Re: Diverge From T-bird

[GérardJan]

Rick,
¿What the hack is T-bird?

rickman wrote:

When using SeaMonkey for reading newsgroups, I see a number of differences from
T-bird.  One that is particularly annoying is when reading a thread new posts
often show up in the middle with other parts of the thread outside of the thread
pane.  An easy way to see if any other posts remain unread in this thread is to
use the \ key to close the thread.  If an underline remains I could then press
'N' to take me to the next unread post in that thread in T-bird.  In SeaMonkey
it takes me to the first unread post in the GROUP!

Obviously this is a divergence from T-bird.  Was this something that was changed
in SeaMonkey or in T-bird?

I find any number of differences in usability like this.  I think if I could get
T-bird to work on my machine I would switch back.  But it ran even slower than
SeaMonkey does, so SeaMonkey is a net improvement, just not a large one.

For that matter, why did SeaMonkey split off from T-bird?  What was the
fundamental issue that created a new tool so similar to the old?




--
GérardJan Vinkesteijn-Rudersdorff
http://www.ciudadpatricia.es
https://facebook.com/gerardjan.vinkesteijn

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/52.0 
SeaMonkey/2.49a2

Build identifier: 20161122013001

Kaylee (to Simon): "Are you okay?"

Mal: "Is HE okay?"

Simon (rushing to River, who is seemingly unfazed): "River?"

River: "I swallowed a bug."
--"Serenity"
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[rickman]

NFN Smith wrote on 6/13/2017 5:18 PM:

David C. Mores wrote:


Thanks for adding your quantitative study information to this discussion.
It's interesting, and made me realize that my comments on fastness were
about operational fastness and not about the app startup time fastness -
which likely is what the original FF/TB/SM discussion was about.



True.

When it comes to evaluating speed, there's fast (or slow) and then there's
fast.

With Seamonkey, speed of loading the application is one thing, and speed of
operation is another. And within operational speed, there's not just what's
happening on the local computer, but things like connectivity to a site, and
responsiveness of the site itself.  There's several different potential
bottlenecks.


That all applies to the browser and would be the same between different 
browsers.  I only really use SeaMonkey for newsgroups and only use the 
SeaMonkey browser when I click a link in a newsgroup.  That said, I find 
everything in SeaMonkey to be slow.  There are times I am waiting to type 
into the newsgroup post I am making and have to find something else to do 
while I am waiting for control to return.  I also see focus change to the 
main window sometimes resulting in chaos when it starts interpreting my 
typed ahead keys as commands.


I saw similar speed issues in T-bird which has a lot of common code while I 
don't find these speed issues in any other apps on my computer.  When these 
speed issues happen, I don't see any indication in task manager the computer 
is being taxed in any way.


--

Rick C
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[NFN Smith]

David C. Mores wrote:


Thanks for adding your quantitative study information to this 
discussion.  It's interesting, and made me realize that my comments on 
fastness were about operational fastness and not about the app startup 
time fastness - which likely is what the original FF/TB/SM discussion 
was about.



True.

When it comes to evaluating speed, there's fast (or slow) and then 
there's fast.


With Seamonkey, speed of loading the application is one thing, and speed 
of operation is another. And within operational speed, there's not just 
what's happening on the local computer, but things like connectivity to 
a site, and responsiveness of the site itself.  There's several 
different potential bottlenecks.


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

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[David C. Mores via support-seamonkey]

Ed Mullen wrote:

On 6/10/17 at 8:39 PM, David C. Mores's prodigious digits fired off with
great aplomb:

EE wrote:

rickman wrote:

When using SeaMonkey for reading newsgroups, I see a number of
differences from T-bird.  One that is particularly annoying is when
reading a thread new posts often show up in the middle with other parts
of the thread outside of the thread pane.  An easy way to see if any
other posts remain unread in this thread is to use the \ key to close
the thread.  If an underline remains I could then press 'N' to take me
to the next unread post in that thread in T-bird.  In SeaMonkey it
takes
me to the first unread post in the GROUP!

Obviously this is a divergence from T-bird.  Was this something that
was
changed in SeaMonkey or in T-bird?

I find any number of differences in usability like this.  I think if I
could get T-bird to work on my machine I would switch back.  But it ran
even slower than SeaMonkey does, so SeaMonkey is a net improvement,
just
not a large one.

For that matter, why did SeaMonkey split off from T-bird?  What was the
fundamental issue that created a new tool so similar to the old?


What do you mean, "outside of the thread pane"? If a thread exists, it
has to be in the thread pane, unless you think that some part of it was
not sent.

SeaMonkey did not split from Thunderbird.  Thunderbird and Firefox split
off from the Mozilla suite, and SeaMonkey was a continuation of the
Mozilla suite, only kept more up to date by having the cores of
Thunderbird and Firefox.


As I recall it from the discussion at the time, Thunderbird and
Firefox were created as separate, single function applications to make
them faster and more responsive than the combined multi-function
application.


That was part of the rationale.



I never understood or appreciated this view because I always found the
Seamonkey multi-function application to be entirely responsive and
fast enough for me.  Like what are we talking about?  300ms verses
500ms or some such - not really perceptible for most of us in day to
day usage. Having the mail and browser app, etc. rolled into one
seemed to be - and continues to be - a supremely convenient and
efficient way to go, but your mileage and situation may vary.


A long time ago, because of the faster/lighter argument, I did a
comparison of SM vs separate apps.



The original was done, I think, in 2006. I re-ran them in 2013.



Thanks for adding your quantitative study information to this 
discussion.  It's interesting, and made me realize that my comments on 
fastness were about operational fastness and not about the app startup 
time fastness - which likely is what the original FF/TB/SM discussion 
was about.

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

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[Ed Mullen]

On 6/10/17 at 8:39 PM, David C. Mores's prodigious digits fired off with 
great aplomb:

EE wrote:

rickman wrote:

When using SeaMonkey for reading newsgroups, I see a number of
differences from T-bird.  One that is particularly annoying is when
reading a thread new posts often show up in the middle with other parts
of the thread outside of the thread pane.  An easy way to see if any
other posts remain unread in this thread is to use the \ key to close
the thread.  If an underline remains I could then press 'N' to take me
to the next unread post in that thread in T-bird.  In SeaMonkey it takes
me to the first unread post in the GROUP!

Obviously this is a divergence from T-bird.  Was this something that was
changed in SeaMonkey or in T-bird?

I find any number of differences in usability like this.  I think if I
could get T-bird to work on my machine I would switch back.  But it ran
even slower than SeaMonkey does, so SeaMonkey is a net improvement, just
not a large one.

For that matter, why did SeaMonkey split off from T-bird?  What was the
fundamental issue that created a new tool so similar to the old?


What do you mean, "outside of the thread pane"? If a thread exists, it
has to be in the thread pane, unless you think that some part of it was
not sent.

SeaMonkey did not split from Thunderbird.  Thunderbird and Firefox split
off from the Mozilla suite, and SeaMonkey was a continuation of the
Mozilla suite, only kept more up to date by having the cores of
Thunderbird and Firefox.

As I recall it from the discussion at the time, Thunderbird and Firefox 
were created as separate, single function applications to make them 
faster and more responsive than the combined multi-function application.


That was part of the rationale.



I never understood or appreciated this view because I always found the 
Seamonkey multi-function application to be entirely responsive and fast 
enough for me.  Like what are we talking about?  300ms verses 500ms or 
some such - not really perceptible for most of us in day to day usage. 
Having the mail and browser app, etc. rolled into one seemed to be - and 
continues to be - a supremely convenient and efficient way to go, but 
your mileage and situation may vary.


A long time ago, because of the faster/lighter argument, I did a 
comparison of SM vs separate apps.




The original was done, I think, in 2006. I re-ran them in 2013.

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
"We win justice quickest by rendering justice to the other party." - 
Mohandas Gandhi

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

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[NFN Smith]

David C. Mores wrote:

EE wrote:

rickman wrote:

When using SeaMonkey for reading newsgroups, I see a number of
differences from T-bird.  One that is particularly annoying is when
reading a thread new posts often show up in the middle with other parts
of the thread outside of the thread pane.  An easy way to see if any
other posts remain unread in this thread is to use the \ key to close
the thread.  If an underline remains I could then press 'N' to take me
to the next unread post in that thread in T-bird.  In SeaMonkey it takes
me to the first unread post in the GROUP!

Obviously this is a divergence from T-bird.  Was this something that was
changed in SeaMonkey or in T-bird?

I find any number of differences in usability like this.  I think if I
could get T-bird to work on my machine I would switch back.  But it ran
even slower than SeaMonkey does, so SeaMonkey is a net improvement, just
not a large one.

For that matter, why did SeaMonkey split off from T-bird?  What was the
fundamental issue that created a new tool so similar to the old?


What do you mean, "outside of the thread pane"? If a thread exists, it
has to be in the thread pane, unless you think that some part of it was
not sent.

SeaMonkey did not split from Thunderbird.  Thunderbird and Firefox split
off from the Mozilla suite, and SeaMonkey was a continuation of the
Mozilla suite, only kept more up to date by having the cores of
Thunderbird and Firefox.

As I recall it from the discussion at the time, Thunderbird and Firefox 
were created as separate, single function applications to make them 
faster and more responsive than the combined multi-function application.


I never understood or appreciated this view because I always found the 
Seamonkey multi-function application to be entirely responsive and fast 
enough for me.  Like what are we talking about?  300ms verses 500ms or 
some such - not really perceptible for most of us in day to day usage. 
Having the mail and browser app, etc. rolled into one seemed to be - and 
continues to be - a supremely convenient and efficient way to go, but 
your mileage and situation may vary.



The other consideration, and at this point, the effective difference is 
minor, is that if you run Firefox and Thunderbird simultaneously, you're 
loading separate copies of the rendering engine, and with Seamonkey, 
you're running only a single copy. Might be an issue if you're really 
constrained on available RAM...


Smith

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

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[David C. Mores via support-seamonkey]

EE wrote:

rickman wrote:

When using SeaMonkey for reading newsgroups, I see a number of
differences from T-bird.  One that is particularly annoying is when
reading a thread new posts often show up in the middle with other parts
of the thread outside of the thread pane.  An easy way to see if any
other posts remain unread in this thread is to use the \ key to close
the thread.  If an underline remains I could then press 'N' to take me
to the next unread post in that thread in T-bird.  In SeaMonkey it takes
me to the first unread post in the GROUP!

Obviously this is a divergence from T-bird.  Was this something that was
changed in SeaMonkey or in T-bird?

I find any number of differences in usability like this.  I think if I
could get T-bird to work on my machine I would switch back.  But it ran
even slower than SeaMonkey does, so SeaMonkey is a net improvement, just
not a large one.

For that matter, why did SeaMonkey split off from T-bird?  What was the
fundamental issue that created a new tool so similar to the old?


What do you mean, "outside of the thread pane"? If a thread exists, it
has to be in the thread pane, unless you think that some part of it was
not sent.

SeaMonkey did not split from Thunderbird.  Thunderbird and Firefox split
off from the Mozilla suite, and SeaMonkey was a continuation of the
Mozilla suite, only kept more up to date by having the cores of
Thunderbird and Firefox.

As I recall it from the discussion at the time, Thunderbird and Firefox 
were created as separate, single function applications to make them 
faster and more responsive than the combined multi-function application.


I never understood or appreciated this view because I always found the 
Seamonkey multi-function application to be entirely responsive and fast 
enough for me.  Like what are we talking about?  300ms verses 500ms or 
some such - not really perceptible for most of us in day to day usage. 
Having the mail and browser app, etc. rolled into one seemed to be - and 
continues to be - a supremely convenient and efficient way to go, but 
your mileage and situation may vary.

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

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[Chris Ilias]

On 2017-06-09 6:15 PM, rickman wrote:

Richmond wrote on 6/9/2017 4:51 PM:

rickman  writes:



For that matter, why did SeaMonkey split off from T-bird?  What was the
fundamental issue that created a new tool so similar to the old?


The way I remember it, Thunderbird (and Firefox) split off from
Seamonkey. Seamonkey came from Netscape Communicator, which then became
Mozilla Application Suite.


So you are saying the split was a long time ago?  I didn't realize.  I 
believe Netscape was a more universal tool with support for newsgroups, 
email and web page composition.  That's what I used to write my web page 
a decade and a half ago.  Maybe it's time for an update...?


I created this page years ago to explain it: 



--
Chris Ilias 
Newsgroup moderator
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[EE]

rickman wrote:

When using SeaMonkey for reading newsgroups, I see a number of
differences from T-bird.  One that is particularly annoying is when
reading a thread new posts often show up in the middle with other parts
of the thread outside of the thread pane.  An easy way to see if any
other posts remain unread in this thread is to use the \ key to close
the thread.  If an underline remains I could then press 'N' to take me
to the next unread post in that thread in T-bird.  In SeaMonkey it takes
me to the first unread post in the GROUP!

Obviously this is a divergence from T-bird.  Was this something that was
changed in SeaMonkey or in T-bird?

I find any number of differences in usability like this.  I think if I
could get T-bird to work on my machine I would switch back.  But it ran
even slower than SeaMonkey does, so SeaMonkey is a net improvement, just
not a large one.

For that matter, why did SeaMonkey split off from T-bird?  What was the
fundamental issue that created a new tool so similar to the old?

What do you mean, "outside of the thread pane"? If a thread exists, it 
has to be in the thread pane, unless you think that some part of it was 
not sent.


SeaMonkey did not split from Thunderbird.  Thunderbird and Firefox split 
off from the Mozilla suite, and SeaMonkey was a continuation of the 
Mozilla suite, only kept more up to date by having the cores of 
Thunderbird and Firefox.


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

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[Ed Mullen]

On 6/9/17 at 2:18 PM, rickman's prodigious digits fired off with great 
aplomb:
When using SeaMonkey for reading newsgroups, I see a number of 
differences from T-bird.  One that is particularly annoying is when 
reading a thread new posts often show up in the middle with other parts 
of the thread outside of the thread pane.  An easy way to see if any 
other posts remain unread in this thread is to use the \ key to close 
the thread.  If an underline remains I could then press 'N' to take me 
to the next unread post in that thread in T-bird.  In SeaMonkey it takes 
me to the first unread post in the GROUP!


Obviously this is a divergence from T-bird.  Was this something that was 
changed in SeaMonkey or in T-bird?


I find any number of differences in usability like this.  I think if I 
could get T-bird to work on my machine I would switch back.  But it ran 
even slower than SeaMonkey does, so SeaMonkey is a net improvement, just 
not a large one.


For that matter, why did SeaMonkey split off from T-bird?  What was the 
fundamental issue that created a new tool so similar to the old?






The article has a good history section.

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have 
learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first." - Ronald Reagan

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

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[Felix Miata]

rickman composed on 2017-06-09 18:15 (UTC-0400):

> Richmond wrote:
.
>> rickman  writes:
.
>>> For that matter, why did SeaMonkey split off from T-bird?  What was the
>>> fundamental issue that created a new tool so similar to the old?
.
>> The way I remember it, Thunderbird (and Firefox) split off from
>> Seamonkey. Seamonkey came from Netscape Communicator, which then became
>> Mozilla Application Suite.
.
> So you are saying the split was a long time ago?  I didn't realize.  I 
> believe Netscape was a more universal tool with support for newsgroups, 
> email and web page composition.  That's what I used to write my web page a 
> decade and a half ago.  Maybe it's time for an update...?
.
The name seamonkey originally came from either Netscape Communicator or Netscape
before it added "Communicator" to the name. But, Netscape was followed by the
Mozilla Suite, the inception of the Mozilla Project. Firebird (later Firefox)
and Thunderbird were split off from the Suite. After that split came the
renaming of the Mozilla Suite to SeaMonkey.

Dates are from the content of 32-bit Linux downloads on archive.mozilla.org.

Mozilla Milestone 3 1999-03
Mozilla Suite 0.6   2000-12
Mozilla Suite 1.0   2002-05
Firebird 0.72003-05
Thunderbird 0.1 2003-07
Firefox 0.8 2004-02
Firefox 1.0 2004-11
Thunderbird 1.0 2004-12
SeaMonkey 1.0   2006-01
Mozilla Suite 1.17.13   2006-04 (final)
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[rickman]

Richmond wrote on 6/9/2017 4:51 PM:

rickman  writes:



For that matter, why did SeaMonkey split off from T-bird?  What was the
fundamental issue that created a new tool so similar to the old?


The way I remember it, Thunderbird (and Firefox) split off from
Seamonkey. Seamonkey came from Netscape Communicator, which then became
Mozilla Application Suite.


So you are saying the split was a long time ago?  I didn't realize.  I 
believe Netscape was a more universal tool with support for newsgroups, 
email and web page composition.  That's what I used to write my web page a 
decade and a half ago.  Maybe it's time for an update...?


--

Rick C
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[Richmond via support-seamonkey]

rickman  writes:

>
> For that matter, why did SeaMonkey split off from T-bird?  What was the
> fundamental issue that created a new tool so similar to the old?

The way I remember it, Thunderbird (and Firefox) split off from
Seamonkey. Seamonkey came from Netscape Communicator, which then became
Mozilla Application Suite.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[rickman]

Paul B. Gallagher wrote on 6/9/2017 2:27 PM:

rickman wrote:


When using SeaMonkey for reading newsgroups, I see a number of
differences from T-bird.  One that is particularly annoying is when
reading a thread new posts often show up in the middle with other
parts of the thread outside of the thread pane.


New posts appear in the middle when the new poster replies to a previous
post in the middle. For example, numbering posts below in chronological order:
Post 1
Post 2 (in reply to 1)
Post 5 (in reply to 2)
Post 3 (in reply to 1)
Post 4 (in reply to 1)


An easy way to see if any other posts remain unread in this thread is
to use the \ key to close the thread.  If an underline remains I
could then press 'N' to take me to the next unread post in that
thread in T-bird.  In SeaMonkey it takes me to the first unread post
in the GROUP!


Depends where you are. In my experience, N takes me to the next unread
message after the selected message; if there are none below it, SM will wrap
around to the top and search from there. If no message in a group is
selected, it goes to the first unread one in that group, and if no message
in the group is unread, it offers to look in the next group or mail account
that does have new messages.


Maybe I didn't explain it well.   A message in the middle of the thread is 
selected.   There are posts in this thread as well as other threads off the 
bottom of the pane.  I use \ to close the message thread so I can see if 
there are other unread posts *below* the post that is currently selected. 
Now I can see there are unread messages in the message thread of interest as 
well as unread messages in message threads *below* the now closed thread.


In T-bird I would see the closed thread selected and when I pressed "N" it 
would take me to the next unread message after the first message in the 
closed thread.  In SeaMonkey I see *NO* message or thread selected and when 
I press "N" it skips over all the unread messages below the thread I just 
closed and wraps around to open the first unread message in the entire 
group.  Or I suppose you could say no message is selected so it simply 
starts at the top of the group and finds the first unread message.


The question is *WHY* are the two apps different?  I don't need an 
explanation of how the tool operates, the issue is why/how the two tools 
diverged.  The T-bird behavior seems the obvious choice for useful behavior 
and I would like to see SeaMonkey behave the same way.


--

Rick C
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Diverge From T-bird

[Paul B. Gallagher]

rickman wrote:


When using SeaMonkey for reading newsgroups, I see a number of
differences from T-bird.  One that is particularly annoying is when
reading a thread new posts often show up in the middle with other
parts of the thread outside of the thread pane.


New posts appear in the middle when the new poster replies to a previous 
post in the middle. For example, numbering posts below in chronological 
order:

Post 1
Post 2 (in reply to 1)
Post 5 (in reply to 2)
Post 3 (in reply to 1)
Post 4 (in reply to 1)


An easy way to see if any other posts remain unread in this thread is
to use the \ key to close the thread.  If an underline remains I
could then press 'N' to take me to the next unread post in that
thread in T-bird.  In SeaMonkey it takes me to the first unread post
in the GROUP!


Depends where you are. In my experience, N takes me to the next unread 
message after the selected message; if there are none below it, SM will 
wrap around to the top and search from there. If no message in a group 
is selected, it goes to the first unread one in that group, and if no 
message in the group is unread, it offers to look in the next group or 
mail account that does have new messages.


--
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

Diverge From T-bird

[rickman]

When using SeaMonkey for reading newsgroups, I see a number of differences 
from T-bird.  One that is particularly annoying is when reading a thread new 
posts often show up in the middle with other parts of the thread outside of 
the thread pane.  An easy way to see if any other posts remain unread in 
this thread is to use the \ key to close the thread.  If an underline 
remains I could then press 'N' to take me to the next unread post in that 
thread in T-bird.  In SeaMonkey it takes me to the first unread post in the 
GROUP!


Obviously this is a divergence from T-bird.  Was this something that was 
changed in SeaMonkey or in T-bird?


I find any number of differences in usability like this.  I think if I could 
get T-bird to work on my machine I would switch back.  But it ran even 
slower than SeaMonkey does, so SeaMonkey is a net improvement, just not a 
large one.


For that matter, why did SeaMonkey split off from T-bird?  What was the 
fundamental issue that created a new tool so similar to the old?


--

Rick C
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey