On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:38:22 -0700, Ken Rudolph wrote:

> All well and good; but the question is why is Seamonkey 1.1.17 so 
> much less robust than Firefox?  And furthermore, why is the "broken 
> site" window so useless?  Will SM 2.0 be more Foxy, at least?

You have to compare apples to apples:

SeaMonkey 1.1.17 <==> Firefox 2.0.0.?
SeaMonkey 2.0b1pre <==> Firefox 3.5.0

(I think I am one of the only two people using SeaMonkey 1.5a ~~ Firefox
3.0)

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.
[ ]ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI!
* TagZilla 0.066.6

_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Reply via email to