Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.os.linux.ubuntu > #186012 > unrolled thread
| Started by | gamo <gamo@telecable.es> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-10 21:18 +0100 |
| Last post | 2016-01-21 03:45 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 61 — 18 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux.ubuntu
Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-10 21:18 +0100
Re: Thunderbird "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-10 22:26 +0100
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-10 22:41 +0100
Re: Thunderbird Paul <nospam@needed.com> - 2016-01-10 16:31 -0500
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-10 22:55 +0100
Re: Thunderbird "jeff g." <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2016-01-10 16:30 -0800
Re: Thunderbird "jeff g." <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2016-01-10 19:29 -0800
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-11 06:04 +0100
Re: Thunderbird "jeff g." <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2016-01-11 08:34 -0800
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-11 17:48 +0100
Re: Thunderbird "jeff g." <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2016-01-11 10:29 -0800
Re: Thunderbird CookieM <do@not.spam> - 2016-01-12 09:46 +0100
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-12 11:37 +0100
Re: Thunderbird Madlove <madlove@arkham.dc> - 2016-01-14 14:48 -0400
Re: Thunderbird Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2016-01-14 11:48 -0800
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-14 21:24 +0100
Re: Thunderbird Madlove <madlove@arkham.dc> - 2016-01-15 14:02 -0400
Re: Thunderbird stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2016-01-10 20:57 -0800
Re: Thunderbird Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-10 21:12 -0800
Re: Thunderbird stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2016-01-10 21:31 -0800
Re: Thunderbird "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-11 20:23 +0100
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-11 06:11 +0100
Re: Thunderbird stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2016-01-10 21:26 -0800
Re: Thunderbird Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-10 21:27 -0800
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-11 06:43 +0100
Re: Thunderbird Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-10 21:54 -0800
Re: Thunderbird "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-11 20:10 +0100
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-11 20:14 +0100
Re: Thunderbird Gordon <Gordon@clear.net.nz> - 2016-01-11 06:23 +0000
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-11 08:12 +0100
Re: Thunderbird Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io> - 2016-01-11 07:38 -0800
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-11 17:08 +0100
Re: Thunderbird Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io> - 2016-01-11 08:18 -0800
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-11 17:38 +0100
Re: Thunderbird Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io> - 2016-01-11 08:51 -0800
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-11 19:01 +0100
Re: Thunderbird DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-11 11:50 -0500
Re: Thunderbird Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-11 10:53 -0600
Re: Thunderbird DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-11 12:05 -0500
Re: Thunderbird Dan C <youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> - 2016-01-17 03:18 +0000
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-17 07:32 +0100
Re: Thunderbird Dan C <youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> - 2016-01-17 19:41 +0000
Re: Thunderbird gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-18 07:59 +0100
Re: Thunderbird Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-01-18 06:38 -0500
Re: Thunderbird stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2016-01-18 20:06 -0800
Re: Thunderbird "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-19 00:35 -0600
Re: Thunderbird stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2016-01-18 22:38 -0800
Re: Thunderbird Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2016-01-19 08:49 +0100
Re: Thunderbird Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-01-19 06:15 -0500
Re: Thunderbird "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-19 08:44 -0600
Re: Thunderbird "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 08:30 -0500
Re: Thunderbird "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-19 09:01 -0600
Re: Thunderbird "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 11:34 -0500
Re: Thunderbird "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-19 11:28 -0600
Re: Thunderbird Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-19 11:32 -0600
Re: Thunderbird "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-19 11:34 -0600
Re: Thunderbird Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-19 13:22 -0600
Re: Thunderbird "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-19 15:16 -0600
Re: Thunderbird DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-19 16:54 -0500
Re: Thunderbird Dan C <youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> - 2016-01-21 03:43 +0000
Re: Thunderbird Dan C <youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> - 2016-01-21 03:45 +0000
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
| From | gamo <gamo@telecable.es> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 21:18 +0100 |
| Subject | Thunderbird |
| Message-ID | <n6uec8$kqr$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
Thunderbird, a program nobody use, has two critical security holes patched since 24 Dec past year. I'm waiting until the new version be updated. Someone want to discuss more about the weak sec policy? -- http://gamo.eu.pn/ The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 22:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5692cc81$0$23801$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #186012 |
Op 10-01-16 om 21:18 schreef gamo: > > Thunderbird, a program nobody use, Speak for yourself :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gamo <gamo@telecable.es> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 22:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n6uj8p$tgi$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #186015 |
El 10/01/16 a las 22:26, Dirk T. Verbeek escribió: > Op 10-01-16 om 21:18 schreef gamo: >> >> Thunderbird, a program nobody use, > Speak for yourself :) It is irony. :-) -- http://gamo.eu.pn/ The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul <nospam@needed.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 16:31 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n6uiei$ku9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186012 |
gamo wrote:
>
> Thunderbird, a program nobody use, has two critical
> security holes patched since 24 Dec past year. I'm
> waiting until the new version be updated.
>
> Someone want to discuss more about the weak sec policy?
>
Thunderbird is a program based on Firefox.
It uses Firefox as a rendering engine, to draw
the three pane view you use for mail and USENET posting.
Perhaps 10% of the files are Thunderbird specific.
The other 90% are pulled directly from the Firefox tree.
It's easy to see how a security issue, would be an issue
with the rendering engine underneath, and not with the
Thunderbird specific code.
Examine the security issues reported with Firefox,
compare to Thunderbird reported ones, *then* comment
on how sloppy the Thunderbird developers are on their
10% contribution.
Is it stupid to use an entire web browser as a rendering
engine. Yes, of course. But it helps a certain user
out there, who wants to see his USENET posts in HTML.
That's why they do it this way.
Paul
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gamo <gamo@telecable.es> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 22:55 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n6uk1s$vo1$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #186016 |
El 10/01/16 a las 22:31, Paul escribió: > gamo wrote: >> >> Thunderbird, a program nobody use, has two critical >> security holes patched since 24 Dec past year. I'm >> waiting until the new version be updated. >> >> Someone want to discuss more about the weak sec policy? >> > > Thunderbird is a program based on Firefox. > > It uses Firefox as a rendering engine, to draw > the three pane view you use for mail and USENET posting. > > Perhaps 10% of the files are Thunderbird specific. > > The other 90% are pulled directly from the Firefox tree. > > It's easy to see how a security issue, would be an issue > with the rendering engine underneath, and not with the > Thunderbird specific code. > > Examine the security issues reported with Firefox, > compare to Thunderbird reported ones, *then* comment > on how sloppy the Thunderbird developers are on their > 10% contribution. > > Is it stupid to use an entire web browser as a rendering > engine. Yes, of course. But it helps a certain user > out there, who wants to see his USENET posts in HTML. > That's why they do it this way. > > Paul Yes, yes, but to clarify, the patches are available with new version 38.5.1 of TB. Already exist. Maybe a vacational delay. In other cases they are circulating outdated versions and few excuses are available. -- http://gamo.eu.pn/ The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jeff g." <jeff.g.group@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 16:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <n6usu4$rc0$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186020 |
On 01/10/2016 01:55 PM, gamo wrote: > El 10/01/16 a las 22:31, Paul escribió: >> gamo wrote: >>> >>> Thunderbird, a program nobody use, has two critical >>> security holes patched since 24 Dec past year. I'm >>> waiting until the new version be updated. >>> >>> Someone want to discuss more about the weak sec policy? >>> >> >> Thunderbird is a program based on Firefox. >> >> It uses Firefox as a rendering engine, to draw >> the three pane view you use for mail and USENET posting. >> >> Perhaps 10% of the files are Thunderbird specific. >> >> The other 90% are pulled directly from the Firefox tree. >> >> It's easy to see how a security issue, would be an issue >> with the rendering engine underneath, and not with the >> Thunderbird specific code. >> >> Examine the security issues reported with Firefox, >> compare to Thunderbird reported ones, *then* comment >> on how sloppy the Thunderbird developers are on their >> 10% contribution. >> >> Is it stupid to use an entire web browser as a rendering >> engine. Yes, of course. But it helps a certain user >> out there, who wants to see his USENET posts in HTML. >> That's why they do it this way. >> >> Paul > > Yes, yes, but to clarify, the patches are available with > new version 38.5.1 of TB. > Already exist. Maybe a vacational delay. > what does that mean? > In other cases they are circulating outdated versions > and few excuses are available. > what does THAT mean?? You don't like it, don't use it. I've never heard of anyone habving a problem with that program - I've been using it since day 1. And there is no more development going on, just security updates, last I even looked. -- Jeff G. She was only a whisky-maker, but he loved her still.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jeff g." <jeff.g.group@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 19:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <n6v7dj$khb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186030 |
On 01/10/2016 04:30 PM, jeff g. wrote: > On 01/10/2016 01:55 PM, gamo wrote: >> El 10/01/16 a las 22:31, Paul escribió: >>> gamo wrote: >>>> >>>> Thunderbird, a program nobody use, has two critical >>>> security holes patched since 24 Dec past year. I'm >>>> waiting until the new version be updated. >>>> >>>> Someone want to discuss more about the weak sec policy? >>>> >>> >>> Thunderbird is a program based on Firefox. >>> >>> It uses Firefox as a rendering engine, to draw >>> the three pane view you use for mail and USENET posting. >>> >>> Perhaps 10% of the files are Thunderbird specific. >>> >>> The other 90% are pulled directly from the Firefox tree. >>> >>> It's easy to see how a security issue, would be an issue >>> with the rendering engine underneath, and not with the >>> Thunderbird specific code. >>> >>> Examine the security issues reported with Firefox, >>> compare to Thunderbird reported ones, *then* comment >>> on how sloppy the Thunderbird developers are on their >>> 10% contribution. >>> >>> Is it stupid to use an entire web browser as a rendering >>> engine. Yes, of course. But it helps a certain user >>> out there, who wants to see his USENET posts in HTML. >>> That's why they do it this way. >>> >>> Paul >> >> Yes, yes, but to clarify, the patches are available with >> new version 38.5.1 of TB. >> Already exist. Maybe a vacational delay. >> > > what does that mean? > >> In other cases they are circulating outdated versions >> and few excuses are available. >> > > what does THAT mean?? > > You don't like it, don't use it. I've never heard of anyone habving a and spelchek works two :) > problem with that program - I've been using it since day 1. > > And there is no more development going on, just security updates, last I > even looked. > > -- Jeff G. Arguing over a girl's bust size is like choosing between Molson, Heineken, Coors & Budweiser. Men may state their preferences, but will grab whatever is available.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gamo <gamo@telecable.es> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-11 06:04 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n6vd71$lr1$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #186030 |
El 11/01/16 a las 01:30, jeff g. escribió: >> Yes, yes, but to clarify, the patches are available with >> new version 38.5.1 of TB. >> Already exist. Maybe a vacational delay. >> > > what does that mean? You don't know what "vacations" means. -- http://gamo.eu.pn/ The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jeff g." <jeff.g.group@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-11 08:34 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <n70ld8$vtl$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186038 |
On 01/10/2016 09:04 PM, gamo wrote: > El 11/01/16 a las 01:30, jeff g. escribió: >>> Yes, yes, but to clarify, the patches are available with >>> new version 38.5.1 of TB. >>> Already exist. Maybe a vacational delay. >>> >> >> what does that mean? > > You don't know what "vacations" means. > Thats not what you wrote - is "vacational" a word? Never heard it... And vacation makes just as little sense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gamo <gamo@telecable.es> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-11 17:48 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n70meq$ucc$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #186065 |
El 11/01/16 a las 17:34, jeff g. escribió: > Thats not what you wrote - is "vacational" a word? Never heard it... It is. Now try another play. -- http://gamo.eu.pn/ The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jeff g." <jeff.g.group@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-11 10:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <n70s56$s6c$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186068 |
On 01/11/2016 08:48 AM, gamo wrote: > El 11/01/16 a las 17:34, jeff g. escribió: >> Thats not what you wrote - is "vacational" a word? Never heard it... > > It is. Now try another play. > wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CookieM <do@not.spam> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-12 09:46 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n72ehj$67h$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #186020 |
W dniu 10.01.2016 o 22:55, gamo pisze: > El 10/01/16 a las 22:31, Paul escribió: >> gamo wrote: >>> [...] > > Yes, yes, but to clarify, the patches are available with > new version 38.5.1 of TB. > Already exist. Maybe a vacational delay. > > In other cases they are circulating outdated versions > and few excuses are available. > What's your problem man? Just download the latest version of TB from archive.mozilla.org and use this version instead the one from repos. Works fine for me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gamo <gamo@telecable.es> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-12 11:37 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n72l3e$iaj$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #186099 |
El 12/01/16 a las 09:46, CookieM escribió: > What's your problem man? Just download the latest version of TB from > archive.mozilla.org and use this version instead the one from repos. > Works fine for me. In Ubuntu? Thanks for the recomendation. -- http://gamo.eu.pn/ The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Madlove <madlove@arkham.dc> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-14 14:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <n78qgh$6ns$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #186100 |
Firefox web browser's market share continues downhill. How did Firefox go from being a popular, open-source web browser to the unpopular program it is today? It happened a little something like this. It's been getting slower and klutzier release after release. I run all the major browsers and Firefox can't compete. I like Google Chrome the best today, but I think it could stand some improvement and competition. Unfortunately, Firefox is no longer a competitor. This isn't just my opinion. The federal government's Digital Analytic Program (DAP), shows that Firefox has dropped in popularity from 11 percent in March to 9.7 percent in December. That's far behind, Chrome, with shy of 42 percent, and all varieties of IE with 22.2 percent. In short, fewer and fewer people like Firefox. It's not simply that Firefox is slow and prone to bugs. Mozilla, Firefox's parent organization, seems to be falling apart at the seams. I date Mozilla's collapse to Brendan Eich, Mozilla co-founder and creator of JavaScript, being forced out as CEO in June 2014. Nine days after being named CEO, Eich went from Mozilla's savior to a pariah. Eich's donation of $1,000 to the campaign supporting California's anti-gay-marriage Proposition 8 in 2008 led to a bloody internal fight. Eich eventually backpedaled from his position, but it was too little, too late. Since then Mozilla has drifted both with its goals and its technology. Firefox, the web browser, became an after-thought. Mozilla's leadership put its focus on Firefox OS, its smartphone operating system rival to Apple's iOS and Google's Android. It failed -- badly. By early December, the word was out. Mozilla was giving up on Firefox OS. Ari Jaaksi, Mozilla's senior vice president of connected devices, explained (perhaps as he was packing his desk): "Because we were not able to deliver the best user experience possible, we decided to stop offering Firefox OS smartphones through carrier channels." Oh, in theory, Firefox OS will live on as Internet of Things (IoT), but that won't save Mozilla's bacon. Neither will Thunderbird, a once popular e-mail client. Mozilla is trying, for the second time, to kill off Thunderbird. While web-based e-mail is now much more popular than clients, many old-time Mozilla fans aren't happy with Mozilla booting Thunderbird to the curb. http://www.zdnet.com/article/is-firefox-the-walking-dead/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-14 11:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <dfqcddFs6pvU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #186243 |
Madlove wrote: > How did Firefox go from being a popular, open-source web browser to the > unpopular program it is today? It happened a little something like this. Besides the article's analysis, the comments section is 'robust'; overwhelmingly supporting Tb & Ffx. The strongest 'anti-Moz' comments, interestingly, are from those who were put off by the Eich debacle and dropped Moz products thenceforth. -- Mike Easter
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gamo <gamo@telecable.es> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-14 21:24 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n7908j$ier$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #186243 |
El 14/01/16 a las 19:48, Madlove escribió: > Firefox web browser's market share continues downhill. > > How did Firefox go from being a popular, open-source web browser to the > unpopular program it is today? It happened a little something like this. > > It's been getting slower and klutzier release after release. I run all > the major browsers and Firefox can't compete. I like Google Chrome the > best today, but I think it could stand some improvement and competition. > > Unfortunately, Firefox is no longer a competitor. > > This isn't just my opinion. The federal government's Digital Analytic > Program (DAP), shows that Firefox has dropped in popularity from 11 > percent in March to 9.7 percent in December. That's far behind, Chrome, > with shy of 42 percent, and all varieties of IE with 22.2 percent. > > In short, fewer and fewer people like Firefox. > > It's not simply that Firefox is slow and prone to bugs. Mozilla, > Firefox's parent organization, seems to be falling apart at the seams. > > I date Mozilla's collapse to Brendan Eich, Mozilla co-founder and > creator of JavaScript, being forced out as CEO in June 2014. Nine days > after being named CEO, Eich went from Mozilla's savior to a pariah. > Eich's donation of $1,000 to the campaign supporting California's > anti-gay-marriage Proposition 8 in 2008 led to a bloody internal fight. > Eich eventually backpedaled from his position, but it was too little, > too late. > > Since then Mozilla has drifted both with its goals and its technology. > Firefox, the web browser, became an after-thought. Mozilla's leadership > put its focus on Firefox OS, its smartphone operating system rival to > Apple's iOS and Google's Android. > > It failed -- badly. > > By early December, the word was out. Mozilla was giving up on Firefox > OS. Ari Jaaksi, Mozilla's senior vice president of connected devices, > explained (perhaps as he was packing his desk): "Because we were not > able to deliver the best user experience possible, we decided to stop > offering Firefox OS smartphones through carrier channels." > > Oh, in theory, Firefox OS will live on as Internet of Things (IoT), > but that won't save Mozilla's bacon. > > Neither will Thunderbird, a once popular e-mail client. Mozilla is > trying, for the second time, to kill off Thunderbird. While web-based > e-mail is now much more popular than clients, many old-time Mozilla fans > aren't happy with Mozilla booting Thunderbird to the curb. > > http://www.zdnet.com/article/is-firefox-the-walking-dead/ In November 2015, last data I could see, FF was the second most used browser, after Chrome. Later comes all the rest. The data is never accurate enough to do cualitative predictions about the future, especially in an evironment changing. I.e. video framework. -- http://gamo.eu.pn/ The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Madlove <madlove@arkham.dc> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-15 14:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <n7bc68$b37$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #186247 |
On 01/14/2016 04:24 PM, gamo wrote: > In November 2015, last data I could see, FF was the second most used > browser, after Chrome. Later comes all the rest. The data is never > accurate enough to do qualitative predictions about the future, > especially in an environment changing. I.e. video framework. Take it with a grain of salt. I use FF and don't have any plans to change to Chrome so far.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | stepore <linshine@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 20:57 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <n6vciu$6b8$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186012 |
On 01/10/2016 12:18 PM, gamo wrote: > > Thunderbird, a program nobody use What a profoundly stupid (and misguided) thing to say. > has two critical > security holes patched since 24 Dec past year. I'm > waiting until the new version be updated. > You're more than welcome to wait. Or you can just update yourself. I have! > Someone want to discuss more about the weak sec policy? > No, because you have no idea. And you're really starting to become a serious troll in this NG, aren't you?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 21:12 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <JemdnYoVnpIypA7LnZ2dnUU7-VWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #186035 |
On 2016-01-11, stepore <linshine@here.now> wrote: > On 01/10/2016 12:18 PM, gamo wrote: >> >> Thunderbird, a program nobody use > > What a profoundly stupid (and misguided) thing to say. > >> has two critical >> security holes patched since 24 Dec past year. I'm >> waiting until the new version be updated. >> > > You're more than welcome to wait. Or you can just update yourself. I have! > >> Someone want to discuss more about the weak sec policy? >> > > No, because you have no idea. And you're really starting to become a > serious troll in this NG, aren't you? I for one am happy Mozilla wants to ditch Thunderbird. If another group takes over the project with the purpose of further developing it that would be a good thing. Mozilla has been so focused on the browser they have abandoned the email client. Thunderbird has been my goto email app for many years. It's reliable, extensible and platform independent. For an app that hasn't seen new development in years it's still remarkably modern. But at this point I think it would be best if a group who intends to continue developing it took it over from Mozilla as they are clearly focused elsewhere. I don't know why the industry as a whole continues to leave Microsoft unchallenged in the area of groupware. Zimbra showed great promise but it is driven by a commercial agenda and also feels like it is in stagnation hell. I thought Google would step up but they clearly want you to just use the web client. -- Marek Novotny https://github.com/marek-novotny
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | stepore <linshine@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 21:31 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <n6vg1q$441$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186039 |
On 01/10/2016 09:12 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: > I for one am happy Mozilla wants to ditch Thunderbird. If another group > takes over the project with the purpose of further developing it that > would be a good thing. Mozilla has been so focused on the browser they > have abandoned the email client. > +1 > Zimbra showed great promise but it is driven by a commercial agenda and > also feels like it is in stagnation hell. I thought Google would step up > but they clearly want you to just use the web client. > Web client and that damn "Inbox" app thing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.os.linux.ubuntu
csiph-web