On 05/14/2009 01:10 PM, Karl Anderson wrote:
> Benoit Renard wrote:
>> John Doue wrote:
>>> The best version is the one you have been using for a while to your 
>>> satisfaction.
>> Not if that version has publicly known exploits that have been patched 
>> in the next version.
>>> The wise man does not rush.
>> Unfortunately, this isn't really true for security updates, and often is 
>> followed to the point of exaggeration. See: Conficker infections.
> Unfortunately, most of these answers don't address my underlying 
> question. Are the newer versions of Seamonkey backwards compatable with 
> my older version of Windows (Win2kpro)running on outdated hardware? 
> Also, do they hog resources the way that newer versions of windows do? 
> In other words, my old PIII-900 with 256 megs of RAM runs Win2K pretty 
> well, but I suspect it would bog down under XP, which is one reason I've 
> not upgraded. But at this point it is also tying me back to legacy 
> versions of some software and I'm wondering if Mozilla/Seamonkey falls 
> into that category.

Yes it did - I've *already* told you that SeaMonkey will work with Win2K:

It will work just fine in Win2K & uses much of the same browser code
that FireFox 3.x uses. However, calendaring addons (Lightning) work is
still in progress, so you'll be without that for awhile yet.

I run Win2K, both as dual-boot and in VirtualBox and run Both SeaMonkey
1.1.16 and 2.0b1pre. The dual-boot is an 800Mhz/384Mb laptop. I also
have 1.1.16 running on a 350Mhz/256Mb Win2K laptop.

I've also told you that SeaMonkey 1.1.16 or 2.0b1pre will run in
parallel with your existing outdated and unsupported version of Mozilla
1.7.3. So, load it up and give it a try.

support-seamonkey mailing list

Reply via email to