bad!! I've not seen one of those for years but I was in SeaMonkey when the last 2 happened - I don't remember about the first 4 times. I had no trouble reinstalling 1.18 - first uninstalled 2.01 and then did 1.18 - and it fired right up with its profile. I have had to do a number of little things to bring stuff up to date from the 10/29 date in the old profile directory. Side benefit - password insertion should work decently again. [grin] you should be able to look at event viewer and find out what caused the problems--look for Red X's What/where is Event Viewer? Hard to iimagine anything would be avaiilable to indicate what happend just prior to the crash. Only logical source would the the few lines of code (binary?) the BSOD displayed after it did a RAM dump. (I still want to call it a core dump!!!) JohnW-Mpls ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
On 12/28/2009 10:07 AM, Jay Garcia wrote: On 27.12.2009 23:55, Ken Rudolph wrote: --- Original Message --- I have to say that last week I experienced the identical BSOD to the above while running SM 2.0.1. It's one of the only times in 28 years of running DOS and Windows on 11 different computers that this has happened. It hasn't recurred so far and my fingers are crossed. Interesting .. 28 years puts you at 1981, six years *prior* to the release of Windows 2.0 ... :-D And of course MS-DOS IBM PC Compatible was released in 1981 but didn't produce any BSOD's that I can remember. And in fact I still have a NEW copy of MS-DOS first release in a sealed box as well as Windows 2.0 in a new sealed box. Hmmm, eBAY ?? :-) Followup set to .general Reminds me of when I got out of the Air Force, job ads were asking for people with 5 years experience on the IBM 360-30. That was in 1968, and the 360-30 came out in 1964. sigh. -- Ron Hunter - rphun...@charter.net ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
JohnW-Mpls wrote: On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 18:22:55 -0600, Johnjmcken...@cableone.net wrote: JohnW-Mpls wrote: /snip/ you should be able to look at event viewer and find out what caused the problems--look for Red X's What/where is Event Viewer? Hard to iimagine anything would be avaiilable to indicate what happend just prior to the crash. Only logical source would the the few lines of code (binary?) the BSOD displayed after it did a RAM dump. (I still want to call it a core dump!!!) JohnW-Mpls http://www.liutilities.com/articles/what-is-windows-event-viewer/ Lee ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
On 09-12-28 11:07 AM, Jay Garcia wrote: Followup set to .general Just a note to anyone replying to Jay's post: Jay put mozilla.general in the newsgroups header, not the followup-to header, so your replies will still show up in mozilla.support.seamonkey. If you reply, make sure you remove mozilla.support.seamonkey from the newsgroups header. Thanks. -- Chris Ilias http://ilias.ca List-owner: support-firefox, support-thunderbird, test-multimedia Keeper of the Knowledge Base: https://support.mozilla.com/kb/ ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
JohnW-Mpls wrote: On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 18:22:55 -0600, John jmcken...@cableone.net wrote: JohnW-Mpls wrote: I switched back from 2.01 because it MAY have been the culprit that caused my system to crash 6 times in the last 2 months (after I moved to 2.0). Crashes were immediate appearance of a full blue screen with white text stating memory had been dumped and a cold boot is required - bad!! I've not seen one of those for years but I was in SeaMonkey when the last 2 happened - I don't remember about the first 4 times. I had no trouble reinstalling 1.18 - first uninstalled 2.01 and then did 1.18 - and it fired right up with its profile. I have had to do a number of little things to bring stuff up to date from the 10/29 date in the old profile directory. Side benefit - password insertion should work decently again. [grin] you should be able to look at event viewer and find out what caused the problems--look for Red X's What/where is Event Viewer? Hard to iimagine anything would be avaiilable to indicate what happend just prior to the crash. Only logical source would the the few lines of code (binary?) the BSOD displayed after it did a RAM dump. (I still want to call it a core dump!!!) JohnW-Mpls control Panel-Administrative-Tools-event Viewer ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
JohnW-Mpls wrote: I switched back from 2.01 because it MAY have been the culprit that caused my system to crash 6 times in the last 2 months (after I moved to 2.0). Crashes were immediate appearance of a full blue screen with white text stating memory had been dumped and a cold boot is required - bad!! I've not seen one of those for years but I was in SeaMonkey when the last 2 happened - I don't remember about the first 4 times. I had no trouble reinstalling 1.18 - first uninstalled 2.01 and then did 1.18 - and it fired right up with its profile. I have had to do a number of little things to bring stuff up to date from the 10/29 date in the old profile directory. Side benefit - password insertion should work decently again. [grin] you should be able to look at event viewer and find out what caused the problems--look for Red X's ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
Martin Freitag wrote: JohnW-Mpls schrieb: I switched back from 2.01 because it MAY have been the culprit that caused my system to crash 6 times in the last 2 months (after I moved to 2.0). Crashes were immediate appearance of a full blue screen with white text stating memory had been dumped and a cold boot is required - bad!! I've not seen one of those for years but I was in SeaMonkey when the last 2 happened - I don't remember about the first 4 times. It is highly unlikely that SM causes bluescreens. Bluscreen on WinNT-based system are nearly always due to hardware failure (RAM, harddisk,...) or bad drivers (very close to hardware ;-)). I have to say that last week I experienced the identical BSOD to the above while running SM 2.0.1. It's one of the only times in 28 years of running DOS and Windows on 11 different computers that this has happened. It hasn't recurred so far and my fingers are crossed. I'd suggest reading the bluescreen which file caused the problem and/or writing down the STOP error code. If it does happen again I will do so. I was too panicked to do anything at the time but hard boot and start over. Also checking the RAM with memtest86, or performing harddisk diagnostic could be a wise idea. I'm pretty sure that the problem wasn't with RAM. Then again, I have no idea what caused the crash. Usually program crashes in XP3 don't go to BSOD, that's for sure. The weird thing is that SM 2 has been a lot more stable than any previous version of SM 1.X. I have yet to experience a normal program crash after several weeks, as opposed to maybe once a month with SM 1.x; but that BSOD was new and frightening. -- Ken ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18 - more BSOD info
Ken Rudolph wrote: Martin Freitag wrote: JohnW-Mpls schrieb: I switched back from 2.01 because it MAY have been the culprit that caused my system to crash 6 times in the last 2 months (after I moved to 2.0). Crashes were immediate appearance of a full blue screen with white text stating memory had been dumped and a cold boot is required - bad!! I've not seen one of those for years but I was in SeaMonkey when the last 2 happened - I don't remember about the first 4 times. It is highly unlikely that SM causes bluescreens. Bluscreen on WinNT-based system are nearly always due to hardware failure (RAM, harddisk,...) or bad drivers (very close to hardware ;-)). I have to say that last week I experienced the identical BSOD to the above while running SM 2.0.1. It's one of the only times in 28 years of running DOS and Windows on 11 different computers that this has happened. It hasn't recurred so far and my fingers are crossed. I'd suggest reading the bluescreen which file caused the problem and/or writing down the STOP error code. If it does happen again I will do so. I was too panicked to do anything at the time but hard boot and start over. Also checking the RAM with memtest86, or performing harddisk diagnostic could be a wise idea. I'm pretty sure that the problem wasn't with RAM. Then again, I have no idea what caused the crash. Usually program crashes in XP3 don't go to BSOD, that's for sure. The weird thing is that SM 2 has been a lot more stable than any previous version of SM 1.X. I have yet to experience a normal program crash after several weeks, as opposed to maybe once a month with SM 1.x; but that BSOD was new and frightening. OOPS! I just recalled that the BSOD happened when I plugged my printer into the USB port while attempting to print out an e-mail in SM 2.0.1. It probably was not SM itself which caused the BSOD, rather something with the printer hardware or USB interface. Anyway, after the re-boot it didn't recur. -- Ken ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
JohnW-Mpls wrote: I'm contemplating going back from 2.0 to 1.18 to get a working ID/password recovery system. The current tricks in 2.0 to get the ID password for different sites either don't work or take much too long - old 1.18 would fill in the ID password as soon as I got to a site. Or - is there a plan to upgrade the ID/password recovery in 2.0? Also, I have not seen any advantage in 2.0 - except that it's now the base system - 1.18 is old technology that is best left in the cold. For me the overwhelming advantage of SM2 is that it has the FireFox 3 rendering engine. So many sites don't display well in SM1/FF2 these days. But I haven't actually upgraded yet on my main machine. -- David Wilkinson ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
David Wilkinson wrote: JohnW-Mpls wrote: I'm contemplating going back from 2.0 to 1.18 to get a working ID/password recovery system. The current tricks in 2.0 to get the ID password for different sites either don't work or take much too long - old 1.18 would fill in the ID password as soon as I got to a site. Or - is there a plan to upgrade the ID/password recovery in 2.0? Also, I have not seen any advantage in 2.0 - except that it's now the base system - 1.18 is old technology that is best left in the cold. For me the overwhelming advantage of SM2 is that it has the FireFox 3 rendering engine. So many sites don't display well in SM1/FF2 these days. But I haven't actually upgraded yet on my main machine. Same here. I have 2.0 on my MacBook and G5 iMac, but I'm sticking with 1.1.18 on my main machine - my Intel iMac. I haven't noticed any issues with display on the sites I frequent between the two, but that said... ...mostly I see interface issues that I don't like in 2.0, and I wish I didn't upgrade my MacBook - things like small buttons and missing grippies make 2.0 REALLY annoying to use on a laptop. The new default Theme which is supposed to be more Mac-like only lasted for me a few days...then I switched to the Modern Theme and have been slightly happier. But there you are, and here I am... -- - Rufus ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
Interviewed by CNN on 5/12/2009 16:37, David Wilkinson told the world: For me the overwhelming advantage of SM2 is that it has the FireFox 3 rendering engine. So many sites don't display well in SM1/FF2 these days. There's that, certainly. For me, a few other things: - My bank here in Brazil supported Firefox flawlessly, but had some sort of weird bug with the old Seamonkey that rendered the site unusable. Now I don't have to fire another browser for banking. OK, that's covered under rendering engine, I guess... - Extensions. Yes, I lost Multizilla for the time being, and I do miss it. But a lot of other extensions which were unavailable for Seamonkey, or available only in old versions, now are within my reach. For instance, DownThemAll... the only version which ran on 1.1.x was the one Philip Chee made available, and that lacks a lot of later improvements, such as the AntiContainer plugin. - The integrated RSS reader in Mail. Sure, I was using Newsfox with the old Seamonkey -- but it's a separate window, I had to manually start it, it's slw, and the browser is basically unusable while it checks my 6o-plus feeds, one by one. The one in Mail is more basic than NewsFox, but it's very fast, checks more than one feed at once, and works in the background without bothering me. - Good extension management is certainly a plus. -- MCBastos This message has been protected with the 2ROT13 algorithm. Unauthorized use will be prosecuted under the DMCA. -=-=- ... BOFH excuse #313: your process is not ISO 9000 compliant * 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: Back to 1.18
JohnW-Mpls wrote: I'm contemplating going back from 2.0 to 1.18 to get a working ID/password recovery system. The current tricks in 2.0 to get the ID password for different sites either don't work or take much too long - old 1.18 would fill in the ID password as soon as I got to a site. Or - is there a plan to upgrade the ID/password recovery in 2.0? Also, I have not seen any advantage in 2.0 - except that it's now the base system - 1.18 is old technology that is best left in the cold. my experience was , I had to Click The ID box and then the id and password would Show in the Boxes ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
question schrieb: JohnW-Mpls wrote: I'm contemplating going back from 2.0 to 1.18 to get a working ID/password recovery system. The current tricks in 2.0 to get the ID password for different sites either don't work or take much too long - old 1.18 would fill in the ID password as soon as I got to a site. Or - is there a plan to upgrade the ID/password recovery in 2.0? Also, I have not seen any advantage in 2.0 - except that it's now the base system - 1.18 is old technology that is best left in the cold. my experience was , I had to Click The ID box and then the id and password would Show in the Boxes This is near correct, usually one has to click two times. regards Martin -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
On or about 12/5/2009 6:40 PM, stango typed the following: Martin Freitag wrote: question schrieb: JohnW-Mpls wrote: I'm contemplating going back from 2.0 to 1.18 to get a working ID/password recovery system. The current tricks in 2.0 to get the ID password for different sites either don't work or take much too long - old 1.18 would fill in the ID password as soon as I got to a site. Or - is there a plan to upgrade the ID/password recovery in 2.0? Also, I have not seen any advantage in 2.0 - except that it's now the base system - 1.18 is old technology that is best left in the cold. my experience was , I had to Click The ID box and then the id and password would Show in the Boxes This is near correct, usually one has to click two times. regards Martin More correctly, some sites you do not have to click at all. Other sites you have to double click on one field on once on the other field. Other sites you have to double click on both fields and then at others you can click till you finger goes numb and still get no response. That has been my experience and one of the reasons I have reverted back to 1.1.18. And when you finally get a drop-down window to open (assuming you have multiple user/passwords for a site - which I do) the window is limited to only showing 5 of the user/passwords. This is one reason I will not upgrade my laptop to 2.0. -- Ed War is like love; it always finds a way. -Bertolt Brecht (1898-1956) ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Back to 1.18
stango wrote: Martin Freitag wrote: question schrieb: JohnW-Mpls wrote: I'm contemplating going back from 2.0 to 1.18 to get a working ID/password recovery system. The current tricks in 2.0 to get the ID password for different sites either don't work or take much too long - old 1.18 would fill in the ID password as soon as I got to a site. Or - is there a plan to upgrade the ID/password recovery in 2.0? Also, I have not seen any advantage in 2.0 - except that it's now the base system - 1.18 is old technology that is best left in the cold. my experience was , I had to Click The ID box and then the id and password would Show in the Boxes This is near correct, usually one has to click two times. regards Martin More correctly, some sites you do not have to click at all. Other sites you have to double click on one field on once on the other field. Other sites you have to double click on both fields and then at others you can click till you finger goes numb and still get no response. That has been my experience and one of the reasons I have reverted back to 1.1.18. My experience is similar to yours except I made some change and now every web page will finally offer the usename. I finally got used to it but I don't log onto many things. 8-) -- JD.. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
