"JAS" <jaskin...@bbc.net> wrote in message news:l_-dnsnurmbzndzsnz2dnuvz_rkdn...@mozilla.org... > NoOp wrote: >> On 02/19/2012 08:12 AM, JAS wrote: >>> NoOp wrote: >>>> On 02/18/2012 08:49 PM, MCBastos wrote: >>>>> Interviewed by CNN on 19/02/2012 00:05, JAS told the world: >>>>>> Why is it that the last few updates accessed from the "check for >>>>>> updates" downloads the entire new SM program instead of just the new >>>>>> updated files? Or is it that there are that many new changes in the >>>>>> program? Just wondering. >>>>> Well, for anything *but* the most recent update, it will download the >>>>> full install file. Mozilla (and Seamonkey) only offer a "patch" for >>>>> the >>>>> most recent update. >>>>> >>>>> For instance, if you waited too long to upgrade from 2.6.1 to 2.7, and >>>>> when you did upgrade 2.7.1 had already been released, then you get the >>>>> full download. Even if you are upgrading from 2.7.0 to 2.7.2, for that >>>>> matter. >>>>> >>>>> (Why not download the consecutive patches instead? Well, because it >>>>> doubles -- or triples -- the users' annoyance, for comparatively small >>>>> savings in bandwidth). >>>>> >>>>> And... sometimes the patch download fails, and then Seamonkey (or >>>>> Firefox, or Thunderbird) downloads the full upgrade as a fallback. >>>>> >>>> The Firefox & Thunderbird updates were about 1.8MB each. >>>> >>>> >>> My last update to 2.7.2 was 21.6 mb and all went well with no problems. >>> >> That was my point... both Firefox and Thunderbird only required ~1.8MB >> to upgrade from 10.0.1 to 10.0.2, SM required ~21MB to go from 2.7.1 to >> 2.7.2. >> >> > The update went without a problem and was over in less than 2 min. with > no loss of add ons. I was just curious if that was to be the norm from > now on. I am very please with SeaMonkey. I have Firefox and Thunderbird > on a flash drive [portable versions] but prefer to run SeaMonkey.
Really? No loss of extensions? I just declined the update because two extensions will be disabled. This is exactly why I hate frequent updates. I'm installing Fx enterprise version to avoid the craziness there of way, way too frequent updates. I came back to SM because it used not to engage in the craziness but it does now although at least it doesn't use the outrageous labeling that Fx uses. I'm still using Fx 4.01. I will update Fx once a year and no more and not even that often if my extensions will be disabled (I used Fx 1.5 until March 2011). SeaMonkey, well, I won't update if my extensions are going to be disabled. A simple, absolutely necessary security patch should never be as large as you are reporting and, besides security patches, there is no need for updates more than once yearly. I'll be so glad to get away from at least some of the insanity when I move over to Fx enterprise. The security updates are not even needed unless you are a user who is ignorant about computers and computer security. > > -- > You either teach people to treat you with dignity and respect, or you > don't. This means you are partly responsible for the mistreatment that you > get at the hands of someone else. > _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
