Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Steve Wendt wrote: On 10/28/09 10:26 am, Phillip Jones wrote: Java-script. Must not be too dangerous Adobe acrobat uses it extensively. Acrobat also has a lot of security exploits (!). But related not to Java-script. A quick Google search suggests otherwise: http://www.404techsupport.com/2009/02/20/prevent-the-latest-exploit-in-adobe-acrobat-disable-javascript/ http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/vulninfo/vuln.aspx?id=36838 Uh, did you read the link you gave? for Acrobat 9.0. There has since been versions 9.1.0, 9.1.1, 9.1.2, 9.1.3, and finally of recent 9.2.0 That's typical of a new version of any software. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Steve Wendt wrote: On 10/28/09 10:26 am, Phillip Jones wrote: Java-script. Must not be too dangerous Adobe acrobat uses it extensively. Acrobat also has a lot of security exploits (!). But related not to Java-script. A quick Google search suggests otherwise: http://www.404techsupport.com/2009/02/20/prevent-the-latest-exploit-in-adobe-acrobat-disable-javascript/ http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/vulninfo/vuln.aspx?id=36838 On the last link the Update is up to 8.1.7 that was reported is almost two years old -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Steve Wendt wrote: On 10/28/09 10:26 am, Phillip Jones wrote: Java-script. Must not be too dangerous Adobe acrobat uses it extensively. Acrobat also has a lot of security exploits (!). But related not to Java-script. A quick Google search suggests otherwise: http://www.404techsupport.com/2009/02/20/prevent-the-latest-exploit-in-adobe-acrobat-disable-javascript/ http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/vulninfo/vuln.aspx?id=36838 Uh, did you read the link you gave? Did you read your own messages? You said Adobe used JavaScript to show it doesn't have serious problems. Then it was pointed out that Adobe also get a lot of exploits. You responded by saying that they were not related to JavaScript. You are proved wrong, only to retort by saying that they have been patched. That was not the point. The point was that they do exist, which you wouldn't acknowledge. Hell, just read the quoted messages above. It's pretty obvious. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Robert Kaiser wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Isn't there an early build out there that supports Gecko 1.9.1.x but still has the SeaMonkey 1.1.x UI ? And btw, now that wqe have a newer release, 1.1.18 is badly insecure, 80% of all security holes fixed in Gecko 1.9.1.1 to 1.9.1.4 do exist in SeaMonkey 1.1.18 but were never fixed there. Why not? Why did you push a stable release that still contained known security holes that were patched elsewhere (meaning the theorical solution was at least known)? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On Oct 28, 4:26 pm, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: asmpgmr wrote: I've used Mozilla Suite/SeaMonkey 1.x for awhile and never once had a security problem so I'm really not concerned about this. I've never seen that volcano spit fire, so it surely must be perfectly safe to wander its crater any day in the future as well, right? And we never needed more than 640KB of RAM before, so we'll never need more than that, right? And nobody ever came up with the idea to fly a passenger jet into a skyscraper, so you surely wouldn't ever be concerned about that, right? SeaMonkey 2.0 alpha 1 and 2 still had much of the old UI including the old location bar, download manager and I believe the old password manager as well so would it be possible to get one of those, revert the fix for bug 270443 (the bad infobars) and update Gecko to the current version ? Feel free to try building this version, I'll try to continue our project meanwhile, OK? Robert Kaiser Clearly you couldn't care less what anyone else thinks if they don't agree with you. As SeaMonkey becomes more and more like Firefox + Thunderbird users will either migrate to them as they are mainstream and on the forefront of development or they will switch to something else entirely so you're ultimately doing yourself no favor with this attitude. Oh and the 9/11 reference was *highly* inappropriate, a lot of people died that day. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Benoit Renard wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Isn't there an early build out there that supports Gecko 1.9.1.x but still has the SeaMonkey 1.1.x UI ? And btw, now that wqe have a newer release, 1.1.18 is badly insecure, 80% of all security holes fixed in Gecko 1.9.1.1 to 1.9.1.4 do exist in SeaMonkey 1.1.18 but were never fixed there. Why not? Why did you push a stable release that still contained known security holes that were patched elsewhere (meaning the theorical solution was at least known)? Never mind. I read why in another thread in the mozilla.support.seamonkey newsgroup. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Benoit Renard wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: They make Java work in Sandbox (whatever that is). Why can't Java-script. Look up what a sandbox in the context of computers is first so you know what you're talking about. I sort of know what it is I am just not a developer and technically versed to explain it correctly. Basically its a strict set of guideline to allow Java to do only certain things it crosses that line and it fails. Just Like a child playing in a Real sandbox its restricted as to where to move and play. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Benoit Renard wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Steve Wendt wrote: On 10/28/09 10:26 am, Phillip Jones wrote: Java-script. Must not be too dangerous Adobe acrobat uses it extensively. Acrobat also has a lot of security exploits (!). But related not to Java-script. A quick Google search suggests otherwise: http://www.404techsupport.com/2009/02/20/prevent-the-latest-exploit-in-adobe-acrobat-disable-javascript/ http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/vulninfo/vuln.aspx?id=36838 Uh, did you read the link you gave? Did you read your own messages? You said Adobe used JavaScript to show it doesn't have serious problems. Then it was pointed out that Adobe also get a lot of exploits. You responded by saying that they were not related to JavaScript. You are proved wrong, only to retort by saying that they have been patched. That was not the point. The point was that they do exist, which you wouldn't acknowledge. Hell, just read the quoted messages above. It's pretty obvious. JavaScript is not the only technology that has problems. Java had it share. even SM and FF constantly update because of overrun exploits. Sure Acrobat had their problems, even with Java script, but not currently. I suppose with with Normal PC anything is dangerous. I can remember when Computers first came out with DOS (I worked for school system) little 11 12 kids could go in and remove a Config.sys file or other files from system and cause system to crash. I wore out many a copy of Norton Tools, Norton commander just replacing these files. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Benoit Renard wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: They make Java work in Sandbox (whatever that is). Why can't Java-script. Look up what a sandbox in the context of computers is first so you know what you're talking about. I sort of know what it is I am just not a developer and technically versed to explain it correctly. Basically its a strict set of guideline to allow Java to do only certain things it crosses that line and it fails. Just Like a child playing in a Real sandbox its restricted as to where to move and play. Just that it's more an illusion of a sandbox than a real one, from what I hear from some security people. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Benoit Renard wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Isn't there an early build out there that supports Gecko 1.9.1.x but still has the SeaMonkey 1.1.x UI ? And btw, now that wqe have a newer release, 1.1.18 is badly insecure, 80% of all security holes fixed in Gecko 1.9.1.1 to 1.9.1.4 do exist in SeaMonkey 1.1.18 but were never fixed there. Why not? Why did you push a stable release that still contained known security holes that were patched elsewhere (meaning the theorical solution was at least known)? We fixed at least one very large security hole in 1.1.17 when we pushed 1.1.18, but there were a few other known ones which were know already then (and that was a few months ago, some more were found since then) which just nobody had taken the time to backport - and sorry, I am just not able to do those backports as I don't understand any C/C++ code and most security bugs are there. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Interviewed by CNN on 29/10/2009 13:01, asmpgmr told the world: On Oct 28, 4:26 pm, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: Feel free to try building this version, I'll try to continue our project meanwhile, OK? Clearly you couldn't care less what anyone else thinks if they don't agree with you. As SeaMonkey becomes more and more like Firefox + Thunderbird users will either migrate to them as they are mainstream and on the forefront of development or they will switch to something else entirely so you're ultimately doing yourself no favor with this attitude. Well, in KaiRo's defense, we're not *paying* him, so we have no right to give him *orders*. He's doing what he thinks is the best thing based on his knowledge of things, including the innards of both the old and the new Seamonkey. The statements I have seen, by him and many others, over the last few years, were that with Seamonkey no longer being an official Mozilla project (and therefore with far less money and manpower available for development) the best choice in the long run would be to make it as close to Firefox and Thunderbird as possible, in order to concentrate efforts in what makes Seamonkey unique, leaving stuff like the development of the Gecko engine in the hands of the Mozilla Foundation. What you were asking was to go back to the old Seamonkey code. Which is old, has known security bugs and is used *only* by Seamonkey, so the maintenance cannot be shared with the larger projects. He prefers instead to keep moving forward with the new code, which *is* shared with the official MoFo projects -- freeing valuable time from the maintenance of obsolete code to do other stuff that needs to be done. If you disagree, if you think you have a better idea of what's the best roadmap for whatever replaced the Mozilla Suite, well, the source code is available, just fork a new project. Maybe you can find enough interested programmers to backport Gecko 1.9 and Tracemonkey back to the old framework, and to maintain it. I wish you success. Personally, I would be happier in the short run if there was a way to use Multizilla with Seamonkey 2. But I understand that this would either involve holding up evolution of Seamonkey, or a massive rewriting job for Multizilla (which the Multizilla author currently has no time for). So for me it's a tradeoff: keep with SM 1.1.18, Multizilla but pass on stuff like a better rendering engine, faster Javascript and such, or move to SM2 and look for other ways to regain the functionality I was used to. So I decided to sacrifice short-term convenience for long-term evolution; I trust that eventually I'll find the right mix of extensions to do the things I used to do with Multizilla. And sometimes change is good to make you rethink the way you were doing things. Losing the Googlebox forced me to find another convenient way to do searches -- and I ended up with a *better* way. I could have used it back in SM 1.1.18, but I was too set in my ways. -- MCBastos This message has been protected with the 2ROT13 algorithm. Unauthorized use will be prosecuted under the DMCA. -=-=- ... Its a dogma-eat-dogma world! * TagZilla 0.0661 * http://tagzilla.mozdev.org on Seamonkey 2 ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Robert Kaiser ha scritto: asmpgmr wrote: Well the tiny round buttons aren't good. I've never seen any app have buttons like that, it needs normal buttons. Also what do you perceive as wrong with the 1.x design ? It looks perfectly fine to me. People who don't like dialogs can use the download manager and that's great, there's a choice. Why make the dialog unusable to those who prefer dialogs ? The tiny round buttons are IMHO one of the better designs in that progress window. It's no dialog anyhow, it's a progess window. But perhaps we should have just remove them altogether, would have saved me lots of work and us all lots of discussions. Hello, can you please upload somewhere a screen-shot of what you're talking about? This discussion is really interesting, but I'm missing the problem... thanx, Gabriele ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
NoOp wrote: On 10/29/2009 05:25 AM, Phillip Jones wrote: Steve Wendt wrote: On 10/28/09 10:26 am, Phillip Jones wrote: Java-script. Must not be too dangerous Adobe acrobat uses it extensively. Acrobat also has a lot of security exploits (!). But related not to Java-script. A quick Google search suggests otherwise: http://www.404techsupport.com/2009/02/20/prevent-the-latest-exploit-in-adobe-acrobat-disable-javascript/ http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/vulninfo/vuln.aspx?id=36838 Uh, did you read the link you gave? for Acrobat 9.0. There has since been versions 9.1.0, 9.1.1, 9.1.2, 9.1.3, and finally of recent 9.2.0 That's typical of a new version of any software. http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/techalerts/TA09-286B.html http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb09-15.html I've updated to 9.2 unlike some people I update software the minute an update is available. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On 10/29/2009 06:02 PM, Phillip Jones wrote: NoOp wrote: On 10/29/2009 05:25 AM, Phillip Jones wrote: Steve Wendt wrote: On 10/28/09 10:26 am, Phillip Jones wrote: Java-script. Must not be too dangerous Adobe acrobat uses it extensively. Acrobat also has a lot of security exploits (!). But related not to Java-script. A quick Google search suggests otherwise: http://www.404techsupport.com/2009/02/20/prevent-the-latest-exploit-in-adobe-acrobat-disable-javascript/ http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/vulninfo/vuln.aspx?id=36838 Uh, did you read the link you gave? for Acrobat 9.0. There has since been versions 9.1.0, 9.1.1, 9.1.2, 9.1.3, and finally of recent 9.2.0 That's typical of a new version of any software. http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/techalerts/TA09-286B.html http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb09-15.html I've updated to 9.2 unlike some people I update software the minute an update is available. Sorry. I commented on the wrong post. This was meant for your comment that stated: Sure Acrobat had their problems, even with Java script, but not currently.. As you can see from the date of the above, Adobe have indeed had problems with javascript currently. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Bill Davidsen wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. Then it's good that SeaMonkey is being developed by users. Classifying people who code as users, just because they do use the code they write is avoiding the issue, don't you think. Looks like you haven't understand open source work, then. Seamonkey is not like the Linux kernel, where a patch can be posted, people will test it, and it is likely to be accepted if it works and does something useful. That's just wrong. You just need to go through Bugzilla, but else it's pretty much the same. Oh, and we enforce code quality by requiring reviews, while Linux people might just pull in patches without looking at them a real lot, from what I understand. That's why some drivers are that stable. (Don't mistake me, I love using Linux.) I might have misunderstood their process, though. I'm pretty sure things get lost on a mailing list much more often than in Bugzilla. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: Isn't there an early build out there that supports Gecko 1.9.1.x but still has the SeaMonkey 1.1.x UI ? Not one that is nearly secure. And btw, now that wqe have a newer release, 1.1.18 is badly insecure, 80% of all security holes fixed in Gecko 1.9.1.1 to 1.9.1.4 do exist in SeaMonkey 1.1.18 but were never fixed there. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On Oct 28, 5:31 am, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Isn't there an early build out there that supports Gecko 1.9.1.x but still has the SeaMonkey 1.1.x UI ? Not one that is nearly secure. And btw, now that we have a newer release, 1.1.18 is badly insecure, 80% of all security holes fixed in Gecko 1.9.1.1 to 1.9.1.4 do exist in SeaMonkey 1.1.18 but were never fixed there. Of course you missed my point. The reason for getting such a release would be to keep the SeaMonkey 1.1.x UI as is but easily drop in the current version of Gecko 1.9.1.x and potentially keep Gecko updated. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Steve Wendt wrote: On 10/27/09 06:21 pm, Phillip Jones wrote: Active-X will never, ever be safe. Java-script could be is some would take the time. They make Java work in Sandbox (whatever that is). Why can't Java-script. Must not be too dangerous Adobe acrobat uses it extensively. Acrobat also has a lot of security exploits (!). But related not to Java-script. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: On Oct 28, 5:31 am, Robert Kaiserka...@kairo.at wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Isn't there an early build out there that supports Gecko 1.9.1.x but still has the SeaMonkey 1.1.x UI ? Not one that is nearly secure. And btw, now that we have a newer release, 1.1.18 is badly insecure, 80% of all security holes fixed in Gecko 1.9.1.1 to 1.9.1.4 do exist in SeaMonkey 1.1.18 but were never fixed there. Of course you missed my point. The reason for getting such a release would be to keep the SeaMonkey 1.1.x UI as is but easily drop in the current version of Gecko 1.9.1.x and potentially keep Gecko updated. You don't understand. The old UI and the backends it used had some of the security problems right in them - and the old UI just doesn't work with the 1.9.1.x platform, that's one reason for the large rewrites. E.g. the old password manager was able to send the first password to a website without you actually doing anything - at least in some hard to reproduce cases. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: I've used Mozilla Suite/SeaMonkey 1.x for awhile and never once had a security problem so I'm really not concerned about this. I've never seen that volcano spit fire, so it surely must be perfectly safe to wander its crater any day in the future as well, right? And we never needed more than 640KB of RAM before, so we'll never need more than that, right? And nobody ever came up with the idea to fly a passenger jet into a skyscraper, so you surely wouldn't ever be concerned about that, right? SeaMonkey 2.0 alpha 1 and 2 still had much of the old UI including the old location bar, download manager and I believe the old password manager as well so would it be possible to get one of those, revert the fix for bug 270443 (the bad infobars) and update Gecko to the current version ? Feel free to try building this version, I'll try to continue our project meanwhile, OK? Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:26:13 +0100, Robert Kaiser wrote: And nobody ever came up with the idea to fly a passenger jet into a skyscraper, so you surely wouldn't ever be concerned about that, right? Actually Tom Clancy came up with exactly that idea in one of his novels but (at that time) all the security experts dismissed that scenario as too far fetched. 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On 10/28/09 10:26 am, Phillip Jones wrote: Java-script. Must not be too dangerous Adobe acrobat uses it extensively. Acrobat also has a lot of security exploits (!). But related not to Java-script. A quick Google search suggests otherwise: http://www.404techsupport.com/2009/02/20/prevent-the-latest-exploit-in-adobe-acrobat-disable-javascript/ http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/vulninfo/vuln.aspx?id=36838 ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Daniel wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Daniel wrote: asmpgmr wrote: On Oct 24, 5:40 pm, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: 1) Tabs were not in IE until very recently (IE7) while Mozilla has had them for ages (Opera was the first tabbed browser, though). 2) The vast majority of users love tabs, please accept that while you might be one of our users, you are not the majority and can't speak for them. I don't like tabs either and see them as a pointless waste of screen space when the OS already has window management and its own taskbar which can be hidden but I don't care that tabs are supported because I have the choice not to use them. Tabs also seem to use more resources and essentially duplicate functionality already in the OS. 4) As in any open source project, those who actually give time and work to the project have the most influence of what's happening. Nobody can change that, it's the very nature of how things work, and an increasing amount of people seems to be happier with that than with the alternatives. Granted but why do things like change the download progress dialog UI to be less usable because you don't like dialogs (Your words: Download progress dialogs ? Eww!). There really is no reason why this can't look more or less the same as SeaMonkey 1.x 5) Accept that you are not always in the majority or target audience group among users. Does this mean that people who like the SeaMonkey 1.x UI aren't the target audience for SeaMonkey 2.0 ?? Phillip, if I am to believe your message header, you are using Win98! SeaMonkey 2.0 is not supposed to work on Win98, so are you complaining about something you haven't even tried yet?? Or have you found a way for getting SM 2.0 to work on Win98 (Please, oh please, Phillip, you'll be my friend forever!!)?? Hang on, Phillip, you almost got away with that, Phillip.but then, just before I hit sent I remembered that you use Mac OSX or whatever, so you must have your SM prefs munged!! You almost got away with that, Phillip! Daniel No I use Mac OSX 4.11. There isn't a Windows machine within a quarter mile of my house thank you. There is no modal window in SM2 for Mac. As for the Active -X Comments its combination or Reading various internet news feed, plus helping some of my relatives that use Windows machines and Friends. I suggest they turn off active-x and the malware attacks seem to disappear. So did you just forget to re-set your header info last time??? (Now it is correctly showing you are using a Mac!) Daniel ??? I don't even use User Agent switcher any more. I'm sorry, Phillip, somehow I mis-read asmpgmr as your name! Must have been a real bad day. Again, I'm sorry, Phillip!! Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Bill Davidsen wrote: mailing links to pages which have the js doesn't make thing more secure, just less convenient. It does make it more secure. With no JavaScript in the e-mail message, you can't get exposed to the JavaScript just by opening the message. You have to choose to visit the page. And just because we can't make both safe doesn't mean we shouldn't at least try to make one of them safe. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: Perhaps someone will take an old pre-alpha 1 build of SeaMonkey 2.0 which supported early Gecko 1.9.1 before any of these UI changes were added, drop in the current version of Gecko 1.9.1 and release that as a user-supported custom build, a sort of SeaMonkey 1.5. If you're referring to our XPFE builds, they only supported 1.9.0a5, so you'd probably be able to compile it against Gecko 1.9.0.x, but of course it wouldn't have the extension manager, form autocomplete, feed preview, vista-compatible shell integration, fast location bar autocomplete, etc. -- Warning: May contain traces of nuts. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On Oct 27, 5:36 am, Neil n...@parkwaycc.co.uk wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Perhaps someone will take an old pre-alpha 1 build of SeaMonkey 2.0 which supported early Gecko 1.9.1 before any of these UI changes were added, drop in the current version of Gecko 1.9.1 and release that as a user-supported custom build, a sort of SeaMonkey 1.5. If you're referring to our XPFE builds, they only supported 1.9.0a5, so you'd probably be able to compile it against Gecko 1.9.0.x, but of course it wouldn't have the extension manager, form autocomplete, feed preview, vista-compatible shell integration, fast location bar autocomplete, etc. Isn't there an early build out there that supports Gecko 1.9.1.x but still has the SeaMonkey 1.1.x UI ? I know 2.0 alpha 1 is close but has the annoying infobars. Personally I don't care about any of the new features, I only care about Gecko 1.9.1.x which processes JavaScript faster and supports some newer web standards. As long as everything in the SeaMonkey 1.1.x was still present then that would be great. So I want the old location bar, old password manager, old form manager, old download progress dialog and uses the old mork database format (I don't care if it's old and archaic, it works while SQLite tends to thrash). I would never use the RSS feeds or session saving and have no intention of using bloated Win Vista or more bloated Win 7. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Robert Kaiser wrote: Hell, that was a joke! Am I the only person in the world who uses some humor in blog posts now and then? It would seem that you poorly communicated that it was a joke, as asmpgmr isn't the only one who thought you were being serious. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Stanimir Stamenkov wrote: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 16:36:01 +0100, /Benoit Renard/: Plus, with tabs, I can rearrange them with dragdrop. Something that Windows couldn't do with its taskbar until Windows 7! For this I'm using Taskbar Shuffle http://www.freewebs.com/nerdcave/ - very handy. Holy ! I never thought an utility to do this was possible. It even works as far back as Windows 95! Thanks for the link! :D ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Daniel wrote: I don't know about this Dead Link feature being in Communicator, but maybe it was. I've used AM-Deadlink for the last ten years or so, and, as far as I can see, there would only be a link to a Spammer page in my address book if I put it there. So AM-Deadlink (or the Communicator feature from years ago) could only report me to a Spammer site if *I* had added the site first. How was that a security risk in Communicator?? Daniel How would Communicator know that it was a dead link? It can only know by checking it. Or is this some feature that disabled all links unless it matched a whitelist? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Benoit Renard wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Hell, that was a joke! Am I the only person in the world who uses some humor in blog posts now and then? It would seem that you poorly communicated that it was a joke, as asmpgmr isn't the only one who thought you were being serious. Two things: Readers can't see your facial features, so smiles are invisible, and raised eyebrows are invisible, and widened eyes are invisible... That's precisely why many folks use smileys, but others look on their use with disdain. Secondly, many folks depend on body language, including facial features, to pick the humor out of humorous sarcasm, and just plain miss it! It is most difficult to portray nuances in person-to-person communication that is only written, so you have to let your language do it FOR you! So, in all fairness to Robert K, who ordinarily does a most excellent job at communicating his intent, I really wouldn't call it poorly communicated but incompletely communicated. And most of us are guilty of that lapse on occasion! keith whaley ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
The question still remains: are users who like the way things work in SeaMonkey 1.x in the target audience for SeaMonkey 2.0 ? As it stands I'm going to stick with SeaMonkey 1.1.x, for me there are several show stoppers in SeaMonkey 2.0: awfulbar, extremely intrusive infobars, bad password manager, bad download progress dialog. Also if the new tabmail feature can't be turned off then that would be a major show stopper for me. While it would be nice to have the newer and faster Gecko 1.9.1 rendering engine, Gecko 1.8.1 still handles websites just fine and these new features are just too undesirable to me and clearly there is no concern for longtime users who like things the way they have been from Mozilla Suite through SeaMonkey 1.1.x. Perhaps someone will take an old pre-alpha 1 build of SeaMonkey 2.0 which supported early Gecko 1.9.1 before any of these UI changes were added, drop in the current version of Gecko 1.9.1 and release that as a user-supported custom build, a sort of SeaMonkey 1.5. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: The question still remains: are users who like the way things work in SeaMonkey 1.x in the target audience for SeaMonkey 2.0 ? As it stands I'm going to stick with SeaMonkey 1.1.x, for me there are several show stoppers in SeaMonkey 2.0: awfulbar, extremely intrusive infobars, bad password manager, bad download progress dialog. Also if the new tabmail feature can't be turned off then that would be a major show stopper for me. While it would be nice to have the newer and faster Gecko 1.9.1 rendering engine, Gecko 1.8.1 still handles websites just fine and these new features are just too undesirable to me and clearly there is no concern for longtime users who like things the way they have been from Mozilla Suite through SeaMonkey 1.1.x. Perhaps someone will take an old pre-alpha 1 build of SeaMonkey 2.0 which supported early Gecko 1.9.1 before any of these UI changes were added, drop in the current version of Gecko 1.9.1 and release that as a user-supported custom build, a sort of SeaMonkey 1.5. After reading these threads, I decided against SeaMonkey, for now. I'm perfectly happy with Firefox 3.5.3 and Thunderbird 2.0.x and see no benefit to switching, but I have noticed a few things I enjoy now are missing in SeaMonkey. Innovation is wonderful, but I like options and tweaks, and buttons, and progress bars, and the ability to turn various bells and whistles on or off as I prefer. -- KristleBawl ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Ray_Net wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Benoit Renard wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: And if I were to use Thunderbird I actually like Postbox better because the last one I downloaded still allowed javascript in email. You do realise that JavaScript in mail is a big security risk, right? It doesn't have a place in e-mail messages in the first place. It's a message, not a web page. Why is it a security risk? I used Netscape Navigator 3.0.1.a Gold, Communicator, Mozilla, and Thunderbird until it was removed, and not once in all those years had any javascript attacks in email. Not once. You may cross the road when the ligths are red ... without any trouble ... until the bad day ! It is odd that from Netscape Navigator days to just less than a year ago it wasn't that insecure. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Daniel wrote: Benoit Renard wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: For example I've always thought Tabs was not what most users wanted, because it was a gee-whiz-bang feature that was in IE. we had to have it. You're wrong. OR, how about killing javascript, in Thunderbird. Security risk, as pointed out above. There was a Feature in Communicator that was great, you could check for dead links and then ask it to delete them. It never saw the light of day in Mozilla. Another security (and privacy) risk. Imagine getting some spam with links. If SeaMonkey would check those for you, the spammer would get notified that your e-mail address exists, along with other data that's part of the HTTP request. Then you'd get even more spam. I don't know about this Dead Link feature being in Communicator, but maybe it was. I've used AM-Deadlink for the last ten years or so, and, as far as I can see, there would only be a link to a Spammer page in my address book if I put it there. So AM-Deadlink (or the Communicator feature from years ago) could only report me to a Spammer site if *I* had added the site first. How was that a security risk in Communicator?? Daniel It wouldn't be. Because it only checked items you already had downloaded. I know I have some now I know are most likely out of date. But it would take me months to go through all of them to see if they are dead. It worked great even on a slow 56K POTTS line back then with DSL and Cable and FOIS it out to knock it out in a minute or two. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Daniel wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Daniel wrote: asmpgmr wrote: On Oct 24, 5:40 pm, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: 1) Tabs were not in IE until very recently (IE7) while Mozilla has had them for ages (Opera was the first tabbed browser, though). 2) The vast majority of users love tabs, please accept that while you might be one of our users, you are not the majority and can't speak for them. I don't like tabs either and see them as a pointless waste of screen space when the OS already has window management and its own taskbar which can be hidden but I don't care that tabs are supported because I have the choice not to use them. Tabs also seem to use more resources and essentially duplicate functionality already in the OS. 4) As in any open source project, those who actually give time and work to the project have the most influence of what's happening. Nobody can change that, it's the very nature of how things work, and an increasing amount of people seems to be happier with that than with the alternatives. Granted but why do things like change the download progress dialog UI to be less usable because you don't like dialogs (Your words: Download progress dialogs ? Eww!). There really is no reason why this can't look more or less the same as SeaMonkey 1.x 5) Accept that you are not always in the majority or target audience group among users. Does this mean that people who like the SeaMonkey 1.x UI aren't the target audience for SeaMonkey 2.0 ?? Phillip, if I am to believe your message header, you are using Win98! SeaMonkey 2.0 is not supposed to work on Win98, so are you complaining about something you haven't even tried yet?? Or have you found a way for getting SM 2.0 to work on Win98 (Please, oh please, Phillip, you'll be my friend forever!!)?? Hang on, Phillip, you almost got away with that, Phillip.but then, just before I hit sent I remembered that you use Mac OSX or whatever, so you must have your SM prefs munged!! You almost got away with that, Phillip! Daniel No I use Mac OSX 4.11. There isn't a Windows machine within a quarter mile of my house thank you. There is no modal window in SM2 for Mac. As for the Active -X Comments its combination or Reading various internet news feed, plus helping some of my relatives that use Windows machines and Friends. I suggest they turn off active-x and the malware attacks seem to disappear. So did you just forget to re-set your header info last time??? (Now it is correctly showing you are using a Mac!) Daniel ??? I don't even use User Agent switcher any more. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Daniel wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Daniel wrote: asmpgmr wrote: On Oct 24, 5:40 pm, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: /snip/ So did you just forget to re-set your header info last time??? (Now it is correctly showing you are using a Mac!) Daniel ??? I don't even use User Agent switcher any more. Daniel, I've looked at several of Phillip's full headers, and I have not seen one that indicates anything other then Mac OSX. I suspect you may have looked at someone else's post by mistake. Since this is getting off topic, I've set a followup to mozilla.general. Lee ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Robert Kaiser wrote: asmpgmr wrote: On Oct 25, 4:52 pm, Robert Kaiserka...@kairo.at wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Now I realize this is subjective and that you think progress dialogs are soo backwards, only really old software uses such a thing. That's not what I think but you seem to be so convinced that I do that you ignore anything I'm saying anyhow, it seems. Sorry but I copied the quoted text from your own blog. Hell, that was a joke! Am I the only person in the world who uses some humor in blog posts now and then? Robert Kaiser Yep! Everyone is too serious these days. You ought visit the the adobe forums. You'd think you were in a Hospital. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Benoit Renard wrote: Daniel wrote: I don't know about this Dead Link feature being in Communicator, but maybe it was. I've used AM-Deadlink for the last ten years or so, and, as far as I can see, there would only be a link to a Spammer page in my address book if I put it there. So AM-Deadlink (or the Communicator feature from years ago) could only report me to a Spammer site if *I* had added the site first. How was that a security risk in Communicator?? Daniel How would Communicator know that it was a dead link? It can only know by checking it. Or is this some feature that disabled all links unless it matched a whitelist? What it did was go to the site and try to get in as soon as it got a response it would mark it as active or dead. then it listed the dead links you could then delete the dead links. I can't remember exact process but it worked well. Worked kind of like a Whois utility. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. Then it's good that SeaMonkey is being developed by users. Classifying people who code as users, just because they do use the code they write is avoiding the issue, don't you think. And the set of people who can not only *write* code, but get it *accepted* is smaller yet. Seamonkey is not like the Linux kernel, where a patch can be posted, people will test it, and it is likely to be accepted if it works and does something useful. Or did you complain that different users have different opinions about what they want? No, I think the complaint is lack of option to do things in a way people other than developers find productive. I don't listen very hard to complaints about default settings, they can be tuned. But forcing one mode of operation by everyone because a developer likes it does seem to be pretty elitist. Particularly when something used to work one way and no developer can say that someone would have to write and test that code, and the code was working for years on previous Seamonkey. -- Bill Davidsen david...@tmr.com We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked. - from Slashdot ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Mark Hansen wrote: On 10/23/09 18:32, Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. The think they no more how a program should look like than the users that have to use it. Good God, have you a bone to pick or something? I am a developer and I certainly do listen to what end users want - they are my customers after all! Don't you think you might be over-generalizing here a bit? Perhaps you're just having a bad moment? No it seem with Mozilla when user are happy with function, it always seems that that irritates the heck out of the developers. It seems if users like it too much, its a target to be removed. For example I've always thought Tabs was not what most users wanted, because it was a gee-whiz-bang feature that was in IE. we had to have it. Isn't it good that we can decide thing like middle button opening in same window, new window, or tab. Same deal for mail tabs. The way I work I have no desire, nor no need to have 8 or ten tabs open at one time. I look at one thing at a time. Although I've using personal computers since the early. I just never id desire have pages filled up with cached pages of multiple websites. WE don't need to any shape of fashion need to be an IE clone. If we look and, act so much like IE what's the point in trying out something different if it all works and looks the same. I don't want to be even reminded of IE , much less look like like it. This modal thing is another example. OR, how about killing javascript, in Thunderbird. There was a Feature in Communicator that was great, you could check for dead links and then ask it to delete them. It never saw the light of day in Mozilla. I could think of other things. The point about security is valid, but it's still MY computer, set the default where you like and allow the choice if that's what the user wants. Call the option 'allow.securityattacks.from.javascript' if you think you need the issue a warning for legal reasons, but choice is good. And no, I wouldn't turn it on unless I could do so in a message filter and trust certain people. But developers keep think up things, possibly ask (not always), get negative responses then put it in anyway. One thing you have resisted the temptation of doing is using Active-X. I salute you for that. Now That I have bragged on that, there probably will be an announcement next month that Active-X will be built-in. Active-X is the reason now for bout 98% of all the malware floating on the internet. The other 2 percent is Phishing attempts. If Active-X was killed dead, at least for a while Windows machines wouldn't need virus and Malware detection programs. Your estimate is unrelated to any estimate I have ever seen from people who who have measured threat characteristics, perhaps you can cite a source? Perhaps you pulled the number out of your... personal experience? -- Bill Davidsen david...@tmr.com We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked. - from Slashdot ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On 10/26/09 11:56, Phillip Jones wrote: Ray_Net wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Benoit Renard wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: And if I were to use Thunderbird I actually like Postbox better because the last one I downloaded still allowed javascript in email. You do realise that JavaScript in mail is a big security risk, right? It doesn't have a place in e-mail messages in the first place. It's a message, not a web page. Why is it a security risk? I used Netscape Navigator 3.0.1.a Gold, Communicator, Mozilla, and Thunderbird until it was removed, and not once in all those years had any javascript attacks in email. Not once. You may cross the road when the ligths are red ... without any trouble ... until the bad day ! It is odd that from Netscape Navigator days to just less than a year ago it wasn't that insecure. Try to remember that security is a moving target. In addition to points that may be raised by others, consider that as time goes on, people learn of the vulnerabilities that exist up until now. So, for example, to say that when using last year's release *last year*, it was safe, doesn't mean using it now is still safe. The same holds true for JS. In the beginning, I'm sure many had no idea how it could be manipulated in such nefarious ways. However, today people sure know a lot more about how to exploit JS that anyone though possible a few years ago. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Bill Davidsen wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Mark Hansen wrote: On 10/23/09 18:32, Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. The think they no more how a program should look like than the users that have to use it. Good God, have you a bone to pick or something? I am a developer and I certainly do listen to what end users want - they are my customers after all! Don't you think you might be over-generalizing here a bit? Perhaps you're just having a bad moment? No it seem with Mozilla when user are happy with function, it always seems that that irritates the heck out of the developers. It seems if users like it too much, its a target to be removed. For example I've always thought Tabs was not what most users wanted, because it was a gee-whiz-bang feature that was in IE. we had to have it. Isn't it good that we can decide thing like middle button opening in same window, new window, or tab. Same deal for mail tabs. The way I work I have no desire, nor no need to have 8 or ten tabs open at one time. I look at one thing at a time. Although I've using personal computers since the early. I just never id desire have pages filled up with cached pages of multiple websites. WE don't need to any shape of fashion need to be an IE clone. If we look and, act so much like IE what's the point in trying out something different if it all works and looks the same. I don't want to be even reminded of IE , much less look like like it. This modal thing is another example. OR, how about killing javascript, in Thunderbird. There was a Feature in Communicator that was great, you could check for dead links and then ask it to delete them. It never saw the light of day in Mozilla. I could think of other things. The point about security is valid, but it's still MY computer, set the default where you like and allow the choice if that's what the user wants. Call the option 'allow.securityattacks.from.javascript' if you think you need the issue a warning for legal reasons, but choice is good. And no, I wouldn't turn it on unless I could do so in a message filter and trust certain people. But developers keep think up things, possibly ask (not always), get negative responses then put it in anyway. One thing you have resisted the temptation of doing is using Active-X. I salute you for that. Now That I have bragged on that, there probably will be an announcement next month that Active-X will be built-in. Active-X is the reason now for bout 98% of all the malware floating on the internet. The other 2 percent is Phishing attempts. If Active-X was killed dead, at least for a while Windows machines wouldn't need virus and Malware detection programs. Your estimate is unrelated to any estimate I have ever seen from people who who have measured threat characteristics, perhaps you can cite a source? Perhaps you pulled the number out of your... personal experience? cNet, ZDnet, Computerworld at least two three years ago. last report on these networks IE is supposed to come with Active-X disabled by default. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On 10/26/09 14:26, Bill Davidsen wrote: Mark Hansen wrote: On 10/23/09 18:32, Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. The think they no more how a program should look like than the users that have to use it. Good God, have you a bone to pick or something? I am a developer and I certainly do listen to what end users want - they are my customers after all! Don't you think you might be over-generalizing here a bit? Perhaps you're just having a bad moment? Perhaps he is on all counts, but I do think there's a valid point here, that if there are two ways to do things, and an option is possible between old and new, people don't want change they perceive change for the worse. But of course, that wasn't the point of Phillip's to which I was responding :-\ ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Bill Davidsen wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Mark Hansen wrote: On 10/23/09 18:32, Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. The think they no more how a program should look like than the users that have to use it. Good God, have you a bone to pick or something? I am a developer and I certainly do listen to what end users want - they are my customers after all! Don't you think you might be over-generalizing here a bit? Perhaps you're just having a bad moment? No it seem with Mozilla when user are happy with function, it always seems that that irritates the heck out of the developers. It seems if users like it too much, its a target to be removed. For example I've always thought Tabs was not what most users wanted, because it was a gee-whiz-bang feature that was in IE. we had to have it. Isn't it good that we can decide thing like middle button opening in same window, new window, or tab. Same deal for mail tabs. The way I work I have no desire, nor no need to have 8 or ten tabs open at one time. I look at one thing at a time. Although I've using personal computers since the early. I just never id desire have pages filled up with cached pages of multiple websites. WE don't need to any shape of fashion need to be an IE clone. If we look and, act so much like IE what's the point in trying out something different if it all works and looks the same. I don't want to be even reminded of IE , much less look like like it. This modal thing is another example. OR, how about killing javascript, in Thunderbird. There was a Feature in Communicator that was great, you could check for dead links and then ask it to delete them. It never saw the light of day in Mozilla. I could think of other things. The point about security is valid, but it's still MY computer, set the default where you like and allow the choice if that's what the user wants. Call the option 'allow.securityattacks.from.javascript' if you think you need the issue a warning for legal reasons, but choice is good. And no, I wouldn't turn it on unless I could do so in a message filter and trust certain people. But developers keep think up things, possibly ask (not always), get negative responses then put it in anyway. One thing you have resisted the temptation of doing is using Active-X. I salute you for that. Now That I have bragged on that, there probably will be an announcement next month that Active-X will be built-in. Active-X is the reason now for bout 98% of all the malware floating on the internet. The other 2 percent is Phishing attempts. If Active-X was killed dead, at least for a while Windows machines wouldn't need virus and Malware detection programs. Your estimate is unrelated to any estimate I have ever seen from people who who have measured threat characteristics, perhaps you can cite a source? Perhaps you pulled the number out of your... personal experience? cNet, ZDnet, Computerworld at least two three years ago. last report on these networks IE is supposed to come with Active-X disabled by default. ON IE8 Sorry about that. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. Then it's good that SeaMonkey is being developed by users. Or did you complain that different users have different opinions about what they want? Robert Kaiser Its being being developed by developers not users. Typical Users have no or very little knowledge of code. All they know is how they want the way something should work. If a great design comes along that all users like, then the code designers can't stand it, and want it to work make it like they want it. SeaMonkey, Thunderbird, and FireFox are open source, answerable to users. For Pay Products (example MS Office) is designed for the shareholders and the BOD. Not the users. Users have no input. I prefer modal windows. I hate tabs and to this day refuse to use them. despite being designed into SM FF for last 4-5 years. Tabs waste resources. Each page in a tab as cache and use memory to store. While I have 2 GB Memory in current Laptop with today's web pages that can be easily filled up is I have a bunch of Tabs open. I'd love to get one of the new ones with 4 or more GB RAM but takes money. I'd love to get one of the older ones, the ones that had 2GBytes of Memory. My current one only has about 750MBytes. Money I don't have now. As far as being faster. Its not one whit better than forward or Back button. takes every bit as long one way or the other I've tried it. I have one thing that was improved. Finally you can adjust the size of the preference window. Drag the length longer. Just as sure as I mention this one of the designer will come along and say Oh that fellow loved how this adjustable. It doesn't need to be let us make it preset. If the major of people love the way something works, make it work that way. Phillip, if you painted your house Green, because you liked Green, would it matter to you if someone suggested you should have painted it Blue?? Or even a slightly different shade of Green?? The Guys that are doing the development are the guys that are doing the development, so their preference must count for something. If you, or I, want something different, you, or I, can either do the development of just endure with what we're given, or we can move to something different, Safari or Opera maybe!! Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: On Oct 24, 5:40 pm, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: 1) Tabs were not in IE until very recently (IE7) while Mozilla has had them for ages (Opera was the first tabbed browser, though). 2) The vast majority of users love tabs, please accept that while you might be one of our users, you are not the majority and can't speak for them. I don't like tabs either and see them as a pointless waste of screen space when the OS already has window management and its own taskbar which can be hidden but I don't care that tabs are supported because I have the choice not to use them. Tabs also seem to use more resources and essentially duplicate functionality already in the OS. 4) As in any open source project, those who actually give time and work to the project have the most influence of what's happening. Nobody can change that, it's the very nature of how things work, and an increasing amount of people seems to be happier with that than with the alternatives. Granted but why do things like change the download progress dialog UI to be less usable because you don't like dialogs (Your words: Download progress dialogs ? Eww!). There really is no reason why this can't look more or less the same as SeaMonkey 1.x 5) Accept that you are not always in the majority or target audience group among users. Does this mean that people who like the SeaMonkey 1.x UI aren't the target audience for SeaMonkey 2.0 ?? Phillip, if I am to believe your message header, you are using Win98! SeaMonkey 2.0 is not supposed to work on Win98, so are you complaining about something you haven't even tried yet?? Or have you found a way for getting SM 2.0 to work on Win98 (Please, oh please, Phillip, you'll be my friend forever!!)?? Hang on, Phillip, you almost got away with that, Phillip.but then, just before I hit sent I remembered that you use Mac OSX or whatever, so you must have your SM prefs munged!! You almost got away with that, Phillip! Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: Granted but why do things like change the download progress dialog UI to be less usable because you don't like dialogs (Your words: Download progress dialogs ? Eww!). There really is no reason why this can't look more or less the same as SeaMonkey 1.x If you love ugly, then you your own extension to make it ugly again. And thanks for turning a joke after hours of hard work against me. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Leonidas Jones wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Mark Hansen wrote: On 10/23/09 18:32, Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. The think they no more how a program should look like than the users that have to use it. Good God, have you a bone to pick or something? I am a developer and I certainly do listen to what end users want - they are my customers after all! Don't you think you might be over-generalizing here a bit? Perhaps you're just having a bad moment? No it seem with Mozilla when user are happy with function, it always seems that that irritates the heck out of the developers. It seems if users like it too much, its a target to be removed. For example I've always thought Tabs was not what most users wanted, because it was a gee-whiz-bang feature that was in IE. we had to have it. The way I work I have no desire, nor no need to have 8 or ten tabs open at one time. I look at one thing at a time. Although I've using personal computers since the early. I just never id desire have pages filled up with cached pages of multiple websites. WE don't need to any shape of fashion need to be an IE clone. If we look and, act so much like IE what's the point in trying out something different if it all works and looks the same. I don't want to be even reminded of IE , much less look like like it. This modal thing is another example. OR, how about killing javascript, in Thunderbird. There was a Feature in Communicator that was great, you could check for dead links and then ask it to delete them. It never saw the light of day in Mozilla. I could think of other things. But developers keep think up things, possibly ask (not always), get negative responses then put it in anyway. One thing you have resisted the temptation of doing is using Active-X. I salute you for that. Now That I have bragged on that, there probably will be an announcement next month that Active-X will be built-in. Active-X is the reason now for bout 98% of all the malware floating on the internet. The other 2 percent is Phishing attempts. If Active-X was killed dead, at least for a while Windows machines wouldn't need virus and Malware detection programs. Phillip, lets look at this. SeamMonkey is not Firefox. It is a volunteer effort. The developers *are* users. Actually, I think that's true for Firefox as well, or at least I would hope so. Still, with SeaMonkey, lets step back and remember that these people walked the extra mile, and kept the suite alive for us. Questioning the decisions is fine, developer bashing here is not really appropriate. For what its worth, I like the current About:SeaMonkey behaior. Lee I'm not bashing any particular Developer in particular. Its just because they have they have that unique knowledge they tend to let it go to their head and Feel that normal users don't know what they want. In the for pay community they have an excuse they design strictly for the Board of Directors and shareholders. The users are not in the equation. In open source community they should be beholden to the users. However because its open source most likely that have second jobs, and this a second job, and and self-aggrandizement is the pay off. But I've spoken more than I should. I really was just going to post specifically about the SM RC candidates. Once the it goes Gold I will stay away from the Group. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Daniel wrote: ---snip--- Phillip, if you painted your house Green, because you liked Green, would it matter to you if someone suggested you should have painted it Blue?? Or even a slightly different shade of Green?? The Guys that are doing the development are the guys that are doing the development, so their preference must count for something. If you, or I, want something different, you, or I, can either do the development of just endure with what we're given, or we can move to something different, Safari or Opera maybe!! Daniel Problem I tried and have installed: Safari 4 FireFox 3.5.3 SeaMonkey 1.1.8 SeaMonkey 2.0.rc.2 Camino Opera OmniWeb iCab I find SeaMonkey the best fit for me. I don't even like the design of FireFox as much as the design of SeaMonkey. And if I were to use Thunderbird I actually like Postbox better because the last one I downloaded still allowed javascript in email. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Daniel wrote: asmpgmr wrote: On Oct 24, 5:40 pm, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: 1) Tabs were not in IE until very recently (IE7) while Mozilla has had them for ages (Opera was the first tabbed browser, though). 2) The vast majority of users love tabs, please accept that while you might be one of our users, you are not the majority and can't speak for them. I don't like tabs either and see them as a pointless waste of screen space when the OS already has window management and its own taskbar which can be hidden but I don't care that tabs are supported because I have the choice not to use them. Tabs also seem to use more resources and essentially duplicate functionality already in the OS. 4) As in any open source project, those who actually give time and work to the project have the most influence of what's happening. Nobody can change that, it's the very nature of how things work, and an increasing amount of people seems to be happier with that than with the alternatives. Granted but why do things like change the download progress dialog UI to be less usable because you don't like dialogs (Your words: Download progress dialogs ? Eww!). There really is no reason why this can't look more or less the same as SeaMonkey 1.x 5) Accept that you are not always in the majority or target audience group among users. Does this mean that people who like the SeaMonkey 1.x UI aren't the target audience for SeaMonkey 2.0 ?? Phillip, if I am to believe your message header, you are using Win98! SeaMonkey 2.0 is not supposed to work on Win98, so are you complaining about something you haven't even tried yet?? Or have you found a way for getting SM 2.0 to work on Win98 (Please, oh please, Phillip, you'll be my friend forever!!)?? Hang on, Phillip, you almost got away with that, Phillip.but then, just before I hit sent I remembered that you use Mac OSX or whatever, so you must have your SM prefs munged!! You almost got away with that, Phillip! Daniel No I use Mac OSX 4.11. There isn't a Windows machine within a quarter mile of my house thank you. There is no modal window in SM2 for Mac. As for the Active -X Comments its combination or Reading various internet news feed, plus helping some of my relatives that use Windows machines and Friends. I suggest they turn off active-x and the malware attacks seem to disappear. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Robert Kaiser wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Granted but why do things like change the download progress dialog UI to be less usable because you don't like dialogs (Your words: Download progress dialogs ? Eww!). There really is no reason why this can't look more or less the same as SeaMonkey 1.x If you love ugly, then you your own extension to make it ugly again. And thanks for turning a joke after hours of hard work against me. Robert Kaiser See exactly what I am talking about. You think it looks ugly. Other of us love it. Most of the silent Majority folks are not going to have the courage to speak up. Most say to themselves, Gee something else I am going to have to endure , oh well I can't do anything about, so why bother saying anything. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Tabs waste resources. Each page in a tab as cache and use memory to store. While I have 2 GB Memory in current Laptop with today's web pages that can be easily filled up is I have a bunch of Tabs open. What are you talking about? I only have 160 MB of RAM, and I can easily use a bunch of tabs without running out of physical memory. Maybe your problem is Flash or Java, not tabs themselves. Separate windows use even more resources. Or are you saying that you use one window all the time? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: And if I were to use Thunderbird I actually like Postbox better because the last one I downloaded still allowed javascript in email. You do realise that JavaScript in mail is a big security risk, right? It doesn't have a place in e-mail messages in the first place. It's a message, not a web page. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Robert Kaiser wrote: 1) Tabs were not in IE until very recently (IE7) while Mozilla has had them for ages (Opera was the first tabbed browser, though). If I remember correctly, Maxthon was first with tabs, but that was a shell for IE. Opera was the first web browser to be shipped with tabs built-in. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: I don't like tabs either and see them as a pointless waste of screen space when the OS already has window management and its own taskbar which can be hidden The taskbar becomes less efficient the more buttons it has. Having tabs means that your taskbar is not cluttered with tons of windows. Windows XP has a band-aid for this, but it doesn't work that well because it doesn't know the context of each window. Plus, with tabs, I can rearrange them with dragdrop. Something that Windows couldn't do with its taskbar until Windows 7! Tabs also seem to use more resources This is wrong. A tab is one more instance of a viewport, and that's it. With an additional window, much more needs to be duplicated. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: For example I've always thought Tabs was not what most users wanted, because it was a gee-whiz-bang feature that was in IE. we had to have it. You're wrong. OR, how about killing javascript, in Thunderbird. Security risk, as pointed out above. There was a Feature in Communicator that was great, you could check for dead links and then ask it to delete them. It never saw the light of day in Mozilla. Another security (and privacy) risk. Imagine getting some spam with links. If SeaMonkey would check those for you, the spammer would get notified that your e-mail address exists, along with other data that's part of the HTTP request. Then you'd get even more spam. One thing you have resisted the temptation of doing is using Active-X. I salute you for that. Now That I have bragged on that, there probably will be an announcement next month that Active-X will be built-in. There will never be ActiveX, as it's a proprietary technology that's done more bad than good. Active-X is the reason now for bout 98% of all the malware floating on the internet. Most malware these days comes from social engineering, not ActiveX. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: Granted but why do things like change the download progress dialog UI to be less usable As with the loss of the About dialog, this was fallout from the conversion from XPFE to Toolkit, which (surprise) has no progress dialogs either, so from my point of view you should be lucky that any sort of progress dialog exists, because that means that somebody actually had to step up and write some new code to implement it. -- Warning: May contain traces of nuts. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: On Oct 24, 5:40 pm, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: 1) Tabs were not in IE until very recently (IE7) while Mozilla has had them for ages (Opera was the first tabbed browser, though). 2) The vast majority of users love tabs, please accept that while you might be one of our users, you are not the majority and can't speak for them. I don't like tabs either and see them as a pointless waste of screen space when the OS already has window management and its own taskbar which can be hidden but I don't care that tabs are supported because I have the choice not to use them. Tabs also seem to use more resources and essentially duplicate functionality already in the OS. ... Well, count me as a user who does like tabs. I can't prove it out to you logically because it's a question of taste. I know I can set Windows to combine taskbar entries from the same application, but that doesn't help much if you have five apps running, and I /really/ don't like having 10 or 12 little boxes in the taskbar that say SeaM... because that's useless (I have to mouse over them one... at... a... time... to see what they are). It does help to make the taskbar two rows high; sometimes I wish I could do that with SM's tabs. ;-) -- War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left. -- Paul B. Gallagher ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Granted but why do things like change the download progress dialog UI to be less usable because you don't like dialogs (Your words: Download progress dialogs ? Eww!). There really is no reason why this can't look more or less the same as SeaMonkey 1.x If you love ugly, then you your own extension to make it ugly again. And thanks for turning a joke after hours of hard work against me. Robert Kaiser See exactly what I am talking about. You think it looks ugly. Other of us love it. Most of the silent Majority folks are not going to have the courage to speak up. Most say to themselves, Gee something else I am going to have to endure , oh well I can't do anything about, so why bother saying anything. If the developers come up with something they think is pretty/elegant and gives me the feedback I need, that would be fine. I think it's dysfunctional to have a download process complete silently without telling me it succeeded, or worse yet, stall silently without telling me there's a problem. I don't know when I can go open the file, or if it's even there. -- War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left. -- Paul B. Gallagher ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Sun, 25 Oct 2009 16:36:01 +0100, /Benoit Renard/: Plus, with tabs, I can rearrange them with dragdrop. Something that Windows couldn't do with its taskbar until Windows 7! For this I'm using Taskbar Shuffle http://www.freewebs.com/nerdcave/ - very handy. -- Stanimir ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On Oct 25, 8:14 am, Neil n...@parkwaycc.co.uk wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Granted but why do things like change the download progress dialog UI to be less usable As with the loss of the About dialog, this was fallout from the conversion from XPFE to Toolkit, which (surprise) has no progress dialogs either, so from my point of view you should be lucky that any sort of progress dialog exists, because that means that somebody actually had to step up and write some new code to implement it. That means there should be a better separation between the backend and frontend code. Of course the Firefox developers are even more guilty of pushing their personal UI choices so this is likely intentional. I understand the backend switch is the reason the password manager was changed as well. Unfortunately there is a definite anti-modal dialog bias here (and having the old about dialog pref be called browser.show_about_as_stupid_modal_window certainly supports this). The problem is the developers aren't developing stuff just for themselves, they're developing for a general audience with varied tastes and varied ways of working. The developers seem to not get this or not to care. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Paul B. Gallagher wrote: I think it's dysfunctional to have a download process complete silently without telling me it succeeded, or worse yet, stall silently without telling me there's a problem. I don't know when I can go open the file, or if it's even there. I agree that the new design has problems, and I'm open to suggestions, but not to just go back to the also bad design it was before. My problem was to come up with a good base for an improved version as nobody wanted to take up the work of rewriting it (the old version was written for a backend we didn't have at all any more and the patch for the new backend only had an empty dialog come up with please use the download manager written in it, so I had to create _something_ new). I'm very unsatisfied with the situation of the functionality of context menus on the source and target labels being completely hidden, but the row of buttons in the old dialog was bad as well, even though it was more discoverable. I made sure no functionality of the old dialog was actuall lost, but I know good parts of it are not as discoverable as they should be. As I said, suggestions are welcome as long as they don't mean just reverting to the old design. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On Oct 25, 10:02 am, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: Paul B. Gallagher wrote: I think it's dysfunctional to have a download process complete silently without telling me it succeeded, or worse yet, stall silently without telling me there's a problem. I don't know when I can go open the file, or if it's even there. I agree that the new design has problems, and I'm open to suggestions, but not to just go back to the also bad design it was before. My problem was to come up with a good base for an improved version as nobody wanted to take up the work of rewriting it (the old version was written for a backend we didn't have at all any more and the patch for the new backend only had an empty dialog come up with please use the download manager written in it, so I had to create _something_ new). I'm very unsatisfied with the situation of the functionality of context menus on the source and target labels being completely hidden, but the row of buttons in the old dialog was bad as well, even though it was more discoverable. I made sure no functionality of the old dialog was actuall lost, but I know good parts of it are not as discoverable as they should be. As I said, suggestions are welcome as long as they don't mean just reverting to the old design. Robert Kaiser Well the tiny round buttons aren't good. I've never seen any app have buttons like that, it needs normal buttons. Also what do you perceive as wrong with the 1.x design ? It looks perfectly fine to me. People who don't like dialogs can use the download manager and that's great, there's a choice. Why make the dialog unusable to those who prefer dialogs ? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: Well the tiny round buttons aren't good. I've never seen any app have buttons like that, it needs normal buttons. Also what do you perceive as wrong with the 1.x design ? It looks perfectly fine to me. People who don't like dialogs can use the download manager and that's great, there's a choice. Why make the dialog unusable to those who prefer dialogs ? The tiny round buttons are IMHO one of the better designs in that progress window. It's no dialog anyhow, it's a progess window. But perhaps we should have just remove them altogether, would have saved me lots of work and us all lots of discussions. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Robert Kaiser wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Well the tiny round buttons aren't good. I've never seen any app have buttons like that, it needs normal buttons. Also what do you perceive as wrong with the 1.x design ? It looks perfectly fine to me. People who don't like dialogs can use the download manager and that's great, there's a choice. Why make the dialog unusable to those who prefer dialogs ? The tiny round buttons are IMHO one of the better designs in that progress window. It's no dialog anyhow, it's a progess window. But perhaps we should have just remove them altogether, would have saved me lots of work and us all lots of discussions. Robert Kaiser I like tiny round buttons, but...what to do when you run across a button icon that does not display a text description when you pass your mouse cursor over it? Is there a toggle for that action somewhere? Every window that displays, at least in Mail Newsgroups AND in Navigator, has a title bar (my name for it) with the name of the window you're looking at, the omnipresent oval button far right, and the three little round buttons far left, with X, - and + inside them. Obviously the X closes the window, the - seems to minimize the window and zoom it into the Dock, and what does the + window do? On mine, pressing plus moves the current window to the top left of the available screen space. What's that all about? Since I have no owner's manual for my SM 1.1.18, and particularly in the absence of the drop-down textual identity windows I mentioned above, I have to _guess_ what the actions are for... I tried looking thru Help, but finally gave up finding anything about them. They don't seem to HAVE a name. So, would it be too much trouble to add drop-down mouse-over I.D. windows for each icon? keith whaley ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Benoit Renard wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Tabs waste resources. Each page in a tab as cache and use memory to store. While I have 2 GB Memory in current Laptop with today's web pages that can be easily filled up is I have a bunch of Tabs open. What are you talking about? I only have 160 MB of RAM, and I can easily use a bunch of tabs without running out of physical memory. Maybe your problem is Flash or Java, not tabs themselves. Separate windows use even more resources. Or are you saying that you use one window all the time? Yes. I have set up unless the website doesn't allow for it, set so that the window used is the same window, but the contents is replaced by the contents of the updated information. Some websites open new windows and I'd like to smack the back of their hand (of the designer) for doing so. Its like a slide show or PP presentation (sort of). -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Benoit Renard wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: And if I were to use Thunderbird I actually like Postbox better because the last one I downloaded still allowed javascript in email. You do realise that JavaScript in mail is a big security risk, right? It doesn't have a place in e-mail messages in the first place. It's a message, not a web page. Why is it a security risk? I used Netscape Navigator 3.0.1.a Gold, Communicator, Mozilla, and Thunderbird until it was removed, and not once in all those years had any javascript attacks in email. Not once. let's see Navigator 3.0.1.a Gold came out sometime in early 90's or maybe even in late 80's let say roughly 15-20 years. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Benoit Renard wrote: asmpgmr wrote: I don't like tabs either and see them as a pointless waste of screen space when the OS already has window management and its own taskbar which can be hidden The taskbar becomes less efficient the more buttons it has. Having tabs means that your taskbar is not cluttered with tons of windows. Windows XP has a band-aid for this, but it doesn't work that well because it doesn't know the context of each window. Plus, with tabs, I can rearrange them with dragdrop. Something that Windows couldn't do with its taskbar until Windows 7! Tabs also seem to use more resources This is wrong. A tab is one more instance of a viewport, and that's it. With an additional window, much more needs to be duplicated. each of those instances require the use of cache to maintain that instance (or page) in memory. That amount of memory to go to that page is added to cache then you click to go somewhere else, that add to a tab, okay that pages contents text graphics everything is added to piece of cache memory, and so on. Taking a snap shot if you will takes memory -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: On Oct 25, 10:02 am, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: Paul B. Gallagher wrote: I think it's dysfunctional to have a download process complete silently without telling me it succeeded, or worse yet, stall silently without telling me there's a problem. I don't know when I can go open the file, or if it's even there. I agree that the new design has problems, and I'm open to suggestions, but not to just go back to the also bad design it was before. My problem was to come up with a good base for an improved version as nobody wanted to take up the work of rewriting it (the old version was written for a backend we didn't have at all any more and the patch for the new backend only had an empty dialog come up with please use the download manager written in it, so I had to create _something_ new). I'm very unsatisfied with the situation of the functionality of context menus on the source and target labels being completely hidden, but the row of buttons in the old dialog was bad as well, even though it was more discoverable. I made sure no functionality of the old dialog was actuall lost, but I know good parts of it are not as discoverable as they should be. As I said, suggestions are welcome as long as they don't mean just reverting to the old design. Robert Kaiser Well the tiny round buttons aren't good. I've never seen any app have buttons like that, it needs normal buttons. Also what do you perceive as wrong with the 1.x design ? It looks perfectly fine to me. People who don't like dialogs can use the download manager and that's great, there's a choice. Why make the dialog unusable to those who prefer dialogs ? One way you can get around this is look for SkyPilot Classic Theme. https://www.projectit.com/ Not only does it have better buttons it also returned the Grippy to the horizontal and vertical adjustment Bars -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On Oct 25, 10:37 am, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Well the tiny round buttons aren't good. I've never seen any app have buttons like that, it needs normal buttons. Also what do you perceive as wrong with the 1.x design ? It looks perfectly fine to me. People who don't like dialogs can use the download manager and that's great, there's a choice. Why make the dialog unusable to those who prefer dialogs ? The tiny round buttons are IMHO one of the better designs in that progress window. It's no dialog anyhow, it's a progess window. But perhaps we should have just remove them altogether, would have saved me lots of work and us all lots of discussions. In general it looks too busy compared to the 1.x download progress dialog, those buttons are too small and easily missed and the menu dropdowns seem out of place on a dialog. Even when you requested feedback about this on your blog most of the comments were negative. Now I realize this is subjective and that you think progress dialogs are soo backwards, only really old software uses such a thing. Also I know you have done a lot of work on SeaMonkey but you obviously hate dialogs and anything resembling them to the point that you have no objectivity when it comes to this area. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Robert Kaiser wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Well the tiny round buttons aren't good. I've never seen any app have buttons like that, it needs normal buttons. Also what do you perceive as wrong with the 1.x design ? It looks perfectly fine to me. People who don't like dialogs can use the download manager and that's great, there's a choice. Why make the dialog unusable to those who prefer dialogs ? The tiny round buttons are IMHO one of the better designs in that progress window. It's no dialog anyhow, it's a progess window. But perhaps we should have just remove them altogether, would have saved me lots of work and us all lots of discussions. Robert Kaiser See what I am saying people come up with a discussion about something and you want to remove them just because your tired of dissenting opinions. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones escribió: Robert Kaiser wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Granted but why do things like change the download progress dialog UI to be less usable because you don't like dialogs (Your words: Download progress dialogs ? Eww!). There really is no reason why this can't look more or less the same as SeaMonkey 1.x If you love ugly, then you your own extension to make it ugly again. See exactly what I am talking about. You think it looks ugly. Other of us love it. Most of the silent Majority folks are not going to have the courage to speak up. OK, I'll take the courage to speak up myself. :-) I love tabs, I strongly think they don't waste resources (if any, they save resources, since tabs don't create menu, menu items, toolbars, toolbar contents and status bars that are part of new windows), I think they add value to standard OS window management because they can be created without grabbing focus (it may be possible now to do that with windows, too, but it wasn't when tabs were first introduced in Mozilla Suite), and I think new download progress windows are not so bad vs. SeaMonkey 1.1.x (in fact, although I prefer dialogs vs. download manager window, I find new dialogs more useful than SM 1.1.x ones). And, despite above, I like more a separate dialog (whether modal or not) for About SeaMonkey vs. the current tab behaviour. These are my reasons: - Most About... programs are presented as dialogs, so SM digress from them here. - Usually, when I want to launch About... dialog, I want to see it. However, due to my preferences, the About... tab is open in background, forcing me to switch to it to access the data presented in it. I think my preferences are not too unusual, though. - If I have the mail and browser components open, with the mail component having focus, and I launch About..., I have to switch to browser component and probably switch to another tab. Still, I think this is not a priority issue, although if a patch already exists and works, it could worth considering it. My 0.02 cents. Ricardo ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Paul B. Gallagher wrote I think it's dysfunctional to have a download process complete silently without telling me it succeeded, or worse yet, stall silently without telling me there's a problem. I don't know when I can go open the file, or if it's even there. I think neither the Download Manager nor download progress windows are the best way to address that, but YMMV (i.e. it shouldn't stop anyone from improving download progress windows). For me Download Statusbar has always been the best way to visualize downloads (including progress and status) and to open/show them. Since SM2 now supports the back-end that newer versions of DSB require it was quite easy to port it; should be available shortly. Greetings, 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Benoit Renard wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: And if I were to use Thunderbird I actually like Postbox better because the last one I downloaded still allowed javascript in email. You do realise that JavaScript in mail is a big security risk, right? It doesn't have a place in e-mail messages in the first place. It's a message, not a web page. Why is it a security risk? I used Netscape Navigator 3.0.1.a Gold, Communicator, Mozilla, and Thunderbird until it was removed, and not once in all those years had any javascript attacks in email. Not once. You may cross the road when the ligths are red ... without any trouble ... until the bad day ! ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Daniel wrote: asmpgmr wrote: On Oct 24, 5:40 pm, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: 1) Tabs were not in IE until very recently (IE7) while Mozilla has had them for ages (Opera was the first tabbed browser, though). 2) The vast majority of users love tabs, please accept that while you might be one of our users, you are not the majority and can't speak for them. I don't like tabs either and see them as a pointless waste of screen space when the OS already has window management and its own taskbar which can be hidden but I don't care that tabs are supported because I have the choice not to use them. Tabs also seem to use more resources and essentially duplicate functionality already in the OS. 4) As in any open source project, those who actually give time and work to the project have the most influence of what's happening. Nobody can change that, it's the very nature of how things work, and an increasing amount of people seems to be happier with that than with the alternatives. Granted but why do things like change the download progress dialog UI to be less usable because you don't like dialogs (Your words: Download progress dialogs ? Eww!). There really is no reason why this can't look more or less the same as SeaMonkey 1.x 5) Accept that you are not always in the majority or target audience group among users. Does this mean that people who like the SeaMonkey 1.x UI aren't the target audience for SeaMonkey 2.0 ?? Phillip, if I am to believe your message header, you are using Win98! SeaMonkey 2.0 is not supposed to work on Win98, so are you complaining about something you haven't even tried yet?? Or have you found a way for getting SM 2.0 to work on Win98 (Please, oh please, Phillip, you'll be my friend forever!!)?? Hang on, Phillip, you almost got away with that, Phillip.but then, just before I hit sent I remembered that you use Mac OSX or whatever, so you must have your SM prefs munged!! You almost got away with that, Phillip! Daniel No I use Mac OSX 4.11. There isn't a Windows machine within a quarter mile of my house thank you. There is no modal window in SM2 for Mac. As for the Active -X Comments its combination or Reading various internet news feed, plus helping some of my relatives that use Windows machines and Friends. I suggest they turn off active-x and the malware attacks seem to disappear. So did you just forget to re-set your header info last time??? (Now it is correctly showing you are using a Mac!) Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Benoit Renard wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: For example I've always thought Tabs was not what most users wanted, because it was a gee-whiz-bang feature that was in IE. we had to have it. You're wrong. OR, how about killing javascript, in Thunderbird. Security risk, as pointed out above. There was a Feature in Communicator that was great, you could check for dead links and then ask it to delete them. It never saw the light of day in Mozilla. Another security (and privacy) risk. Imagine getting some spam with links. If SeaMonkey would check those for you, the spammer would get notified that your e-mail address exists, along with other data that's part of the HTTP request. Then you'd get even more spam. I don't know about this Dead Link feature being in Communicator, but maybe it was. I've used AM-Deadlink for the last ten years or so, and, as far as I can see, there would only be a link to a Spammer page in my address book if I put it there. So AM-Deadlink (or the Communicator feature from years ago) could only report me to a Spammer site if *I* had added the site first. How was that a security risk in Communicator?? Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: Now I realize this is subjective and that you think progress dialogs are soo backwards, only really old software uses such a thing. That's not what I think but you seem to be so convinced that I do that you ignore anything I'm saying anyhow, it seems. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On Oct 25, 4:52 pm, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Now I realize this is subjective and that you think progress dialogs are soo backwards, only really old software uses such a thing. That's not what I think but you seem to be so convinced that I do that you ignore anything I'm saying anyhow, it seems. Robert Kaiser Sorry but I copied the quoted text from your own blog. Now if that's your opinion then I don't fault you for it, everyone has their own likes and disklies and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. All I'm saying is that for software that is used by a wide audience front end elements shouldn't be locked into a particular method based only upon developer's POV especially when this involves a major change from previous releases. Better in regards to UI is almost always subjective. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. Then it's good that SeaMonkey is being developed by users. Or did you complain that different users have different opinions about what they want? Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: - download progress dialog was apparently intentionally hobbled (and a patch to improve it rejected) To be fair, it was rejected based on review criteria instead of developer opinion. Neil (who reviewed my patch) doesn't like the new download progress dialog either. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. Then it's good that SeaMonkey is being developed by users. Or did you complain that different users have different opinions about what they want? Robert Kaiser Its being being developed by developers not users. Typical Users have no or very little knowledge of code. All they know is how they want the way something should work. If a great design comes along that all users like, then the code designers can't stand it, and want it to work make it like they want it. SeaMonkey, Thunderbird, and FireFox are open source, answerable to users. For Pay Products (example MS Office) is designed for the shareholders and the BOD. Not the users. Users have no input. I prefer modal windows. I hate tabs and to this day refuse to use them. despite being designed into SM FF for last 4-5 years. Tabs waste resources. Each page in a tab as cache and use memory to store. While I have 2 GB Memory in current Laptop with today's web pages that can be easily filled up is I have a bunch of Tabs open. I'd love to get one of the new ones with 4 or more GB RAM but takes money. Money I don't have now. As far as being faster. Its not one whit better than forward or Back button. takes every bit as long one way or the other I've tried it. I have one thing that was improved. Finally you can adjust the size of the preference window. Drag the length longer. Just as sure as I mention this one of the designer will come along and say Oh that fellow loved how this adjustable. It doesn't need to be let us make it preset. If the major of people love the way something works, make it work that way. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On 10/23/09 18:32, Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. The think they no more how a program should look like than the users that have to use it. Good God, have you a bone to pick or something? I am a developer and I certainly do listen to what end users want - they are my customers after all! Don't you think you might be over-generalizing here a bit? Perhaps you're just having a bad moment? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
With patience akin to a cat's, Neil, on 10/23/2009 12:43 PM typed: D. K. Kraft wrote: In SM 1.1.x, there was a non-UI pref to have about:SeaMonkey display in a modal window (IMO, *not* stupid, but useful; YMMV): browser.show_about_as_stupid_modal_window. This pref is no longer functioning in SM 2. This dialog was provided as part of XPFE. The new toolkit did not provide an equivalent, and at the time we didn't think it was worth our while writing a replacement dialog along the lines of the Firefox/Thunderbird dialogs. There is also the problem that links in the about: dialog didn't work very well. This doesn't quite make sense. If SM 2 is using Toolkit, why would it be so difficult to port FF's about modal window to SM 2? I realize I have no program writing background to understand the idiosyncrasies that would have to be worked around between SM 2 and FF, but on the surface, for this one purpose, it doesn't appear that it should be so convoluted to execute. Is there such a radical difference between FF and SM 2, regardless of the commonality of Toolkit, that would make this a huge task? Not trying to be obtuse, but it seems like such a simple, isolated function. Just to get in my digs, and yes, whine a bit, from a practical standpoint, I think the presentation of SM 2's about info in a tab is unwieldy, since I often have to find the tab among a group of others when many tabs are open. The modal window is short, to the point, on top of all else, and for this purpose alone, a cleaner execution IMO. SM 2 isn't FF, I know, but in this case alone, I think emulating FF's execution would be just--I don't know--nicer? Yeah, it's just my user opinion, but looking for the about info in a buried tab really is a bit of a PITA. For what it's worth -- -- /\ /\ | Even if you have just destroyed a ^o o^D.K. Cat Kraft | Ming vase, purr. Usually all will -T- | be forgiven. ~ Lynnwood, WA | ___oOO___OOo___ | -- Lenny Rubenstein ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Mark Hansen wrote: On 10/23/09 18:32, Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. The think they no more how a program should look like than the users that have to use it. Good God, have you a bone to pick or something? I am a developer and I certainly do listen to what end users want - they are my customers after all! Don't you think you might be over-generalizing here a bit? Perhaps you're just having a bad moment? No it seem with Mozilla when user are happy with function, it always seems that that irritates the heck out of the developers. It seems if users like it too much, its a target to be removed. For example I've always thought Tabs was not what most users wanted, because it was a gee-whiz-bang feature that was in IE. we had to have it. The way I work I have no desire, nor no need to have 8 or ten tabs open at one time. I look at one thing at a time. Although I've using personal computers since the early. I just never id desire have pages filled up with cached pages of multiple websites. WE don't need to any shape of fashion need to be an IE clone. If we look and, act so much like IE what's the point in trying out something different if it all works and looks the same. I don't want to be even reminded of IE , much less look like like it. This modal thing is another example. OR, how about killing javascript, in Thunderbird. There was a Feature in Communicator that was great, you could check for dead links and then ask it to delete them. It never saw the light of day in Mozilla. I could think of other things. But developers keep think up things, possibly ask (not always), get negative responses then put it in anyway. One thing you have resisted the temptation of doing is using Active-X. I salute you for that. Now That I have bragged on that, there probably will be an announcement next month that Active-X will be built-in. Active-X is the reason now for bout 98% of all the malware floating on the internet. The other 2 percent is Phishing attempts. If Active-X was killed dead, at least for a while Windows machines wouldn't need virus and Malware detection programs. -- 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Neil wrote: D. K. Kraft wrote: If SM 2 is using Toolkit, why would it be so difficult to port FF's about modal window to SM 2? Sorry, but I can't really answer this because I've never seen FF's about dialog, but at the time we were preparing to make the switchover from XPFE to toolkit and we were busy trying to fix up things that weren't working. I've got a PNG image of the dialog or Modal window if you want to see 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: Mark Hansen wrote: On 10/23/09 18:32, Phillip Jones wrote: Developers never, ever, ever, ever listen to end users. The think they no more how a program should look like than the users that have to use it. Good God, have you a bone to pick or something? I am a developer and I certainly do listen to what end users want - they are my customers after all! Don't you think you might be over-generalizing here a bit? Perhaps you're just having a bad moment? No it seem with Mozilla when user are happy with function, it always seems that that irritates the heck out of the developers. It seems if users like it too much, its a target to be removed. For example I've always thought Tabs was not what most users wanted, because it was a gee-whiz-bang feature that was in IE. we had to have it. The way I work I have no desire, nor no need to have 8 or ten tabs open at one time. I look at one thing at a time. Although I've using personal computers since the early. I just never id desire have pages filled up with cached pages of multiple websites. WE don't need to any shape of fashion need to be an IE clone. If we look and, act so much like IE what's the point in trying out something different if it all works and looks the same. I don't want to be even reminded of IE , much less look like like it. This modal thing is another example. OR, how about killing javascript, in Thunderbird. There was a Feature in Communicator that was great, you could check for dead links and then ask it to delete them. It never saw the light of day in Mozilla. I could think of other things. But developers keep think up things, possibly ask (not always), get negative responses then put it in anyway. One thing you have resisted the temptation of doing is using Active-X. I salute you for that. Now That I have bragged on that, there probably will be an announcement next month that Active-X will be built-in. Active-X is the reason now for bout 98% of all the malware floating on the internet. The other 2 percent is Phishing attempts. If Active-X was killed dead, at least for a while Windows machines wouldn't need virus and Malware detection programs. Phillip, lets look at this. SeamMonkey is not Firefox. It is a volunteer effort. The developers *are* users. Actually, I think that's true for Firefox as well, or at least I would hope so. Still, with SeaMonkey, lets step back and remember that these people walked the extra mile, and kept the suite alive for us. Questioning the decisions is fine, developer bashing here is not really appropriate. For what its worth, I like the current About:SeaMonkey behaior. Lee ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Phillip Jones wrote: For example I've always thought Tabs was not what most users wanted, because it was a gee-whiz-bang feature that was in IE. we had to have it. 1) Tabs were not in IE until very recently (IE7) while Mozilla has had them for ages (Opera was the first tabbed browser, though). 2) The vast majority of users love tabs, please accept that while you might be one of our users, you are not the majority and can't speak for them. 3) The majority of satisfied users doesn't speak out loudly, a part of the minority of unsatisfied ones does. It's hard to find out from a strange subsection like those doing lots of posts what the opinion of the general audience is. 4) As in any open source project, those who actually give time and work to the project have the most influence of what's happening. Nobody can change that, it's the very nature of how things work, and an increasing amount of people seems to be happier with that than with the alternatives. 5) Accept that you are not always in the majority or target audience group among users. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On Oct 24, 5:40 pm, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote: 1) Tabs were not in IE until very recently (IE7) while Mozilla has had them for ages (Opera was the first tabbed browser, though). 2) The vast majority of users love tabs, please accept that while you might be one of our users, you are not the majority and can't speak for them. I don't like tabs either and see them as a pointless waste of screen space when the OS already has window management and its own taskbar which can be hidden but I don't care that tabs are supported because I have the choice not to use them. Tabs also seem to use more resources and essentially duplicate functionality already in the OS. 4) As in any open source project, those who actually give time and work to the project have the most influence of what's happening. Nobody can change that, it's the very nature of how things work, and an increasing amount of people seems to be happier with that than with the alternatives. Granted but why do things like change the download progress dialog UI to be less usable because you don't like dialogs (Your words: Download progress dialogs ? Eww!). There really is no reason why this can't look more or less the same as SeaMonkey 1.x 5) Accept that you are not always in the majority or target audience group among users. Does this mean that people who like the SeaMonkey 1.x UI aren't the target audience for SeaMonkey 2.0 ?? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On a previous occasion I did ask, but I got the impression from the negative reactions that even if I wrote a patch, it would be unceremoniously turned down. Therein lies the problem. There seems to be somewhat of a lack of regard for user choice on the part of the developers for things they don't personally like. This is much more so for Firefox but is starting to affect SeaMonkey as well. The thing with certain developers disliking modal dialogs is a good example. No one is saying that they should like them but to consider that some users don't have a problem with them and would prefer them to other UI and to provide prefs to allow the user to choose. SeaMonkey 2.0 changes: - missing plugin notification uses infobar instead of a modal dialog - password manager uses input field dropdown instead of a modal dialog - download progress dialog was apparently intentionally hobbled (and a patch to improve it rejected) - About SeaMonkey opens in a window only Out of curiosity, what is the problem that some of the developers have with modal dialogs anyway ? Is this a Linux/Unix thing ? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Robert Kaiser wrote: asmpgmr wrote: Out of curiosity, what is the problem that some of the developers have with modal dialogs anyway ? They get in our way even in cases when you don't need them. To expand on that somewhat short statement: I think the most prominent case is a modal dialog that is triggered by a page that is loaded in a background tab or other window. 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
D. K. Kraft wrote: In SM 1.1.x, there was a non-UI pref to have about:SeaMonkey display in a modal window (IMO, *not* stupid, but useful; YMMV): browser.show_about_as_stupid_modal_window. This pref is no longer functioning in SM 2. This dialog was provided as part of XPFE. The new toolkit did not provide an equivalent, and at the time we didn't think it was worth our while writing a replacement dialog along the lines of the Firefox/Thunderbird dialogs. There is also the problem that links in the about: dialog didn't work very well. Of course, SeaMonkey 2.0 makes it very easy for some enterprising extension author to write an About Dialog extension. -- Warning: May contain traces of nuts. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr wrote: Out of curiosity, what is the problem that some of the developers have with modal dialogs anyway ? They get in our way even in cases when you don't need them. To expand on that somewhat short statement: I think the most prominent case is a modal dialog that is triggered by a page that is loaded in a background tab or other window. I've honestly never had that happen. I would think that if you goto a site which does something that requires user interaction (i.e. password, missing plugins, etc.) then you would see this fairly quickly before you had a chance to switch to another window. In this case of password entry this would be expected and for things like about:seamonkey this is due to user input so your point doesn't apply. I'm definitely not saying that you personally should like modal dialogs, I'm only saying that not everyone has a problem with them as you do and that you should give users a choice to work the way that suits them. For example I absolutely despise infobars as I find moving the content area down an extremely unwelcome distraction. Forcing your own personal UI likes and dislikes upon everyone without a choice is definitely not a good way to go. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
asmpgmr schrieb: To expand on that somewhat short statement: I think the most prominent case is a modal dialog that is triggered by a page that is loaded in a background tab or other window. I've honestly never had that happen. I would think that if you goto a site which does something that requires user interaction (i.e. password, missing plugins, etc.) then you would see this fairly quickly before you had a chance to switch to another window. In this case of password entry this would be expected and for things like about:seamonkey this is due to user input so your point doesn't apply. I'll always open links in the background, no need for a chance to switch. Just a middle click with my mouse so i can open a lot of them if they are near by -like on newspages. When a modal Dialog comes up i don't know to which page it belongs. Also there are some areas of the world which are realy slow with page loading - try the asus webpage *g*-, so there is a delay in which i could change the page. I don't like modal dialogs in most cases, but in some cases they are good. But most ppl. don't care about them, put them in the background and wonder why SM dosn't respond and blame the program. Also I'm not happy about the infobar but i get used to it. Forcing your own personal UI likes and dislikes upon everyone without a choice is definitely not a good way to go. SM 2 is young, be patient. There is a lot to do which is IMHO more important. File a Bug, submit a patch and get your feature. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
Using SM 2.0 RC2 with a migrated profile from 1.1.18, Win XP Pro SP3: In SM 1.1.x, there was a non-UI pref to have about:SeaMonkey display in a modal window (IMO, *not* stupid, but useful; YMMV): browser.show_about_as_stupid_modal_window. This pref is no longer functioning in SM 2. Can we look for a return of this option in SM 2? Currently, about:SeaMonkey is displayed in a tab, dependent on a user's tab settings, or a wholly separate browser window. Not to bang the Firefox does it, why can't SM drum too loudly, but FF does display its about in a very nice modal window, and I think it works well. Better than the current SM 2 behavior, IMO. TIA for any feedback -- -- /\ /\ | Even if you have just destroyed a ^o o^D.K. Cat Kraft | Ming vase, purr. Usually all will -T- | be forgiven. ~ Lynnwood, WA | ___oOO___OOo___ | -- Lenny Rubenstein ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
D. K. Kraft schrieb: Using SM 2.0 RC2 with a migrated profile from 1.1.18, Win XP Pro SP3: In SM 1.1.x, there was a non-UI pref to have about:SeaMonkey display in a modal window (IMO, *not* stupid, but useful; YMMV): browser.show_about_as_stupid_modal_window. This pref is no longer functioning in SM 2. Useful? What for? 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On 10/22/09 16:50, Martin Freitag wrote: D. K. Kraft schrieb: Using SM 2.0 RC2 with a migrated profile from 1.1.18, Win XP Pro SP3: In SM 1.1.x, there was a non-UI pref to have about:SeaMonkey display in a modal window (IMO, *not* stupid, but useful; YMMV): browser.show_about_as_stupid_modal_window. This pref is no longer functioning in SM 2. Useful? What for? Martin Personal preference? I happen to like the modal dialog as well. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:20:28 -0700, Mark Hansen wrote: On 10/22/09 16:50, Martin Freitag wrote: D. K. Kraft schrieb: Using SM 2.0 RC2 with a migrated profile from 1.1.18, Win XP Pro SP3: In SM 1.1.x, there was a non-UI pref to have about:SeaMonkey display in a modal window (IMO, *not* stupid, but useful; YMMV): browser.show_about_as_stupid_modal_window. This pref is no longer functioning in SM 2. Useful? What for? Martin Personal preference? I happen to like the modal dialog as well. On a previous occasion I did ask, but I got the impression from the negative reactions that even if I wrote a patch, it would be unceremoniously turned down. 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: SM 2.0 RC2: will modal window for About:SeaMonkey return?
On 10/22/09 18:12, Philip Chee wrote: On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:20:28 -0700, Mark Hansen wrote: On 10/22/09 16:50, Martin Freitag wrote: D. K. Kraft schrieb: Using SM 2.0 RC2 with a migrated profile from 1.1.18, Win XP Pro SP3: In SM 1.1.x, there was a non-UI pref to have about:SeaMonkey display in a modal window (IMO, *not* stupid, but useful; YMMV): browser.show_about_as_stupid_modal_window. This pref is no longer functioning in SM 2. Useful? What for? Martin Personal preference? I happen to like the modal dialog as well. On a previous occasion I did ask, but I got the impression from the negative reactions that even if I wrote a patch, it would be unceremoniously turned down. Phil Well, I won't lose any sleep over it, but I did prefer it. Best Regards, ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
