Ronnie wrote:
As a final note, if I'm going to have to explain or justify each and
every decision made when trying to use SeaMonkey as the default browser
in a distribution that has a substantial amount of users and put it back
in the limelight, then maybe I should reconsider that decision as well.
To be perfectly frank, outside old school technically inclined users
(which i am as well) the browser doesn't get used by default because of
its dated look and lack of features. Midori and Qupzilla get more play
and its simply because they look modern. Sure they don't have the
plugins yet but that doesn't matter, they are still adopted more often
than Seamonkey. Palemoon is also getting substantial users because of
the same reason, in fact even more so because more plugins are supported
than SeaMonkey. I wanted to boost SeaMonkey interest and give it a
platform to be showcased. I did plenty of research about most people
gripes about the browser. Whether superficial or not, looks, and some
relatively mundain features that were missing was the biggest gripes. It
certainly seems like I'm making an effort, including bringing developers
back to the suite, actually paying them as well for their work and
giving what I think is the best possible chance to stay on the machine
after install. If this is not the goal of the users here for their
beloved browser, then next release the effort won't be made.
What plugins can SeaMonkey not use that Firefox and Palemoon can use?
The main ones are Flash, Quicktime, Silverlight, Windows media, maybe
Java, maybe Adobe Acrobat, and maybe Real Player (& for Macs,
Photocast). What others are there that SeaMonkey cannot handle?
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
