Re: Printing passwords in V 2
Phillip Jones wrote: Philip Chee wrote: On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 19:47:18 -0500, Phillip Jones wrote: document.write( + login.hostname + \n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n + login.username + \n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n + login.password + \n\n/td\n\n/tr\n); For this bit you either need to join them up into one line or: document.write( + login.hostname + \n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\ + login.username + \n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n + login.password + \n\n/td\n\n/tr\n); Phil Got it to work. Now how do I save the list as a List I can get to, if needed I have put into one line the parts that was i multi-lines. Still doesnot work. I have added document.write(ZORRO\n\n); in http://home.scarlet.be/~pin10521/showpassword.htm Only the word ZORRO is displayed ... grr... ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Printing passwords in V 2
Ray_Net: I have put into one line the parts that was i multi-lines. Still doesnot work. It should have been posted as attachment and not inline. Doesn't work for my SM 2.1 though *g* and i'm not much interested in fixing it. But works for an old SM 2.0.1. Hartmut Title: Export Seamonkey Passwords Host User name Password ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
On or about 2/1/2010 10:08 PM, CatThief typed the following: Phillip Jones wrote the following on 01-30-2010 10:28 AM: Rinaldi J. Montessi wrote: BeeNeR wrote: snip Absolutely. That is just one of the reasons I've used Netscape, Mozilla, and now SeaMonkey. Yes. When did the integration take place? Netscape version 3.0 or so? The first version I used was Netscape 3.0.a.Gold which I had to pay $35.00 Buck for. it was received on a CD and had a Paper Back 200 page manual. OMG, I had the very same thing! Then I used version 4 until migrating to Mozilla. And back before Netscape I used unix commands since our pc was interfaced to a SUN system. That was lot's of fun, NOT. And the interface boards at that time all had built-in IP addresses assigned by the government. Then came Procomm and Procomm+ before I used Netscape. Anyhow, I'm more than happy with an integrated net program such as SeaMonkey. I wasn't too happy with 2.0.0, but when I was able to get the password problem solved (don't use one) and the auto-mail addressing situation resolved I've been quite happy with SM. Only two minor issues left to take care of (at least for my operation) are the inability to delete addresses from mailing lists in the manner that existed in 1.x and I really do miss the 'QUICKSTART' button. Please bring it back. -- Ed http://mysite.verizon.net/vze1zhwu Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. –Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1968) ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Printing passwords in V 2
George Carden wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Philip Chee wrote: On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 19:47:18 -0500, Phillip Jones wrote: document.write( + login.hostname + \n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n + login.username + \n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n + login.password + \n\n/td\n\n/tr\n); For this bit you either need to join them up into one line or: document.write( + login.hostname + \n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\ + login.username + \n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n + login.password + \n\n/td\n\n/tr\n); Phil Got it to work. Now how do I save the list as a List I can get to, if needed Phil, I usually do a PDF version of these from time to time. That way I have a snapshot of my passwords at any given time, in case some are lost in the future. I can look back to see what they were. (Or you could just print them out.) Otherwise, I have my View Passwords HTML document bookmarked in SeaMonkey so that whenever I want, I bring it up for my current passwords. -George Smach self on head! I forgot about being able to make a PDF the screen. Thanks! -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Printing passwords in V 2
Ray_Net wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Philip Chee wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 19:47:18 -0500, Phillip Jones wrote:
document.write(" " + login.hostname + "\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n
" + login.username + "\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n " +
login.password + "\n\n/td\n\n/tr\n");
For this bit you either need to join them up into one line or:
document.write(" " + login.hostname +
"\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\ " +
login.username +
"\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n " +
login.password +
"\n\n/td\n\n/tr\n");
Phil
Got it to work. Now how do I save the list as a List I can get to, if
needed
I have put into one line the parts that was i multi-lines.
Still doesnot work.
I have added document.write("ZORRO\n\n");
in http://home.scarlet.be/~pin10521/showpassword.htm
Only the word ZORRO is displayed ... grr...
First off I have specific purpose for using html in the post.
To get away from the Problem above
type this:
document.write(" " + login.hostname +
"\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\ " +
login.username +
"\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n " +
login.password +
"\n\n/td\n\n/tr\n");
To look like this:
document.write(" " + login.hostname + "\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\ " + login.username + "\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n " + login.password + "\n\n/td\n\n/tr\n");
Boldface on above statement was strict to emphasis the line and is
not part of the actual line
Copied after the text had been threaded you might have seen " "
remove all of them first.
--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T."If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org
mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Printing passwords in V 2
Phillip Jones wrote:
Ray_Net wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
First off I have specific purpose for using html in the post.
To get away from the Problem above
type this:
document.write(" " + login.hostname +
"\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\ " +
login.username +
"\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n " +
login.password +
"\n\n/td\n\n/tr\n");
To look like this:
document.write(" " + login.hostname + "\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\ " + login.username + "\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n " + login.password + "\n\n/td\n\n/tr\n");
Boldface on above statement was strict to emphasis the line and
is
not part of the actual line
Copied after the text had been threaded you might have seen " "
remove all of them first.
--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T."If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org
mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com
every thing is supposed to be on one line.
document.write(" " + login.hostname + "\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\ " + login.username + "\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n " + login.password + "\n\n/td\n\n/tr\n");
--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T."If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org
mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Help Test Autofill Forms 0.9.5.2 Mod for SeaMonkey 2.0!
Jens Hatlak wrote: Philip Chee wrote: I've just ported Autofill Forms to SeaMonkey 2.0. Before I push this public I would like some brave souls to beta test this. I've gotten it to install and the UI to show up and there are no obvious JS errors. Since I don't normally auto-fill forms even with SeaMonkey 1.1 I haven't tested that it actually fills in forms at all. I haven't tested extensively either but it seems to do the job. Installs fine, the toolbar button is there after the restart and works, settings are accessible and appear to work, saving a form and letting SM fill one in using a saved profile works, too. The context menu entries do as advertised as well. Good job! :-) Now where are all those people screaming around time and again, demanding bring back form manager? It'll be interesting to see what they say, or if they react at all to this. All those people aren't using SM 2 yet, so we can't test it -- but we're watching closely what the rest of you say about Autofill Forms! ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.x: Mail Filter keeps getting disabled
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:55:47 -0600, Sqwertz wrote: Simple mail filter that looks for a word in the subject of an Inbox and puts it into a named local folder. It keeps getting disabled. If I tick the Enabled box, it works until SM gets shut down, then it unticks itself. I've deleted the filter and re-added it. Same thing. It had a mind of it's own. It pretty much makes messages filters useless. I have removed and reinstalled the filter and the email account it is attached to. Same thing happens. This account is set up to POP from pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com (ATT DSL). The only thing odd I notice occasionally is when stafrt the email client, it often say splease wait while the folder is being processed. Apparently it was already checking mail when I fired up the mail window. The filter itself is pretty simple: version=9 logging=yes name=TOSNA enabled=no type=17 action=Move to folder actionValue=mailbox://nob...@local%20folders/TOSNA condition=AND (subject,contains,TOSNA) It's the only filter in the file. And it keeps disabling itself for no apparent reason. Log file is working fine - it logs everything normally up until the point it disables itself. So much for message filters. -sw ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: EVANG: Hostway
Rostyslaw Lewyckyj wrote: Paul B. Gallagher wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: And Tidy Extension (HTML Validator) both in SM and FF show 29 error and 2 warnings just on the opening page. Thanks, I already told them the W3C validator returns 8 errors and 13 warnings. But unless I can show a relationship between one or more errors and the loss of functionality, they are unlikely to be interested. I recommend that you send them the _results_ and pointers to all three validators and recommend/argue that as a matter of good programming they need to correct all the syntax errors in their code at least. After all, don't they correct all the syntax errors reported by the compilers of all of their programs as a first step in the program coding process. (Or, is that no longer current common practice ???) Дякую/Thanks. But I already have reasons to upgrade to v. 2, so once I get around to that we'll see if it helps. For the moment, I'm wrestling with an unrelated problem -- had a bad sector on my HDD, and after fixing it, my backup software (which btw I reinstalled) compiles the file list normally, but then after a few minutes it terminates and reports (for all 80,000-odd files) path not found. How it can find the paths to compile the list but not to save the files I don't know -- War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left. -- Paul B. Gallagher ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Printing passwords in V 2
Phillip Jones wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Ray_Net wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
*First off I have specific purpose for using html in the post. To get
away from the Problem above
*
*type this: *
document.write( + login.hostname +
\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\ +
login.username +
\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n +
login.password +
\n\n/td\n\n/tr\n);
*To look like this:*
*document.write( + login.hostname + \n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\ + login.username +
\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n + login.password + \n\n/td\n\n/tr\n);
*
Boldface on above statement was strict to emphasis the line and is not
part of the actual line
Copied after the text had been threaded you might have seen
remove all of them first.
--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it
http://www.phillipmjones.nethttp://www.vpea.org
mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com
every thing is supposed to be on one line.
document.write( + login.hostname + \n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\ + login.username +
\n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n + login.password + \n\n/td\n\n/tr\n);*
*
--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it
http://www.phillipmjones.nethttp://www.vpea.org
mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com
I have copy/pasted you line into
http://home.scarlet.be/~pin10521/showpassword.htm
and it is still not working.
the problem must be located in the prévious lines:
1. netscape.security.PrivilegeManager.enablePrivilege('UniversalXPConnect');
2. var loginmanager =
Components.classes[@mozilla.org/login-manager;1].getService();
3. loginmanager =
loginmanager.QueryInterface(Components.interfaces.nsILoginManager);
4. // loads signons into table
5. var count = { value: 0 };
6. var logins = loginmanager.getAllLogins(count);
7. for each (var login in logins) {
8. document.write( tr\n\n);
9. document.write( td align=left\n\n);
and not in lines:
10. document.write( + login.hostname + \n\n/td\n\ntd
align=left\n\ + login.username + \n\n/td\n\ntd align=left\n\n
+ login.password + \n\n/td\n\n/tr\n);
11. }
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Printing passwords in V 2
Ray_Net: I have copy/pasted you line into http://home.scarlet.be/~pin10521/showpassword.htm and it is still not working. Well, you could try the attachment i had posted. ;) Hartmut ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
[SOLVED] Re: Printing passwords in V 2
My problem was because i executed it from http://home.scarlet.be/~pin10521/showpassword.htm instead of from file:///C:/ALLDATA/TEST/showpassword.htm NOW - for those asking to print it, they have the choice or printing directly from SM browser, on a printer or on a pdf-pseudo-printer. I prefer to Edit-SelectAll-Copy then Paste in Word and finally print it on a paper. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: [SOLVED] Re: Printing passwords in V 2
Ray_Net wrote: My problem was because i executed it from http://home.scarlet.be/~pin10521/showpassword.htm instead of from file:///C:/ALLDATA/TEST/showpassword.htm NOW - for those asking to print it, they have the choice or printing directly from SM browser, on a printer or on a pdf-pseudo-printer. I prefer to Edit-SelectAll-Copy then Paste in Word and finally print it on a paper. Congrats, Ray. I love it when everyone is happy. ;-) ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Help Test Autofill Forms 0.9.5.2 Mod for SeaMonkey 2.0!
Jens Hatlak wrote: Philip Chee wrote: I've just ported Autofill Forms to SeaMonkey 2.0. Before I push this public I would like some brave souls to beta test this. I've gotten it to install and the UI to show up and there are no obvious JS errors. Since I don't normally auto-fill forms even with SeaMonkey 1.1 I haven't tested that it actually fills in forms at all. I haven't tested extensively either but it seems to do the job. Note: One thing that's a little weird is that the toolbar button keeps reappearing when you drag it from the toolbar to the Customize Toolbar window and then open another browser window or restart SeaMonkey. It's the same with Firefox. To actually get rid of the icon you need to go to the extension's Settings, last tab, first sub tab, first checkbox. Greetings, Jens -- Jens Hatlak http://jens.hatlak.de/ SeaMonkey Trunk Tracker http://smtt.blogspot.com/ ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Help Test Autofill Forms 0.9.5.2 Mod for SeaMonkey 2.0!
Bill Spikowski wrote: Jens Hatlak wrote: Now where are all those people screaming around time and again, demanding bring back form manager? It'll be interesting to see what they say, or if they react at all to this. All those people aren't using SM 2 yet, so we can't test it You can. Download the ZIP version, extract it somewhere, run the executable and skip profile migration. You'll end up with a fresh profile, in a new location, and your current SeaMonkey will be unaffected. Then you can install the extension and try it out. Just quit your current SeaMonkey before you do, or start the new one with the -no-remote command line option. Once you want to actually switch, start the extracted version with the -P command line parameter once and delete the test profile from the Profile Manager. Then remove the extracted version and proceed with installing the new SeaMonkey version using the installer (if you like). HTH Jens -- Jens Hatlak http://jens.hatlak.de/ SeaMonkey Trunk Tracker http://smtt.blogspot.com/ ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 21:49:47 -0800, Rufus wrote: Philip Chee wrote: On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:44:15 -0800, Rufus wrote: I do keep Thunderbird 3.x around just to evaluate it and I'm quite pleased with it - more so than I might have expected. There appear to be a very vocal minority of veteran SeaMonkey1.1^WThunderbird2.0 users who hate, absolutely hate the new SeaMonkey2.0^WThunderbird3.0 and are sticking resolutely to the old version (or threatening to move to Outlook Express (?!?). Phil ...that's sort of funny...given that it's about the reverse of how I feel about SM 1.1.18 vs SM 2.x.x... I installed TB 3.0 expecting to hate it, and ended up loving it compared to what got under my skin about SM 2.0. First thing I noted was that their Mac presentation was far more Mac-like than the new SM default...and maybe that's what people hate most! I suppose that it's what you are familiar with. TB3 was a big leap not just in features but in significant changes to the UI. If you've spent years burning TB2 into your muscle memory, you might get upset that your favourite wossits aren't in their accustomed locations - even or especially if the UI is more Mac-like. 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. [ ]I'm not paranoid! Which of my enemies told you that? * TagZilla 0.066.6 ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Spell-checker bugs in SM2
Using SM2 on Windows 7 x64. My spell-checker dictionary transferred successfully from SM1 but I notice a couple of problems: 1. Sometimes, mis-spelled words will be missed (no red underline). In another situation, this same word will be caught. It happens often enough to be a real nuisance. I do not remember this in SM1. 2. If you are reading an RSS feed as a web page, and that page has a text-entry field, the spell checker works (red underline is present) but right-clicking on the offending word does not bring up the spell-checker context menu (just the usual browser context menu). Anybody else noticed these things? Loving SM2 for the most part... -- David Wilkinson ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Spell-checker bugs in SM2
David Wilkinson a écrit : My spell-checker dictionary transferred successfully from SM1 but I notice a couple of problems: Did you try reinstalling it? Maybe the version 1 dictionary isn't 100% compatible or got corrupted or something. You can uninstall it through Tools Addons, which also allows you to download and install the dictionary anew. S. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Help Test Autofill Forms 0.9.5.2 Mod for SeaMonkey 2.0!
Jens Hatlak wrote: Bill Spikowski wrote: Jens Hatlak wrote: Now where are all those people screaming around time and again, demanding bring back form manager? It'll be interesting to see what they say, or if they react at all to this. All those people aren't using SM 2 yet, so we can't test it You can. Download the ZIP version, extract it somewhere, run the executable and skip profile migration. You'll end up with a fresh profile, in a new location, and your current SeaMonkey will be unaffected. Then you can install the extension and try it out. Just quit your current SeaMonkey before you do, or start the new one with the -no-remote command line option. Once you want to actually switch, start the extracted version with the -P command line parameter once and delete the test profile from the Profile Manager. Then remove the extracted version and proceed with installing the new SeaMonkey version using the installer (if you like). Thanks -- I figured there was a way but I didn't know what it was ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Spell-checker bugs in SM2
On 2/3/2010 11:20 AM, David Wilkinson wrote [in part]: Using SM2 on Windows 7 x64. My spell-checker dictionary transferred successfully from SM1 but I notice a couple of problems: 1. Sometimes, mis-spelled words will be missed (no red underline). In another situation, this same word will be caught. It happens often enough to be a real nuisance. I do not remember this in SM1. On the SeaMonkey menu bar, go to [Edit Preferences]. Under Category' on the Preferences window, select [Browser Languages]. Look at the current selection for When typing check my spelling. You might have indicated In multiline boxes, in which case there is no checking for spelling in a single-line box. If that is the case, change the selection to All boxes. -- David E. Ross http://www.rossde.com/ Go to Mozdev at http://www.mozdev.org/ for quick access to extensions for Firefox, Thunderbird, SeaMonkey, and other Mozilla-related applications. You can access Mozdev much more quickly than you can Mozilla Add-Ons. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
Leonidas Jones wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones schrieb: /snip/ Phillip, I would be careful about making statements that you cannot backup, it will damage your credibility. 10 times faster? Come on now! I tried disabling tabs, and opening windows instead, with no gain in speed at all. The same links open in new tabs just as fast as new windows. Not to mention, I often have 10-20 tabs open at a time. Trying to keep track of that many windows is a nightmare. I realize this might not be your work model. If you only have a couple or three open at a time, it probably works, and if it works for you, that's great. But 10 times faster? Please provide some data to back that up. Lee YMMV. But for me its like the difference between night and day. And, it was related to having Multiple windows open for going each link in a page rather than reusing the same window. I don't have the luxury of one of the newfangled 8 GB , quadcore machines. I'm still using just a lowly 1.67GB PowerPC Machine. Plus I have a Slow DSL Line (1 mb synchronous). so setting to open in same window sped up for me as I said. As you know, I don't do tabs. Well, then how the heck do you know its 10 times faster??? I will detail the tests I ran. I do have a fast iMac, with a fast cable connection. I cleared the cache, and opened my my.myway start page. I opened 20 links in tabs, 10 were my.myway pages, and ten were external links. I then cleared the cache, and repeated with opening new windows. There was virtually no difference. The my.myway pages show the load time, and most gave the tabs a slight edge, but from my standpoint, I didn't actually notice a difference. All the pages opened quickly, whether tabs or windows. Knowing that you have an older Mac, I reran the same test on my PowerMac G4, running Tiger. Its a 450 mhz with 640 MB of ram, far slower than what you are running. Same results, if anything, the tabs were faster, though it was not noticeable as a user, within less then a second. Interesting to note the old PowerMac pulled the pages just as fast as the iMac Intel. iMac Intel, OS X 10.6.2 3.06 GHz Core 2 Duo 4 GB RAM PowerMac PPC G4 450 MHz 640 MB RAM Same internet connection, same SM 2.0.2, same speed. I've always said that older machines are far from dead as far as the internet is concerned. Phillip, I respect what you are trying to do here. I agree with a lot of it, some of it I disagree completely, but I respect it none the less. But, when you say things like 10 times faster with absolutely nothing to back it up, and indeed, when it is just clearly so wrong, it damages your credibility, and people are much less likely to take you seriously. Lee I think Phillip tends to exaggerate sometimes, so I don't take something like 10 times faster literally, but rather I think it means just faster . . . how much actually is debatable, but your tests seem to be more precise. Nevertheless, I do take him seriously, just with a grain of salt. On the topic of faster, I think you put it well when you said from my standpoint, I didn't actually notice a difference. Most discussions on browser speeds boil down to maybe a few seconds faster, which a user isn't really going to notice as significant. There are, however, times when the speed IS noticeable, and in that regard Phillip's testimony sometimes leaves me wondering . . . was it really all that much more fast, or is this '10 times' thing just a matter of a few puny seconds? I don't necessarily think it is wrong for Phillip to do that, so I might disagree with you there, but I do agree that it stretches the credibility of the statement if you take it literally. BJ ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Printing passwords in V 2
Leonidas Jones wrote: George Carden wrote: The old ways I am aware of for printing a list of passwords from the Password Manager don't seem to work in SeaMonkey V2. This link describes what I'd been doing... http://edmullen.net/mozilla/moz_pw.php Ed, or anyone, what is the best way to print passwords now in version 2? Thanks! -George This is nothing more then a very kludgey workaround, but if you really need a printed copy, open Password Manager, select View Passwords, take a screen shot and print that. Depending on your screen res and how many passwords you have saved, you might have to take multiple screenshots to get them all. I know its not what you are looking for, but it will get you the copy you need. Lee This link is from No. 5 on Ed Mullen's website. It works on both Firefox 3.x and Seamonkey 2.0.x: http://the-edmeister.com/firefox_info/Firefox_Passwords_Info.html Save the link Firefox-3_Passwords.htm as a file. Open it up in your browser and it will shows all the Host-User name-Password data as an HTML table. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Changed to Improving of using single Widows was Re: Goodbye SeaMonkey
Phillip Jones wrote: Daniel wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones schrieb: /snip/ Phillip, I would be careful about making statements that you cannot backup, it will damage your credibility. 10 times faster? Come on now! I tried disabling tabs, and opening windows instead, with no gain in speed at all. The same links open in new tabs just as fast as new windows. Not to mention, I often have 10-20 tabs open at a time. Trying to keep track of that many windows is a nightmare. I realize this might not be your work model. If you only have a couple or three open at a time, it probably works, and if it works for you, that's great. But 10 times faster? Please provide some data to back that up. Lee YMMV. But for me its like the difference between night and day. And, it was related to having Multiple windows open for going each link in a page rather than reusing the same window. I don't have the luxury of one of the newfangled 8 GB , quadcore machines. I'm still using just a lowly 1.67GB PowerPC Machine. Plus I have a Slow DSL Line (1 mb synchronous). so setting to open in same window sped up for me as I said. As you know, I don't do tabs. Well, then how the heck do you know its 10 times faster??? I will detail the tests I ran. I do have a fast iMac, with a fast cable connection. I cleared the cache, and opened my my.myway start page. I opened 20 links in tabs, 10 were my.myway pages, and ten were external links. I then cleared the cache, and repeated with opening new windows. There was virtually no difference. The my.myway pages show the load time, and most gave the tabs a slight edge, but from my standpoint, I didn't actually notice a difference. All the pages opened quickly, whether tabs or windows. Knowing that you have an older Mac, I reran the same test on my PowerMac G4, running Tiger. Its a 450 mhz with 640 MB of ram, far slower than what you are running. Same results, if anything, the tabs were faster, though it was not noticeable as a user, within less then a second. Interesting to note the old PowerMac pulled the pages just as fast as the iMac Intel. iMac Intel, OS X 10.6.2 3.06 GHz Core 2 Duo 4 GB RAM PowerMac PPC G4 450 MHz 640 MB RAM Same internet connection, same SM 2.0.2, same speed. I've always said that older machines are far from dead as far as the internet is concerned. Phillip, I respect what you are trying to do here. I agree with a lot of it, some of it I disagree completely, but I respect it none the less. But, when you say things like 10 times faster with absolutely nothing to back it up, and indeed, when it is just clearly so wrong, it damages your credibility, and people are much less likely to take you seriously. Lee Please reread. 10 times as opposed the way it was (opening multiple windows and not reusing the same window). I've tried tabs (I just don't use them) and for my setup and machine they are slow. Phillip, did you miss Lee's para...I then cleared the cache, and repeated with opening new windows. Sure seems like he tried multiple Windows to me, not just comparing a iMac Intel, OS X 10.6.2 with a PowerMac PPC G4 Daniel Yes I have to keep my cache files clean. In fact I clean them at least once a day. If I don't SM 2.0.2 crashes. As it stands now it has been crashing about once ever two or three days. I've started out with 1, then 10, then back to 1000, finally 5000 nothing seems to help. Funny thing it affects email more than web browsing but sometimes it affects web browsing. The point I was trying to make, Phillip, (and I guess Lee was trying as well) was, if you download a page, all its bits and pieces are saved in the cache, so the second time you want to display that page, bang, it's there, apparently loaded much quicker. So unless you are clearing your cache *between* doing the test for multiply TABS verses multiply WINDOWS, you're not being fair!! Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
NoOp wrote: On 02/02/2010 04:29 AM, Daniel wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: NoOp schrieb: Really? And early versions of Netscape were just simple browsers? I still have both Mosaic and Netscape on disk, including a version of the first Netscape w/support license. I suppose I could pull it out of the archives (shelf) and check it, but I seem to recall that it included an email client. Very early versions were browser-only for sure, but I can't exactly tell which version was the first to have a mail client. I heard it was some 3.x version, but I wasn't around at that time. Robert Kaiser Let's get real, people. Had been niggling away at me for a while, so I've arced up the Desktop computer with Win98 on it and there in the release notes for Netscape Navigator 1.1 (Windows), in the README.TXT, under the section heading Running Netscape, the second para states You must have a direct Internet connection before you can use Netscape. The ability to send and receive e-mail does not necessarily mean you can run Netscape. There are three requirements for Netscape Navigator 1.1.. O.K., it doesn't specifically say you can use Netscape 1.1 to send and receive e-mail. In the program itself, you can select Directory-Go to Newsgroups or you can select File-Mail Document opens up a page where you can enter Mail To (which I guess is where you would but an e-mail address) or or the same page, Post Newsgroup (which is pretty obvious), Subject and Attachment Then a large portion of the screen where you can type information, and, at the bottom, Send, Quote Document and Cancel If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. Netscape Navigator (TM) Version 1.1N Copyright 1994-1995 Netscape Communications Corporation, All rights reserved. I think I've got NN 0.9 on a floppy disk somewhere, and I think it has mail as well (but don't quote me!!). Daniel Nah, I was wrong. I just checked I still have my original 1.0 book (can't find the floppy just now) and for email it references using Eudora Lite. Newsgroups was available, but the email client was Eudora. I still have my original book, invoices, upgrade invoices... maybe they'll be work something on eBay someday :-) So when did Eudora stop being part of Netscape?? Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
BJ wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones schrieb: /snip/ Phillip, I would be careful about making statements that you cannot backup, it will damage your credibility. 10 times faster? Come on now! I tried disabling tabs, and opening windows instead, with no gain in speed at all. The same links open in new tabs just as fast as new windows. Not to mention, I often have 10-20 tabs open at a time. Trying to keep track of that many windows is a nightmare. I realize this might not be your work model. If you only have a couple or three open at a time, it probably works, and if it works for you, that's great. But 10 times faster? Please provide some data to back that up. Lee YMMV. But for me its like the difference between night and day. And, it was related to having Multiple windows open for going each link in a page rather than reusing the same window. I don't have the luxury of one of the newfangled 8 GB , quadcore machines. I'm still using just a lowly 1.67GB PowerPC Machine. Plus I have a Slow DSL Line (1 mb synchronous). so setting to open in same window sped up for me as I said. As you know, I don't do tabs. Well, then how the heck do you know its 10 times faster??? I will detail the tests I ran. I do have a fast iMac, with a fast cable connection. I cleared the cache, and opened my my.myway start page. I opened 20 links in tabs, 10 were my.myway pages, and ten were external links. I then cleared the cache, and repeated with opening new windows. There was virtually no difference. The my.myway pages show the load time, and most gave the tabs a slight edge, but from my standpoint, I didn't actually notice a difference. All the pages opened quickly, whether tabs or windows. Knowing that you have an older Mac, I reran the same test on my PowerMac G4, running Tiger. Its a 450 mhz with 640 MB of ram, far slower than what you are running. Same results, if anything, the tabs were faster, though it was not noticeable as a user, within less then a second. Interesting to note the old PowerMac pulled the pages just as fast as the iMac Intel. iMac Intel, OS X 10.6.2 3.06 GHz Core 2 Duo 4 GB RAM PowerMac PPC G4 450 MHz 640 MB RAM Same internet connection, same SM 2.0.2, same speed. I've always said that older machines are far from dead as far as the internet is concerned. Phillip, I respect what you are trying to do here. I agree with a lot of it, some of it I disagree completely, but I respect it none the less. But, when you say things like 10 times faster with absolutely nothing to back it up, and indeed, when it is just clearly so wrong, it damages your credibility, and people are much less likely to take you seriously. Lee I think Phillip tends to exaggerate sometimes, so I don't take something like 10 times faster literally, but rather I think it means just faster . . . how much actually is debatable, but your tests seem to be more precise. Nevertheless, I do take him seriously, just with a grain of salt. On the topic of faster, I think you put it well when you said from my standpoint, I didn't actually notice a difference. Most discussions on browser speeds boil down to maybe a few seconds faster, which a user isn't really going to notice as significant. There are, however, times when the speed IS noticeable, and in that regard Phillip's testimony sometimes leaves me wondering . . . was it really all that much more fast, or is this '10 times' thing just a matter of a few puny seconds? I don't necessarily think it is wrong for Phillip to do that, so I might disagree with you there, but I do agree that it stretches the credibility of the statement if you take it literally. BJ I based on my opinion *my systems* . I have two G-4's, a 500 Mb and. and 1.67GB PowerBook 17 slow compared to the Intel machines of today. plus they just have one processor with one core, and cache speed is 100mb on the G4-500, one 167 Mb on the 1.67GB. the G4-500 had 1.5 GB memory. The 1.67Gb has 2 Gb. Now if I had one of them new 8 core 4 GB machines, may be difference would barely be noticeable. But on my machines the improvement when I finally figured out how to reuse the same window was dramatic, for me 10 times was the difference. Now if I could stop the SeaMonkey Crashes I'd be happy: Since 10/29/2009 I've had ten Crashes. And I've actually had two or three others That I cleared out before this. In the entire history of SM 1.x including crashes caused by the full circle crash reporter I had maybe 6 (in about 5-6 years). And I used almost as many as many extensions and themes as I use now. Most are triggered during reading email/news. -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___
Re: Printing passwords in V 2
Evan Davidson wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: George Carden wrote: The old ways I am aware of for printing a list of passwords from the Password Manager don't seem to work in SeaMonkey V2. This link describes what I'd been doing... http://edmullen.net/mozilla/moz_pw.php Ed, or anyone, what is the best way to print passwords now in version 2? Thanks! -George This is nothing more then a very kludgey workaround, but if you really need a printed copy, open Password Manager, select View Passwords, take a screen shot and print that. Depending on your screen res and how many passwords you have saved, you might have to take multiple screenshots to get them all. I know its not what you are looking for, but it will get you the copy you need. Lee This link is from No. 5 on Ed Mullen's website. It works on both Firefox 3.x and Seamonkey 2.0.x: http://the-edmeister.com/firefox_info/Firefox_Passwords_Info.html Save the link Firefox-3_Passwords.htm as a file. Open it up in your browser and it will shows all the Host-User name-Password data as an HTML table. This is way too cool! 8-) Thanks! ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
Phillip Jones wrote: BJ wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones schrieb: /snip/ Phillip, I would be careful about making statements that you cannot backup, it will damage your credibility. 10 times faster? Come on now! I tried disabling tabs, and opening windows instead, with no gain in speed at all. The same links open in new tabs just as fast as new windows. Not to mention, I often have 10-20 tabs open at a time. Trying to keep track of that many windows is a nightmare. I realize this might not be your work model. If you only have a couple or three open at a time, it probably works, and if it works for you, that's great. But 10 times faster? Please provide some data to back that up. Lee YMMV. But for me its like the difference between night and day. And, it was related to having Multiple windows open for going each link in a page rather than reusing the same window. I don't have the luxury of one of the newfangled 8 GB , quadcore machines. I'm still using just a lowly 1.67GB PowerPC Machine. Plus I have a Slow DSL Line (1 mb synchronous). so setting to open in same window sped up for me as I said. As you know, I don't do tabs. Well, then how the heck do you know its 10 times faster??? I will detail the tests I ran. I do have a fast iMac, with a fast cable connection. I cleared the cache, and opened my my.myway start page. I opened 20 links in tabs, 10 were my.myway pages, and ten were external links. I then cleared the cache, and repeated with opening new windows. There was virtually no difference. The my.myway pages show the load time, and most gave the tabs a slight edge, but from my standpoint, I didn't actually notice a difference. All the pages opened quickly, whether tabs or windows. Knowing that you have an older Mac, I reran the same test on my PowerMac G4, running Tiger. Its a 450 mhz with 640 MB of ram, far slower than what you are running. Same results, if anything, the tabs were faster, though it was not noticeable as a user, within less then a second. Interesting to note the old PowerMac pulled the pages just as fast as the iMac Intel. iMac Intel, OS X 10.6.2 3.06 GHz Core 2 Duo 4 GB RAM PowerMac PPC G4 450 MHz 640 MB RAM Same internet connection, same SM 2.0.2, same speed. I've always said that older machines are far from dead as far as the internet is concerned. Phillip, I respect what you are trying to do here. I agree with a lot of it, some of it I disagree completely, but I respect it none the less. But, when you say things like 10 times faster with absolutely nothing to back it up, and indeed, when it is just clearly so wrong, it damages your credibility, and people are much less likely to take you seriously. Lee I think Phillip tends to exaggerate sometimes, so I don't take something like 10 times faster literally, but rather I think it means just faster . . . how much actually is debatable, but your tests seem to be more precise. Nevertheless, I do take him seriously, just with a grain of salt. On the topic of faster, I think you put it well when you said from my standpoint, I didn't actually notice a difference. Most discussions on browser speeds boil down to maybe a few seconds faster, which a user isn't really going to notice as significant. There are, however, times when the speed IS noticeable, and in that regard Phillip's testimony sometimes leaves me wondering . . . was it really all that much more fast, or is this '10 times' thing just a matter of a few puny seconds? I don't necessarily think it is wrong for Phillip to do that, so I might disagree with you there, but I do agree that it stretches the credibility of the statement if you take it literally. BJ I based on my opinion *my systems* . I have two G-4's, a 500 Mb and. and 1.67GB PowerBook 17 slow compared to the Intel machines of today. plus they just have one processor with one core, and cache speed is 100mb on the G4-500, one 167 Mb on the 1.67GB. the G4-500 had 1.5 GB memory. The 1.67Gb has 2 Gb. Now if I had one of them new 8 core 4 GB machines, may be difference would barely be noticeable. But on my machines the improvement when I finally figured out how to reuse the same window was dramatic, for me 10 times was the difference. Now if I could stop the SeaMonkey Crashes I'd be happy: Since 10/29/2009 I've had ten Crashes. And I've actually had two or three others That I cleared out before this. In the entire history of SM 1.x including crashes caused by the full circle crash reporter I had maybe 6 (in about 5-6 years). And I used almost as many as many extensions and themes as I use now. Most are triggered during reading email/news. Incidentally they have the same Reason for crash: EXC_BAD_ACCESS / KERN_PROTECTION_FAILURE -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net
Re: Printing passwords in V 2
George Carden wrote: Evan Davidson wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: George Carden wrote: The old ways I am aware of for printing a list of passwords from the Password Manager don't seem to work in SeaMonkey V2. This link describes what I'd been doing... http://edmullen.net/mozilla/moz_pw.php Ed, or anyone, what is the best way to print passwords now in version 2? Thanks! -George This is nothing more then a very kludgey workaround, but if you really need a printed copy, open Password Manager, select View Passwords, take a screen shot and print that. Depending on your screen res and how many passwords you have saved, you might have to take multiple screenshots to get them all. I know its not what you are looking for, but it will get you the copy you need. Lee This link is from No. 5 on Ed Mullen's website. It works on both Firefox 3.x and Seamonkey 2.0.x: http://the-edmeister.com/firefox_info/Firefox_Passwords_Info.html Save the link Firefox-3_Passwords.htm as a file. Open it up in your browser and it will shows all the Host-User name-Password data as an HTML table. This is way too cool! 8-) Thanks! Didn't work for me. but the html script did work once I did away with the extra returns. -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Template Glitch
I created a Template Email in Seamonkey 2.0.2 Windows XP today. It included a jpeg of a map. The jpeg was on my network drive and had a link to a larger PDF of the map. Every time I pulled up the Template and tried to mail it I got an error attaching the file. If I edited the Template and reinserted the jpg everything worked fine. Any idea why this could happen? Anyone seen anything similar? -- Rob ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
Philip Chee wrote: On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 21:49:47 -0800, Rufus wrote: Philip Chee wrote: On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:44:15 -0800, Rufus wrote: I do keep Thunderbird 3.x around just to evaluate it and I'm quite pleased with it - more so than I might have expected. There appear to be a very vocal minority of veteran SeaMonkey1.1^WThunderbird2.0 users who hate, absolutely hate the new SeaMonkey2.0^WThunderbird3.0 and are sticking resolutely to the old version (or threatening to move to Outlook Express (?!?). Phil ...that's sort of funny...given that it's about the reverse of how I feel about SM 1.1.18 vs SM 2.x.x... I installed TB 3.0 expecting to hate it, and ended up loving it compared to what got under my skin about SM 2.0. First thing I noted was that their Mac presentation was far more Mac-like than the new SM default...and maybe that's what people hate most! I suppose that it's what you are familiar with. TB3 was a big leap not just in features but in significant changes to the UI. If you've spent years burning TB2 into your muscle memory, you might get upset that your favourite wossits aren't in their accustomed locations - even or especially if the UI is more Mac-like. Phil Yeah...I had also been using TB 2.x prior to 3.0...so I did have some expectations based on my negative experience with SM 2.0 - I installed TB 3.0 sometime after I had been fooling around with the newer SM, so I wasn't really expecting to be thrilled. I was, and surprisingly so...I immediately liked the tabs, and everything was where I would have expected it to be on a Mac. It also didn't seem like I lost any functionality for what I do with TB like I did with SM 2.x.x, and that was also of note. Maybe that team has more Mac users on it or something, but from my Mac user standpoint they got a lot of stuff right. Kudos to them. -- - Rufus ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
On 02/03/2010 04:21 PM, Phillip Jones wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: BJ wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: Phillip Jones schrieb: /snip/ Phillip, I would be careful about making statements that you cannot backup, it will damage your credibility. 10 times faster? Come on now! I tried disabling tabs, and opening windows instead, with no gain in speed at all. The same links open in new tabs just as fast as new windows. Not to mention, I often have 10-20 tabs open at a time. Trying to keep track of that many windows is a nightmare. I realize this might not be your work model. If you only have a couple or three open at a time, it probably works, and if it works for you, that's great. But 10 times faster? Please provide some data to back that up. Lee YMMV. But for me its like the difference between night and day. And, it was related to having Multiple windows open for going each link in a page rather than reusing the same window. I don't have the luxury of one of the newfangled 8 GB , quadcore machines. I'm still using just a lowly 1.67GB PowerPC Machine. Plus I have a Slow DSL Line (1 mb synchronous). so setting to open in same window sped up for me as I said. As you know, I don't do tabs. Well, then how the heck do you know its 10 times faster??? I will detail the tests I ran. I do have a fast iMac, with a fast cable connection. I cleared the cache, and opened my my.myway start page. I opened 20 links in tabs, 10 were my.myway pages, and ten were external links. I then cleared the cache, and repeated with opening new windows. There was virtually no difference. The my.myway pages show the load time, and most gave the tabs a slight edge, but from my standpoint, I didn't actually notice a difference. All the pages opened quickly, whether tabs or windows. Knowing that you have an older Mac, I reran the same test on my PowerMac G4, running Tiger. Its a 450 mhz with 640 MB of ram, far slower than what you are running. Same results, if anything, the tabs were faster, though it was not noticeable as a user, within less then a second. Interesting to note the old PowerMac pulled the pages just as fast as the iMac Intel. iMac Intel, OS X 10.6.2 3.06 GHz Core 2 Duo 4 GB RAM PowerMac PPC G4 450 MHz 640 MB RAM Same internet connection, same SM 2.0.2, same speed. I've always said that older machines are far from dead as far as the internet is concerned. Phillip, I respect what you are trying to do here. I agree with a lot of it, some of it I disagree completely, but I respect it none the less. But, when you say things like 10 times faster with absolutely nothing to back it up, and indeed, when it is just clearly so wrong, it damages your credibility, and people are much less likely to take you seriously. Lee I think Phillip tends to exaggerate sometimes, so I don't take something like 10 times faster literally, but rather I think it means just faster . . . how much actually is debatable, but your tests seem to be more precise. Nevertheless, I do take him seriously, just with a grain of salt. On the topic of faster, I think you put it well when you said from my standpoint, I didn't actually notice a difference. Most discussions on browser speeds boil down to maybe a few seconds faster, which a user isn't really going to notice as significant. There are, however, times when the speed IS noticeable, and in that regard Phillip's testimony sometimes leaves me wondering . . . was it really all that much more fast, or is this '10 times' thing just a matter of a few puny seconds? I don't necessarily think it is wrong for Phillip to do that, so I might disagree with you there, but I do agree that it stretches the credibility of the statement if you take it literally. BJ I based on my opinion *my systems* . I have two G-4's, a 500 Mb and. and 1.67GB PowerBook 17 slow compared to the Intel machines of today. plus they just have one processor with one core, and cache speed is 100mb on the G4-500, one 167 Mb on the 1.67GB. the G4-500 had 1.5 GB memory. The 1.67Gb has 2 Gb. Now if I had one of them new 8 core 4 GB machines, may be difference would barely be noticeable. But on my machines the improvement when I finally figured out how to reuse the same window was dramatic, for me 10 times was the difference. Now if I could stop the SeaMonkey Crashes I'd be happy: Since 10/29/2009 I've had ten Crashes. And I've actually had two or three others That I cleared out before this. In the entire history of SM 1.x including crashes caused by the full circle crash reporter I had maybe 6 (in about 5-6 years). And I used almost as many as many extensions and themes as I use now. Most are triggered during reading email/news. Incidentally they have the same Reason for crash: EXC_BAD_ACCESS /
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
On 02/03/2010 04:04 PM, Daniel wrote: NoOp wrote: ... I think I've got NN 0.9 on a floppy disk somewhere, and I think it has mail as well (but don't quote me!!). Daniel Nah, I was wrong. I just checked I still have my original 1.0 book (can't find the floppy just now) and for email it references using Eudora Lite. Newsgroups was available, but the email client was Eudora. I still have my original book, invoices, upgrade invoices... maybe they'll be work something on eBay someday :-) So when did Eudora stop being part of Netscape?? Daniel Got me. I'd have to find the original floppy to install (I'm sure I have it somewhere) to test. CRS is a problem these days, so I can't recall what it was exactly that I was using circa 95-96 (other than a Tymnet email client that I'd been using since 1983 pine on a shell account). ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
On 2/3/2010 6:00 PM, NoOp wrote: It's probably crashing due to lack of trimming in your posts... Note: this post purposely left off trimming no electrons were killed in the process. However this might be of use: http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html quote Trim your follow-ups. Do not quote the entire content of the message to which you are replying. Include only as much as is necessary for context. Remember that if someone wants to read the original message, they can; it is easily accessible. A good rule of thumb is, don't include more quoted text than new text. There is always a need for some trimming - either a salutation, a signature, some blank lines or whatever. If you are doing no trimming whatsoever of the quoted text, then you aren't trimming enough. /quote Sigh ... if only more people would take this advice. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
NoOp wrote: Now if I could stop the SeaMonkey Crashes I'd be happy: Since 10/29/2009 I've had ten Crashes. And I've actually had two or three others That I cleared out before this. In the entire history of SM 1.x including crashes caused by the full circle crash reporter I had maybe 6 (in about 5-6 years). And I used almost as many as many extensions and themes as I use now. Most are triggered during reading email/news. Incidentally they have the same Reason for crash: EXC_BAD_ACCESS / KERN_PROTECTION_FAILURE It's probably crashing due to lack of trimming in your posts... Note: this post purposely left off trimming no electrons were killed in the process. However this might be of use: http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html quote Trim your follow-ups. Do not quote the entire content of the message to which you are replying. Include only as much as is necessary for context. Remember that if someone wants to read the original message, they can; it is easily accessible. A good rule of thumb is, don't include more quoted text than new text. There is always a need for some trimming - either a salutation, a signature, some blank lines or whatever. If you are doing no trimming whatsoever of the quoted text, then you aren't trimming enough. /quote Actually the shorter post are more likely to cause the crash. -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 17:31:15 -0800, Rufus wrote: Maybe that team has more Mac users on it or something, but from my Mac user standpoint they got a lot of stuff right. Kudos to them. Their team has at least two Mac users, one full time graphics designer, and one full time professional User Experience person. I'm sure that if SeaMonkey can afford to hire such people we could match Thunderbird in Mac user experience pretty quickly. 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. [ ]If flies couldn't fly, would they be called walks? * TagZilla 0.066.6 ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: EVANG: Hostway
Paul B. Gallagher wrote: Rostyslaw Lewyckyj wrote: Paul B. Gallagher wrote: Phillip Jones wrote: And Tidy Extension (HTML Validator) both in SM and FF show 29 error and 2 warnings just on the opening page. Thanks, I already told them the W3C validator returns 8 errors and 13 warnings. But unless I can show a relationship between one or more errors and the loss of functionality, they are unlikely to be interested. I recommend that you send them the _results_ and pointers to all three validators and recommend/argue that as a matter of good programming they need to correct all the syntax errors in their code at least. After all, don't they correct all the syntax errors reported by the compilers of all of their programs as a first step in the program coding process. (Or, is that no longer current common practice ???) Дякую/Thanks. But I already have reasons to upgrade to v. 2, so once I get around to that we'll see if it helps. Прошу дуже, Нема за що \ You're welcome, de nada. :-) For the moment, I'm wrestling with an unrelated problem -- had a bad sector on my HDD, and after fixing it, my backup software (which btw I reinstalled) compiles the file list normally, but then after a few minutes it terminates and reports (for all 80,000-odd files) path not found. How it can find the paths to compile the list but not to save the files I don't know Співчуваю/ My sympathies. Perhaps you need to try backing up in pieces. Or, if the files are accessible and readable by the system otherwise, then do a brute force XCOPY (?). Or, try a different backup program. Anyway, My trying to do a Reply-all to your article is what caused my triple posting (due to system #...@?!). When I did the send, the system/SeaMonkey reported a DNS error! but did not give any information as to which address was the cause. Nor did it indicate that the message had been sent to the other address, which happened to be the news server. Trouble shooting the problem caused the re-sends to the newsgroup :( -- Rostyk identify to which destination ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Goodbye Seamonkey
Philip Chee wrote: On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 17:31:15 -0800, Rufus wrote: Maybe that team has more Mac users on it or something, but from my Mac user standpoint they got a lot of stuff right. Kudos to them. Their team has at least two Mac users, one full time graphics designer, and one full time professional User Experience person. I'm sure that if SeaMonkey can afford to hire such people we could match Thunderbird in Mac user experience pretty quickly. Phil Well, to start with, your users are your best user experience people, some seem to get that and some don't... ... but that's something you're going to have to explain to me - all this hired vs volunteer stuff. Who's who, and how are they doing what? Seeing as all these apps are free, I've been assuming that everyone is a volunteer. So, just who is paying the hired guns, how do they make enough money on a free product to get paid, and just why and what keeps it all free? -- - Rufus ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
