Why not creating a version without "vulnerabilities" ... i'ts ennoying
to always upgrade, upgrade, and upgrade ...
On 05/01/2009 06:38 AM, Benoit Renard wrote:
You shouldn't recommend an alpha version to an end user. All kinds of
funky things might (and do) occur.
For best web page rendering I'd recommend the pre-released 2.0
Perhaps. But the link I provided does include a bright warning:
Warning! The SeaMonkey version for download on this page is a
testing-only preview of the next generation of our Internet suite.
Please test it carefully, it's not yet in a state where we can encourage
you to use it for daily browsing and mail operations.
For daily use, we strongly advise you to download the current stable
And Karl stated:
I'm finding it won't render many newer webpages properly. Would the
current version of SeaMonkey work on this system? If not which version
would be best?
For page rendering 2.0x _is_ the better choice IMO. I've also switched
all of my systems (with the exception of 2 test systems) over to 2.x, as
even with it's outstanding issues/bugs, I find it *considerably* better
overall than 1.1.1x. Again my opinion. But I get your point & do
conceed that 1.1.16 is probably the safer choice for most new users...
However, in this case Karl is running "Mozilla 1.7.3" - SM 2.0x will
install in parallel to his existing version and, therefore he should be
able to fall back to/switch to his current version without issue.
Further he's running an unsupported version to begin with:
The Mozilla Suite is no longer supported and is affected by several
known vulnerabilities fixed in newer Mozilla-based products. All users
are urged to upgrade to a supported product such as Firefox or SeaMonkey.
Why bother with installing a lame duck from a non-supported version at
support-seamonkey mailing list