Stanimir Stamenkov wrote:
Sun, 07 Aug 2011 10:37:53 +0100, /Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd)/:
Putting a reasoned argument on behalf of those who prefer stability
and security to non-essential change is not "bitching"; it is
offering a constructive criticism that should be interpreted
as such.
The problem with the so called "constructive criticism" I see widespread
in this group, is it doesn't help keeping the SeaMonkey product alive,
most importantly, and then usable, both related to the Mozilla platform
dependency remark I've given previously.
if its widespread doesn't tell you something. Since the Mozilla all in
one was broken up to SM FF, and TB. Mozilla doesn't give as rat's behind
what happens to SM. Its what the users of SeaMonkey are interested SM.
SM should cater to the users.
If it was left to Mozilla Org. They would put a stake in SeaMonkey and
burn it.
have you read all the complaints from corporations that have left
FireFox because of this rapid release Madness. Corporate users are the
number one users of Mozilla products. And users are running away in droves.
Only recently have Mozilla tried courting the Corporate users and
figuring out a way to not release faster than Corporate IT's can keep up.
--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
