Re: Seamonkey 1.19
JeffM wrote: JeffM wrote: Now for the $64,000 question: How much RAM is in that box? Daniel wrote: 375MByte 384MB would be the number commonly reported for that. So, your box is atypical for someone who is *still* using Win9x. Mostly such folks will never alter the original hardware specs and will still be running with ~128MB. The *light* Linux distros are where they should be looking. (apparently Win98 cannot work with 1gig There is a tweak that usually works for RAM512MB. http://google.com/search?q=512MB+MaxPhysPagehl=all or more of memory More than 1GB is definitely out of bounds for 9x. Gee, isn't that what I said?? Where's my $64,000, please? Expect that to arrive with the next security update for Win98. OK, great, and I was just about to give you my Bank Account details! Seems as you've got some money you want to give away!! Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
JeffM wrote: JeffM wrote: A distro built around KDE or GNOME is likely a non-starter for gear of that vintage. Daniel wrote: Wrong!! My desktop is a dual boot Win98 (upgraded to SE, I think) and Mandriva Linux 2007.1. Part of the Mandrive install is KDE desktop. Version 3.x, but still KDE. Now for the $64,000 question: How much RAM is in that box? In the desktop, one bank of 250MByte and one of 125MByte, total 375MByte (apparently Win98 cannot work with 1gig or more of memory...part of the reason I got the Laptop) The Laptop has 4GByte of RAM. Where's my $64,000, please?/ Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
JeffM wrote: Now for the $64,000 question: How much RAM is in that box? Daniel wrote: 375MByte 384MB would be the number commonly reported for that. So, your box is atypical for someone who is *still* using Win9x. Mostly such folks will never alter the original hardware specs and will still be running with ~128MB. The *light* Linux distros are where they should be looking. (apparently Win98 cannot work with 1gig There is a tweak that usually works for RAM 512MB. http://google.com/search?q=512MB+MaxPhysPagehl=all or more of memory More than 1GB is definitely out of bounds for 9x. Where's my $64,000, please? Expect that to arrive with the next security update for Win98. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
JeffM wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: I for myself am a big fan of openSUSE, which is very friendly to us You have to admire their taste in online software 8-) (though not as default browser...) Well, take the blessings as they come. [...]not so sure[...]how well it works for usually older hardware that people typically have when they are on Win98 Bingo! A distro built around KDE or GNOME is likely a non-starter for gear of that vintage. Wrong!! My desktop is a dual boot Win98 (upgraded to SE, I think) and Mandriva Linux 2007.1. Part of the Mandrive install is KDE desktop. Version 3.x, but still KDE. In part, the reason I got this laptop I'm sitting at now is the SeaMonkey Councils/whomever decision to not release a Win98 compatible version of SM 2.x Don't blame them too much, too few hands doing what they do do, but still Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
JeffM wrote: A distro built around KDE or GNOME is likely a non-starter for gear of that vintage. Daniel wrote: Wrong!! My desktop is a dual boot Win98 (upgraded to SE, I think) and Mandriva Linux 2007.1. Part of the Mandrive install is KDE desktop. Version 3.x, but still KDE. Now for the $64,000 question: How much RAM is in that box? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
baitman schrieb: Maybe I had ask the wrong question previous, on what was stable.. I am using version 1.19 with window 98se, what version can I go up too for example 2.07 will it run on windows 98se. We don't release current software for vastly outdated systems. If you want to stay with the outdated vulnerability-prone Win98SE, you need to stick with the outdated vulnerability-prone 1.x versions of SeaMonkey as well. If you want to use modern software, start with a modern OS. Robert Kaiser -- Note that any statements of mine - no matter how passionate - are never meant to be offensive but very often as food for thought or possible arguments that we as a community needs answers to. And most of the time, I even appreciate irony and fun! :) ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
baitman wrote: I am using version 1.19 with window 98se Robert Kaiser wrote: We don't release current software for vastly outdated systems. If you want to stay with the outdated vulnerability-prone Win98SE, you need to stick with the outdated vulnerability-prone 1.x versions of SeaMonkey as well. If you want to use modern software, start with a modern OS. ...and this topic has been addressed here previously. Depending mostly on how much RAM the box has, there are a number of Linux distros which will run on Win9x-era hardware offering a platform that is superior at security.[1] news://news.mozilla.org:119/1f431a12-24fa-46a5-9514-23d452639...@f15g2000yqe.googlegroups.com http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.support.seamonkey/browse_frm/thread/8157d7d3df614b92/6be73d0db671e444?q=zz+ReplacementForWin98+antix More here: http://google.com/search?q=site:forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic+antiX+SliTaz+Vectorhl=all http://google.com/search?q=site:linuxforums.org+antiX+SliTaz+Vector+-intitle:vectorhl=all . . [1] If you see Puppy mentioned, forget that as it is a poor choice with a lack of security similar to Win9x. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
JeffM schrieb: [1] If you see Puppy mentioned, forget that as it is a poor choice with a lack of security similar to Win9x. OTOH, it's a distro that comes with SeaMonkey as the default browser and mail application, so I'd rather not diss them too much. :) Robert Kaiser -- Note that any statements of mine - no matter how passionate - are never meant to be offensive but very often as food for thought or possible arguments that we as a community needs answers to. And most of the time, I even appreciate irony and fun! :) ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
JeffM schrieb:
[1] If you see Puppy mentioned, forget that as it is a poor choice
with a lack of security similar to Win9x.
OTOH, it's a distro that comes with SeaMonkey as the default browser
and mail application, so I'd rather not diss them too much. :)
Robert Kaiser
The reference to Puppy Linux is a statement from ignorance.
All versions of Linux are inherently more secure than any version
of a MS version of windows.
One need merely glance at the tech journals every now and then
to recognize that.
If someone wants to make the claim that because Puppy runs from
root by default that is still not equivalent to the barn-door
vacuum of security in Win9x.
The fundamental structure of Linux is from the ground-up more
secure than the structure of MS versions of windows.
Plus, there are versions of Puppy available with user accounts
by default -- though such address local (desktop) multi-user
concerns for security, not Internet security.
On top of that every recent version of Puppy comes with the
option to install a firewall and other forms of security.
At the end of the day I am vastly safer with my Puppy Linux
installation than the most up-to-date MS version of windows.
IMHO, YMMV ...
--
Thanks! 73, doc, KD4E
Communicators must defend free speech
or risk losing freedom entirely.
A Search Engine More! http://ixquick.com
|_|___|_|
| | | |
/\ {|
/ \ {|
/\{|
/ @ \ {|
| |~_||
| -| ||
\ # http://KD4E.com
Have an http://ultrafidian.com day!
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
JeffM wrote: If you see Puppy mentioned, forget that as it is a poor choice with a lack of security similar to Win9x. Robert Kaiser wrote: OTOH, it's a distro that comes with SeaMonkey as the default browser and mail application, 8-) Yup, *that* part is good. ...then again, the distro that I like to point to for Win9x sufferers is also friendly to this community. http://google.com/search?q=antiX+IceApe+%22+default.browser%22hl=all (IceApe is, of course, Debian's unbranded version of SM.) ...and if *getting SeaMonkey* is the first thing you do with your amazing new Linux Package Manager, that is a doubleplus good experience for a Linux n00b. (Get great software with near-zero effort; ...and you can _use_ the computer while installing an app and don't have to reboot to get it to take.) so I'd rather not diss them too much. :) ...but, you can easily find uncounted examples in any Win9x forum, of the problems with an OS where there aren't separated privileges (you're *always* a superuser) and how the OS has been easily damaged: I was cleaning up my system and now an error message says _.DLL is missing. If a newbie can do damage without any prompt that what he is doing is dangerous, he gets a fowl impression of Linux --because Puppy is a poor implementation of Linux. Again, with Puppy, it's too easy for a n00b to get a bad impression when one of the selling points of a proper Linux distro is that that kind of crap doesn't happen. Now, if someone absolutely MUST have Puppy, there is **one** extant version which has proper userlevels (i.e. you're **not** always running as root). http://google.com/search?q=PuppyLinux+MultiUserhl=all You *won't*, however, spot that one when you go thru the front door of any Puppy site. 8-( ...and running *any* Puppy from **non-writable** media is OK as the OS can't get borked that way. As soon as you *install* Puppy, however, (any except the one exemplar), Puppy becomes vulnerable. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
JeffM wrote: If a newbie can do damage without any prompt that what
he is doing is dangerous, he gets a fowl impression of Linux
--because Puppy is a poor implementation of Linux.
Again, with Puppy, it's too easy for a n00b to get a bad impression
when one of the selling points of a proper Linux distro is that that
kind of crap doesn't happen.
Now, if someone absolutely MUST have Puppy, there is **one** extant
version which has proper userlevels (i.e. you're **not** always
running as root).
...and running *any* Puppy from **non-writable** media is OK as the
OS can't get borked that way. As soon as you *install* Puppy,
however, (any except the one exemplar), Puppy becomes vulnerable.
This is so filled with error it would take too long to refute
them properly, but here's the short list:
There are *several* versions of Puppy with user accounts. FatDog 64
comes to mind but I *know* that there are more. Fluppy (optimized
for non-eee model Netbooks utilizes a Trash folder to create the
opportunity for recovery of files that one may occasionally delete
unintentionally).
It is as easy, or easier, to add and remove apps from Puppy than
in MS versions of windows. (Puppy Package Manager, Quickpet,
and PET files - which only need to be clicked on and they
self-install).
It is just as easy, or easier, to bork MS versions of windows -
again, one merely need to read the thousands of posts all over
the Internet from MS versions of windows victims ... errr ...
users who have done so.
Sigh.
--
Thanks! 73, doc, KD4E
Communicators must defend free speech
or risk losing freedom entirely.
A Search Engine More! http://ixquick.com
|_|___|_|
| | | |
/\ {|
/ \ {|
/\{|
/ @ \ {|
| |~_||
| -| ||
\ # http://KD4E.com
Have an http://ultrafidian.com day!
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
JeffM schrieb: ...then again, the distro that I like to point to for Win9x sufferers is also friendly to this community. Well, I for myself am a big fan of openSUSE, which is very friendly to us and shipping SeaMonkey on their default DVDs as well (though not as default browser, which is our little popular brother, if you know what I mean). And they are always reacting promptly to any bug reports made on their side about SeaMonkey. :) What I'm not so sure about is how well it works for usually older hardware that people typically have when they are on Win98 right now, as openSUSE, being a mainstream distro, is also by default tailored to mainstream (i.e. more modern) hardware. Robert Kaiser -- Note that any statements of mine - no matter how passionate - are never meant to be offensive but very often as food for thought or possible arguments that we as a community needs answers to. And most of the time, I even appreciate irony and fun! :) ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
Robert Kaiser wrote: I for myself am a big fan of openSUSE, which is very friendly to us You have to admire their taste in online software 8-) (though not as default browser...) Well, take the blessings as they come. [...]not so sure[...]how well it works for usually older hardware that people typically have when they are on Win98 Bingo! A distro built around KDE or GNOME is likely a non-starter for gear of that vintage. The LXDE desktop is a possibility, maybe even Xfce, but when choosing a desktop environment / window manager, **lighter** is the way you want to lean for those boxes. e.g. antiX ships with IceWM and Fluxbox ...and there is an i486 spin of antiX that can install in 48MB and can run in 32MB. All hail (chief antiX developer) Anticapitalista! ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
JeffM wrote: If a newbie can do damage without any prompt that what he is doing is dangerous, he gets a fowl impression of Linux --because Puppy is a poor implementation of Linux. Again, with Puppy, it's too easy for a n00b to get a bad impression when one of the selling points of a proper Linux distro is that that kind of crap doesn't happen. Now, if someone absolutely MUST have Puppy, there is **one** extant version which has proper userlevels (i.e. you're **not** always running as root). http://google.com/search?q=PuppyLinux+MultiUserhl=all You *won't*, however, spot that one when you go thru the front door of any Puppy site. 8-( ...and running *any* Puppy from **non-writable** media is OK as the OS can't get borked that way. As soon as you *install* Puppy, however, (any except the one exemplar), Puppy becomes vulnerable. doc@ kd4e.com wrote: This is so filled with error it would take too long to refute them properly, I wish you would make the effort to educate me. but here's the short list: There are *several* versions of Puppy with user accounts. FatDog 64 comes to mind but I *know* that there are more. So far, I count 2 proper Puplets: your 1 and my 1. More names of actual exemplars would be welcome. That's what? 2 percent of Puplets? ...and, again, you don't see either of those when you go in the front door of Puppy sites --especially not with a tag on them that says DOESN'T SUCK LIKE REGULAR PUPPY. Sorry. You're not going to convince me that the philosophy of the chief developer of Puppy is not critically flawed. I *am* willing to acknowledge Puplet developers who do it right. Fluppy[...]utilizes a Trash folder ..and I assume runs as root--again, like Win9x. ...or XandrOS, or Dyne:bolic, or Lindows/Linspire/Freespire. It is as easy, or easier, to add and remove apps from Puppy than in MS versions of windows. ANY Linux distro's package management is orders of magnitude better than whatever Micros~1has. I won't argue in favor of M$'s junk on any level. I am willing to advocate for Linux distros --but not defective-by-design distros. It is just as easy, or easier, to bork MS versions of windows - Again, I won't defend M$'s crap. I hold them up as examples of what NOT to do. To the extent that Puppy repeats Windoze's mistakes (especially those of Win9x), I condemn Puppy as unsuitable. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 1.19
baitman wrote: Maybe I had ask the wrong question previous, on what was stable.. I am using version 1.19 with window 98se, what version can I go up too for example 2.07 will it run on windows 98se. I know all o/s has some problems.. You will have to keep 1.1.19 as the series 2 won't run on Windows 98. --- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 100912-1, 09/12/2010 Tested on: 9/12/2010 9:24:47 PM avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 AVAST Software. http://www.avast.com Please, please turn off your advertisement for your anti-virus product. -- -bts -Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
