SeaMonkey 1.0 Released

For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by dghcasp · 2006-01-31 07:41 · Score: 2, Interesting

What exactly is SeaMonkey? Based on this summary of features, it sounds exactly like Mozilla.

Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by ZephyrXero · 2006-01-31 07:44 · Score: 4, Informative

SeaMonkey is the old Mozilla Suite... Mozilla foundation decided to stick with stand-alone products, but some people missed the old suite and a few of the features and stuff, so the decided to carry it on as this community driven project ;)

--
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by l33t.g33k · 2006-01-31 07:44 · Score: 1

SeaMonkey is another browser from Mozilla (other than Firefox). It is inspired mostly by the original Mozilla codebase, that was used to produce Mozilla Suite 1.x.

--
My sig is permanently on strike.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by AKAImBatman · 2006-01-31 07:49 · Score: 1

Originally it was the codename for the Mozilla suite. Gecko was the codename for the browser component itself. Now that Mozilla is mostly focusing on Firefox, the Mozilla browser (which itself took on Netscape's codename) has been forked to make SeaMonkey.

Are you thoroughly confused yet? Good, that's the idea.

Me? I'm waiting for a release of Chocolate Sex. (Bonus points to those who understand that reference.)

P.S. Don't forget about Chimera!

--
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 07:56 · Score: 2, Informative

The Mozilla foundation stopped developing the Suite after the 1.8 beta 1 release and switched to Firefox and Thunderbird. A group of developers didn't want to abandon the Suite and improved it independently. In order to make clear that the result is not an official Mozilla.org product (and because Mozilla.org owns the Mozilla trademark), it was renamed to SeaMonkey, which formerly was the internal code name for the Suite. So yes, SeaMonkey is "Mozilla", but with different logos, a different name and a different team of developers. If you stayed with the suite and enviously noticed how Firefox got all the shiny stuff like SVG rendering, instant back button, etc, then SeaMonkey is for you. SeaMonkey has roaming profiles btw...

(Shameless plug: my themes are already compatible)
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by thaerin · 2006-01-31 07:59 · Score: 2, Funny

What exactly is SeaMonkey?

Is it chicken or is it monkey?

--
If big boobed women work at Hooters do one legged women work at IHOP?
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by astrosmash · 2006-01-31 08:03 · Score: 1

If you don't already know what SeaMonkey is then it's probably of little interest to you. It's the original Mozilla codebase that has since been replaced by Firefox, Thunderbird, and Nvu.
Its user interface design is largely based off of Netscape Communicator 4 and is only meant for those who are nostalgic for the days of yore.

--
ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by AKAImBatman · 2006-01-31 08:05 · Score: 1

s/Chocolate Sex/Sexual Chocolate/g

Damn, I screwed up that gag. Oh well, here's the reference.

--
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by harrkev · 2006-01-31 08:06 · Score: 2, Interesting

So, is it Firefox and Thunderbird thrown together in one executable? Or is it something more or less. I guess what I want to know is:

1) Compatability with Thunder/Fire themes and extensions.
2) Does it share the same security holes, or will it have its own ;)
3) Will it be udated as often as Thunder/Fire?

--
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by mo^ · 2006-01-31 08:10 · Score: 3, Insightful

Sorry to troll, but shit, someone had to....

If you don't already know what SeaMonkey is then it's probably of little interest to you

Dang, that sounds elitist. Where is the fun in only learning what we already know and using what we already use???

--
bah!*@%!
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 08:15 · Score: 2, Informative

It's the old Mozilla suite. It shares code with Firefox/Thunderbird but it isn't just them combined.

1) Any plugins that worked with the old Mozilla suite should work (many plugins worked with both Monolithic Mozilla and Firefox). I doubt Thunderbird ones would, but I haven't tried.
2) It will share Gecko security holes, but not Firefox-UI based ones.
3) Update speed all depends on the developers and their quality standards.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by AuMatar · 2006-01-31 08:24 · Score: 1

Mark Henry? He had a match last Sunday.

--
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by savala · 2006-01-31 08:26 · Score: 5, Informative

So, is it Firefox and Thunderbird thrown together in one executable? Or is it something more or less.

It's both more and less. It has a different approach to what such a program should be. Firefox and Thunderbird operate on the principle that it needs to be usable by the proverbial grandmother, and make a lot of sacrifices to get there. Features that are considered "bloat" or confusing are cut rigorously, the user interface gets lots of polishing, and everything that isn't considered essential for basic operation is delegated to the status of extension (which leads to a number of problems). Because of this, Firefox and Thunderbird are supremely usable products, which I'll heartily recommend to any computer novice.

SeaMonkey on the other hand continues the tradition of the Mozilla Suite, which cared less about appearing clunky and confusing, and is far more customizable and ultimately usable for power users, web developers and other geeks. The SeaMonkey people understand that people can have ways to browse which aren't intuitively obvious to grandmothers, but which are ultimately more efficient, and that enabling this is a great good.

As a result SeaMonkey has a number of features that aren't present (by default or at all) in Firefox/Thunderbird, ranging from roaming profiles, to the dom inspector and javascript debugger, to tighter integration between the email program and the browser to far more preferences exposed and easily editable. On the other hand, Firefox has more money behind it, and so has been developing rapidly in some areas, resulting in a large gap in SeaMonkey in an area such as extension management (of course, extensions aren't as necessary for effectively using SeaMonkey, but it's still a big gap).

So, to answer your three questions:

Compatability with Thunder/Fire themes and extensions.

Partly, depending on the specifics of the extension, and the effort its developer went to. I answered this question more fully here.

Does it share the same security holes, or will it have its own ;)

It will mostly have the same (as most security problems are in the backend), but a few less in the frontend, as SeaMonkey has tighter review requirements than Firefox does. (I can think of one big security problem in the last year that was related to extension management which was only present in Firefox, not in Mozilla/SeaMonkey.)

Will it be udated as often as Thunder/Fire?

Yes, that is the goal, give or take a few weeks and some point releases. A SeaMonkey 1.1 release should come around the time of Firefox 2.0, and a SeaMonkey 1.5 for whenever Firefox 3.0 happens. (They'll be matches fairly closely in time, as both depend on the same branches and heavily tested stable code.)
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by antiMStroll · 2006-01-31 08:31 · Score: 2, Informative

No. I realize it's three whole paragraphs down, but:
"The SeaMonkey project is a community-based project hosted at mozilla.org that emerged around Mozilla's suite codebase when the Mozilla Foundation announced it would discontinue further development of its suite product.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by LordNimon · 2006-01-31 08:38 · Score: 1

IMHO, anything which needs a bunch of extensions before it's fully-featured is not something a grandmother would be interested in. I use SeaMonkey not because I'm some elite ueber-hacker, but because I want a good web browser that works out of the box. I tried Thunderbird and Firefox and was sorely disappointed.

--
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by jesser · 2006-01-31 08:58 · Score: 2, Insightful

What missing features or options were you disappointed by?

--
The shareholder is always right.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 09:05 · Score: 3, Funny

That's right! My grandmother demands that the DOM inspector be installed by default, because she is incapable of installing it herself.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by mattkinabrewmindspri · 2006-01-31 09:21 · Score: 1

IMHO, grandmothers probably want something that works and is easy to use, rather than something that is "fully-featured".

--
Albuquerque PC
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Cl1mh4224rd · 2006-01-31 09:36 · Score: 0

As a result SeaMonkey has a number of features that aren't present (by default or at all) in Firefox/Thunderbird, ranging from roaming profiles, to the dom inspector and javascript debugger, to tighter integration between the email program and the browser to far more preferences exposed and easily editable.
Errmm... Firefox does come with the DOM Inspector, as an extension. You just have to choose the "custom" install.

--
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by rm69990 · 2006-01-31 09:41 · Score: 1

Name a single feature not included in Firefox that your Grandma would be dissapointed by it not being included.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by rm69990 · 2006-01-31 09:43 · Score: 1

Notice the "by default" part of his comment? Doing a custom install wouldn't be "by default" now would it?

Now re-read his comment 5 times before posting again please :)
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by HardCase · 2006-01-31 09:46 · Score: 2, Funny

Social Security!
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 10:08 · Score: 0

let d = 'present by default' and a = 'present at all'.

it was not clear if the OP meant:
``!(d or a)'' ====> !d and !a

or did he mean:
``!d or !a'' ====> !d or !a

dom inspector satisfies !d, but it does not satisfy !a

thus, the first interpretation is wrong, because the dom inspector doesn't satisfy the right side of the AND

the second interpretation is correct w.r.t. dom inspector
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by oojah · 2006-01-31 11:40 · Score: 3, Insightful

> Its user interface design is largely based off of Netscape Communicator 4 and is only meant
> for those who are nostalgic for the days of yore.

Or else for those who think that Firefox is just a dumbed down version.

imho.

Roger

--
Do you have any better hostages?
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by oojah · 2006-01-31 11:44 · Score: 1

Isn't that what he's saying? Firefox is for grandmothers and SeaMonkey is for power users.

--
Do you have any better hostages?
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Cl1mh4224rd · 2006-01-31 13:07 · Score: 1

Notice the "by default" part of his comment?
Yep, but "by default or at all" isn't exactly unambiguous.

--
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 13:23 · Score: 0

Go ask Jessica Simpson?
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 13:40 · Score: 0

"Replaced by" is incorrect, and your description of Seamonkey's intended audience is ignorant snobbery.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by JourneyExpertApe · 2006-01-31 14:13 · Score: 1

As a result SeaMonkey has a number of features that aren't present (by default or at all) in Firefox/Thunderbird, ranging from roaming profiles, to the dom inspector and javascript debugger

I haven't tried this JavaScript debugger, but Firefox comes with a DOM inspector. It's in the Tools menu. Last time I tried the Mozilla suite, the only significant feature it had that FF didn't was the HTML editor. That produced code that wasn't that great, and since I got serious about learning HTML, I have no need for it anymore. I don't see what could be so great about SeaMonkey.

--
If you can read this sig, you're too close.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by ShagratTheTitleless · 2006-01-31 14:15 · Score: 3, Interesting

What missing features or options were you disappointed by?
Missing: The "New Tab Button" on the Tab Bar. It's removal flew in the face of consistency (You can remove tabs with a button on the bar but to add them you must navigate a menu or use a keyboard combo). At the same time Firfox added the ability to create a new tab by double clicking blank space in the tab bar which works well until you have several tabs and no more easily clickable blank space. This is poor design. I would suggest amending it by always leaving a little free space on the bar but at that point why not just put the button back? I am aware you can get it back with an extension but it often doesn't theme right and disapears around upgrade time.
Missing: "About Plugins" Menu Option. It's nice to see what plugins you have installed and what insecure out of date versions your running. Firefox has the info but no UI access to it (why no link in advanced options?). Since Firefox is supposed to be simple and secure it should probably check popular plugin versions and offer to update them or send you to a download instead.
Missing: Performance. I remember when the design goal for Firefox was "Lean and Fast". The Suite Browser seems snappier on my system.
Missing: Modern Theme. A lot of people don't like it but it really is useable.
Missing: Plugins that can persist across minor upgrades. Every time a buddy of mine upgrades Firefox I have to fix his plugin that allows him to stream videos to Windows Media Player instead of dowloading them completely before playback. Every time I think about telling him "Nevermind, just fucking use IE".
While I still recommend Firefox to friends, it seems sometimes they are going backwards from their initial plans (hidden features bloat, pigheaded design decisions from on high).

--
Sometimes at night I imagine the darkness is filled with horrible things with too many teeth, like Julia Roberts.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 14:32 · Score: 0

Firefox and Thunderbird operate on the principle that it needs to be usable by the proverbial grandmother

And I thought it was the grandpas who wanted to revive Seamonkey. Silly me :)

Go Clippy... er, grippies!
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by astrosmash · 2006-01-31 14:42 · Score: 1

I wasn't trying to sound elitist. What I meant is that SeaMonkey codebase is in fact old and announcing it as a new 1.0 product is a little disingenuous.

You may recall that the fruits of Mozilla.org's efforts did not gain any traction with the general browsing public until the Firefox interface came along, at which point the old SeaMonkey interface was rightfully dropped. An independent group of developers has since formed to continue development, essentailly moving new Firefox and Thunderbird features back to the old codebase, but this fact remains: not very many people used the old SeaMonkey browsers (Netscape 6/7, Mozilla Suite), and virtually all of those users have since moved on to Firefox / Thunderbird.

If you didn't use SeaMonkey 4 years ago, why would you use it now? This release is for that relatively small group of people who resented Mozilla.org's switch to Firefox and want to continue using the old suite. And good on them, I say; that's what open source is about.

--
ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by sstidman · 2006-01-31 14:48 · Score: 1

It's been a while since I have installed Mozilla, but as I recall it also places the DOM inspector & javascript debugger as part of the customized installation exactly as FF does so that's not "by default" for Mozilla, either. So I don't see the advantage to Mozilla. And even if Mozilla did make it part of a custom install, so what? Power users will likely do a custom install, anyway.

And the tight integration with the e-mail client is a bogus feature; when you click on a mailto link within FF, Thunderbird brings up an e-mail window. What tighter integration do you need?

--
Send/track messages to 100K people: www.xPressAlert.com
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Craig+Davison · 2006-01-31 15:24 · Score: 2, Informative

To make the missing new tab button appear, just right-click on the button bar and choose customize.

--
Hands in my pocket
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Bing+Tsher+E · 2006-01-31 16:09 · Score: 2, Insightful

You may recall that the fruits of Mozilla.org's efforts did not gain any traction with the general browsing public until the Firefox interface came along,..

What I 'recall' is that I used the Mozilla suite for a long, long time and was quite happy with it. Then a bunch of people started hollering about 'Firefox' so I thought I would give it a try. I installed it, and found it missing all kinds of features and menu items I made use of with the suite. It basically gave me the impression of being the 'Windows XP' version of Mozilla.

I ditched it. I am using plain Mozilla (1.7.12) these days, built from pkgsrc on NetBSD. I don't know that I'll ever use 'Firefox' although I suppose eventually it will be installed by default on Windows XP machines, or their descendents. . .

I'm sorry, Firefox just looks all candied out and simplified. Like something that people who finally started using 'Linux' in 2002 or so would like.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Bing+Tsher+E · 2006-01-31 16:12 · Score: 1

I find it really disappointing that some of these people seem gleeful that Firefox is all 'shiney' and old Mozilla is tired and boring.

It's just weird, and it reeks of immaturity that they insist on slagging Mozilla.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by syzler · 2006-01-31 16:26 · Score: 1

I just opened up the OS X version of Mozilla 1.7 and SeaMonkey 1.0, they appear to be the same. At first glance they look exactly the same except for the name. They even use the same profile. What differentiates SeaMonkey from Mozilla?
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by savala · 2006-01-31 17:01 · Score: 1

What differentiates SeaMonkey from Mozilla?
SeaMonkey is the successor to Mozilla. SeaMonkey 1.0 is what would've been known as Mozilla 1.8, if it wasn't for the Mozilla Foundation scrapping it and focussing on Firefox instead.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by ShagratTheTitleless · 2006-01-31 19:02 · Score: 0

To make the missing new tab button appear, just right-click on the button bar and choose customize.
I am aware of that ability but it does not let you put the "new tab button" on the tab bar itself where the suite had it. To be honest it is a picky thing but when I looked into it back when Firefox was still sub 1.0 I found that "a lot" of people wanted it restored but one of the Firefox hackers didn't like it so it was gone.

--
Sometimes at night I imagine the darkness is filled with horrible things with too many teeth, like Julia Roberts.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by aftermath09 · 2006-01-31 23:36 · Score: 1

Found this really useful link summarizing the raison d'etre of Seamonkey and offers a comparison to Firefox/Thunderbird:
http://ilias.ca/SeamonkeyvsFirefox.html
Also a discussion on mozillazine: http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=7 957
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Zontar+The+Mindless · 2006-02-01 11:15 · Score: 1

You forgot to mention that the gleeful ones are probably running Firefox on Windows XP and carrying on about how 1337 this makes them.

Back on topic: SeaMonkey seems much faster with regard to installation and general operation than Moz 1.7.

--
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by Sb1 · 2006-02-01 20:34 · Score: 1

I agree with LordNimon.
I did make the switch to FF 1.5 when the Final came out and put it on my desktops and laptop(WinXP Pro's). I have had a lot more problems with FF than I did with Moz Suite (1.7.12) through the years as a stand alone browser. However, I only installed it as a stand alone browser and the quaility feedback agent.
With FF I get a fair amount of crashes on my computers. However some of the extensions in FF are really nice, but maybe that's why it's crashing so much [FlashGot, FasterFox(just Deleted), NoScript, Adblock, ColorfullTabs, Flashblock, PdfDownload, SessionSaver, DownThemAll, Print/PrintPreview].
I did try a few SeaMonkeys awhile back and they didn't impress me, however with this new release I am going to give it another shot. I liked the way MozSuite handled Multiple Tab Bookmark saves, but now I've warmed up to the way FF handles these, both have there pros and cons.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by RangerFish · 2006-02-02 01:49 · Score: 1

You're confusing English with a language that respects Boolean logic.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by RangerFish · 2006-02-02 02:27 · Score: 1

I'm sorry, Firefox just looks all candied out and simplified. Like something that people who finally started using 'Linux' in 2002 or so would like.

Now, that sounds elitist
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by mattkinabrewmindspri · 2006-02-10 09:02 · Score: 1

It looks to me like he was saying the opposite, that something that isn't full-featured is not something a grandma would want to use.

--
Albuquerque PC
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org... by oojah · 2006-02-11 22:29 · Score: 1

Yes, you're right. So everybody should use SeaMonkey then :)

--
Do you have any better hostages?

SeaMonkey - how cute by fanblade · 2006-01-31 07:41 · Score: 5, Funny

SeaMonkey? I bet this thing dies in a matter of days.

Re:SeaMonkey - how cute by dr_dank · 2006-01-31 08:12 · Score: 1

If it does, just add water!

--
Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
Re:SeaMonkey - how cute by octaene · 2006-01-31 08:13 · Score: 1

Well, duh! After you download it, you have to put it in water for it to work...
Re:SeaMonkey - how cute by Bravoc · 2006-01-31 08:15 · Score: 1, Funny

Yea, and I bet it looks nothing like the screen shots that they had in the back of the comic book either.
Re:SeaMonkey - how cute by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 08:34 · Score: 0

I did that. I followed the ReadMe, which said "Just Add Water." This caused the installer to instantly expand the archive to many times its original size, and then it wiggled around in my hard disk and ate the contents, and died 4 days later.
Re:SeaMonkey - how cute by Enigma_Man · 2006-01-31 08:48 · Score: 1

I have a sea-monkey that is in a sealed ecosphere that has been alive for 7 years this x-mas (at least, plus whatever he lived before he was shipped to my house).

--
Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
Re:SeaMonkey - how cute by Belial6 · 2006-01-31 11:19 · Score: 1

Hear hear...I had Sea-Monkies that lasted for 3 years, until they were forgotten on a sunny windowsill, and killed. We did have a problem for a while where we had one big monkey that was agressivly killing the smaller ones. In the end though it was our own negligence that did them in.
Re:SeaMonkey - how cute by unforgettableid · 2006-01-31 12:45 · Score: 1

At least it'll last longer than an Iceweasel. Those babies melt fast.

--
Who do you trust?
Re:SeaMonkey - how cute by M-G · 2006-02-01 04:08 · Score: 1

Considering brine shrimp only have a lifespan of about a year, this sounds, er, fishy.
Re:SeaMonkey - how cute by Enigma_Man · 2006-02-02 05:57 · Score: 1

Ecosphere is the place where I got them. They themselves say that the shrimp populations can survive for that long.
-Jesse

--
Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
Re:SeaMonkey - how cute by M-G · 2006-02-03 03:49 · Score: 1

Those also appear to be a different kind of shrimp. Sea Monkeys are brine shrimp.

WYSIWYG by ZephyrXero · 2006-01-31 07:42 · Score: 4, Interesting

So how does the Sea Monkey web editor compare to Nvu? If it's better, that'll really suck having to download a whole suite just for that one component. Why Mozilla Corp/Foundation hasn't released it's own editor still is beyond me...

--
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."

Re:WYSIWYG by savala · 2006-01-31 07:50 · Score: 5, Informative

So how does the Sea Monkey web editor compare to Nvu? If it's better, that'll really suck having to download a whole suite just for that one component.
It isn't better, as it's the basis on which NVu has been built (missing lots of features, but with the same basics). NVu's main developer has committed to donating back all the new code to the main Mozilla tree before releasing another version of NVu, and as far as I know, that's currently in the process of happening (although slowly, as it's a lot of code to be reviewed, and not many people capable of doing so).
SeaMonkey 1.5 should contain the results of this work, so basically a WYSIWYG editor nearly identical to current NVu.
Re:WYSIWYG by CTho9305 · 2006-01-31 07:53 · Score: 4, Informative

You don't have to download the whole suite - grab the stub installer (a bit over 200KB), and just the parts you want.

--
My server
Re:WYSIWYG by ZephyrXero · 2006-01-31 07:57 · Score: 1

Yeah, I knew all of that...but I didn't know if the Sea Monkey guys had tried to improve on the old codebase though...that was my question ;)

And I've heard the same things about Nvu getting incorporated back upstream to Mozilla...but so far there has been no news on it on either front :(

--
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
Re:WYSIWYG by Otter · 2006-01-31 07:57 · Score: 3, Informative

Nvu comes from the Mozilla editor codebase, although I don't know if the two have forked or if they're kept in sync at all. Comparing Nvu with the current Mozilla editor -- Nvu has many more features, some of which (site control, CSS editing) are great, some of which (the different link attributes like "date" and "crush") are stupid and some of which (the "New" command, for heaven's sake) don't work. I still prefer Mozilla for light editing, but Nvu would be better (although probably inadequate) for heavier use.
Anyway, "suite" here is only 12-13 megs -- it's not like installing Office or Open Office.

--
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Re:WYSIWYG by savala · 2006-01-31 08:05 · Score: 2, Informative

but I didn't know if the Sea Monkey guys had tried to improve on the old codebase though...that was my question ;)
Ah, ok. In that case, yes, there've undoubtedly been a number of fixes to the editor code since 1.7 (which is what NVu started of with). I'm seeing "+3703/3280) Lines changed" in the /editor directory in the rough timeperiod between the two branches (April 2004 to September 2005) and 56 bugs marked as fixed for the same timeperiod in the editor component. (Not linking, as slashdot referers are blocked.) Of course that code is shared with the email composer and Midas (the rich text editor), but there still should be some improvements.
Re:WYSIWYG by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 08:09 · Score: 0

The server the stub contacts for the rest of it appears to be slashdotted now, so that won't work either ;)
Re:WYSIWYG by Bing+Tsher+E · 2006-01-31 16:14 · Score: 1

Actually, I generally download the source tarball. But thanks for the tip anyway....

IE? by ZachPruckowski · 2006-01-31 07:42 · Score: 2, Interesting

Well, IE officially fell behind again. I mean, it sounded like that new beta was competition for Seamonkey/Firefox, but ten minutes after that's out, Mozilla obsoletes it. Was this scheduled?

Re:IE? by ZephyrXero · 2006-01-31 07:50 · Score: 1

In just about every industry, commodity products (open source software in this case) will eventually over power proprietary ones ;)

--
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."

Am I just confused? by Blimey85 · 2006-01-31 07:43 · Score: 0, Redundant

There was Mozilla and then they made Firefox and Thunderbird (under diff names back then). Eventually they decided to just go with the split programs and abandon the main suite. Now they are doing the suite again? Am I missing something?

I switched to Firefox and Thunderbird and then eventually quit Thunderbird and switched to Outlook (I'm sorry but I like it) and I didn't pay attention to the other stuff Mozilla was doing but my understanding was that the suite was dead. Guess it's back.

The suite is dead.
Long live the suite.

--
How is it that one careless match can start a forest fire, but it takes a whole box to start a campfire?

Re:Am I just confused? by Fritzy · 2006-01-31 07:47 · Score: 2, Informative

The suite never died. It was decided back in early "Phoenix" days to switch priorities, but Firefox and SeaMonkey have still been arm and arm. Most features that make it into Firefox are developed in SeaMonkey. Firefox is simply lighter weight and more aimed at the "grandmother can use this" style UI.
Re:Am I just confused? by AuMatar · 2006-01-31 07:49 · Score: 4, Informative

Its more like this

In the begining there was Mozilla Suite, and it was good. However, a large number of people wanted a standalone browser. Instead of just splitting Mozilla Suite, they made their own browser, Firefox. Despite having an inferior UI, the Mozilla FOundation decided to drop the Suite in favor of Firefox. Some of the users of Mozilla don't particularly like the UI of Firefox, so we revived Mozilla Suite. Unfortunately, Mozilla is a trademark and the Mozilla Foundation does not let them call it Mozilla Suite, so it is now SeaMonkey.

You can tell what side I'm on. I'll be dling the new SeaMonkey tonight.

--
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Re:Am I just confused? by robson · 2006-01-31 08:12 · Score: 2, Informative

Some of the users of Mozilla don't particularly like the UI of Firefox, so we revived Mozilla Suite. Unfortunately, Mozilla is a trademark and the Mozilla Foundation does not let them call it Mozilla Suite, so it is now SeaMonkey.

As one of those users who prefers the Mozilla UI and likes having Composer around on the rare occasions it's needed, I'm glad that the Suite has a new lease on life.
Re:Am I just confused? by slickwillie · 2006-01-31 08:40 · Score: 1

I reluctantly switched from Mozilla to FF/TB just last week, as it seemed like Mozilla was a dead end. I installed Fedora Core 4 and Mozilla was nowhere to be found on the 4 CDs.

Any opinions on whether I should stick with Thunderbird or go with Evolution? I'm using KDE instead of Gnome.
Re:Am I just confused? by hairyfeet · 2006-01-31 08:43 · Score: 1

You won't be disappointed.I've been using the beta and it purrs like a kitten.Fast,rock solid,sweet.And for those that can't understand why we stick with the suite,Try Seamonkey with multizilla http://multizilla.mozdev.org/ it lets me run MY browser MY way.Everything is under my control,From the cache and images to proxy and layout it's all set up MY way.Which is why I'll never let go of my suite(Downloading it as I type)
Give it a try and see why many folks say "Long live the suite!".It also plays VERY nice with Firefox,Kmeleon,And Opera,Which is nice if you have family that uses your machine.Each can have their own browser and not muck about with yours!

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Re:Am I just confused? by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 09:13 · Score: 0

What's wrong with KMail?
Re:Am I just confused? by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 09:33 · Score: 0

Wow. Can I reorganize the toolbar now?
Re:Am I just confused? by rm69990 · 2006-01-31 09:50 · Score: 1

The composer part of your post is obsolete. Nvu is a replacement for Mozilla Composer, and has far better and more features to boot. I agree with the rest of your post though. I myself have taken a liking to this new IE7 Beta however.
Re:Am I just confused? by Hurricane78 · 2006-01-31 11:19 · Score: 1, Flamebait

PLEASE, don't do it! IE 7 is still a nightmare for us web-developers, because it *STILL* shits in the face (YES, that's the correct term) of every standard and every developer trying to create something that simply works WITHOUT being forced to choose if you have it working in every browser that supports the standards OR adapting it to a idiotic non-consistent model of a so-called browser that 90% of the users use (who are stupid by the fact that they use it), because 90% of the big websites still think the have to support this load of crap because 90% of the users... (repeat ... until (death);)

And someone EVER comes to me with the argument, that in version 7, everything will be clean and wonderful, then GET THIS:
IE 7 *STILL* uses the trashy old codebase. No matter what the tell you. It only uses another layer on top of that upside-down pyramid of an application design.
Ho do i know this? Well... If it still has the same quirks, then it normally is the same code. Why would anyone replicate such awful quirks in new code?

I'm really sorry for "trolling" (if it really is), but the dullness of that mass (of poeple) out there who still use IE, think microsoft rocks, think the pharma industry does care if you were healty, or any industry would care if you are happy as long as you bring profit to them
is making me so mad i wish them a big epidemic plague, causing a wonderful *natural* selection, so they FUCKING have to get up their asses to win the game of life!

Yup, i think most poeple actually are allowred to cheat more than they should be allowed to.

And: No, i don't think it is wrong to gain some profit of the iditicity of others.

My basic tought is that this dullness and stupidity make the life of everyone other bad too. And i really like having a good life.

--
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Re:Am I just confused? by Crispy+Critters · 2006-01-31 11:25 · Score: 2, Interesting

"However, a large number of people wanted a standalone browser."
This sounds like a rewrite of history, although it may be part of the story.
More importantly, there was a set of Mozilla developers who were tired of working with a vast code base where each decision had to be made by a committee and was endlessly criticized by posers who never wrote a line of code. These developers decided to write a new browser front end on their own so they could have fun again coding and be accountable to no one.
Amazingly, the new front end became wildly popular, even though the logo and the name are completely different animals. (Foxes are cool, but red pandas a.k.a. firefoxes are cooler.)
Re:Am I just confused? by rm69990 · 2006-01-31 11:31 · Score: 1

OK, for your information I am using Firefox again, due to numerous bugs that I began noticing in IE minutes after posting my post.

Anyways, how are people stupid when they simply don't care about web browsers enough to even know there are alternatives? Cause, fyi, most people don't care, and couldn't be bothered to care. And no amount of bitching by web developers is going to make them care. Get over it, or find a new profession. Cater to your customers and their choices, or fuck off and do something else for a living, kapeesh? In my profession, if a customer choice causes me more work, and I bitch to them about it, I would most likely be fired. Quit being a whiner.

Of course, this is Slashdot, so I'll be modded down in about 30 seconds.
Re:Am I just confused? by AuMatar · 2006-01-31 11:44 · Score: 1

Could be something to that part too, from the outside it looked like a drive by the stand alone browser people though. I can understand why they would want to get away from a comittee, but there were better ways to do it (like a fork) if thats your main goal. As it is Firefox still has nowhere near the features, power, or configuration options of SeaMonkey or even the last version of Mozilla Suite. I really rank it as barely better than IE. Given the vast UI differences I don't buy your explanation as the full reason.

--
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Re:Am I just confused? by Justin205 · 2006-01-31 12:42 · Score: 1

Unfortunately, Mozilla is a trademark and the Mozilla Foundation does not let them call it Mozilla Suite, so it is now SeaMonkey.

Actually, according to the Mozilla trademark policy, Seamonkey is one of their trademarks anyway.

I also suggest people read that policy in general, as there's a good chance most people are technically breaking it already. Put that ® or (TM) next to Mozilla® Thunderbird(TM) recently? (Mozilla is a registered trademark of the Mozilla Foundation. Thunderbird is a trademark of the Mozilla Foundation.)

(Yes, I know I'm being a bit excessive, but if you follow it to their exact spec, that's what you get.)

--
"Your effort to remain what you are is what limits you."
Re:Am I just confused? by Kasar · 2006-01-31 18:22 · Score: 1

Once Communicator came out, there were a lot of people wanting a standalone browser. Communicator was a huge program for it's time and tech support was busy helping people reconfigure their systems just to run the thing. Remember the Navigator releases at the time? Those were just recompiles of the suite with the rest removed and weren't polished at all. They worked, but didn't integrate well with other apps at least in the first few point releases.
About the time they announced the source release, there was a still a lot of interest in a seperate browser both from end users and corporations, often so they could use the browser portion with Outlook. Not too much later, the word coming down from AOL was that they weren't in the software development business and didn't want to be. That was just the view from the support side.

--
vi? Who's that?
Re:Am I just confused? by pembo13 · 2006-01-31 20:10 · Score: 1

You know, there was always Nestscape Navigator for any who wanted a standalone browser.

--
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
Re:Am I just confused? by Hurricane78 · 2006-02-01 11:04 · Score: 1

Okay, I'm sorry for saying they are stupid because they don't care. Everyone has its priorities.

But i think not caring has its limits. Things like not caring if someone dies is an extreme example.
It even gets more complicated when someone really *deserves* to die in the eyes of everyone you know - including you.

So to get back to the general problem, where the popularity of the IE is just one result of it:

It is simply out of my mind, why poeple complain about their "computers" (mostly meaning crappy software) *every* day, say that they have so much problems with it, say they now can save the work that they did not have to do before they had a computer,

and STILL don't care and accept the situation blindly.

So in the core of it, i don't have a problem with this behaviour of realizing there is a big sucking problem in something they have to deal with, but accepting it and not caring.

I don't know how you call that, but i call it pretty damn stupid. Any human with a common sense would try to change the situation, no?

Or asked from another point of view: How much more torture do they need until they try to change a thing?

Bonus question: Is the art of Microsoft to always keep it as near as possible unter this level? ;)

P.S.: I would mod you up if i could. (And me too ;))

--
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Re:Am I just confused? by rm69990 · 2006-02-01 14:11 · Score: 1

Geez, after re-reading my harsh post (I was having a bad day...just had thousands of dollars stolen from me) I'm surprised you said you would mod me up. I was expecting an even harsher post back.

I think we both have valid points. I have always been of the view that when you are servicing your customers, you should accept their decisions, irregardless of how dumb they appear or are, and work your services around them. However, I hate when people complain, and when people bitch about spyware but refuse to switch browsers, it ticks me off also.

IE7 sucks by the way. It seemed all flashy and exciting and new for the first hour or so, until I realized the dumb thing can't even store cookies properly. Gmail has many quirks that don't show up in Firefox or Opera. You have to ask God's help to uninstall the dumb thing. And my keyboard is very unresponsive in it, problems I didn't notice in Firefox or any other program (including IE6).
Re:Am I just confused? by Hurricane78 · 2006-02-02 00:38 · Score: 1

Hmm... you know... I eally whished that they make a good browser. Because in the end i'm not the one who will hate ms because they are ms, but because of what they do and have done.
If they start to only do wonderul things i will slowly start to love them.

But... well... i guess i have to continue whishing. :(
(Is there a chance that they quickly fix the problems until it goes final or until 7.1? ;)

P.S: Compared to my post you don't have to call yours "harsh", do you? *g*

--
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Re:Am I just confused? by heinousjay · 2006-02-11 10:02 · Score: 1

I would like to thank you. I'm a huge fan of people who happily, loudly display their ignorance so I know to discount them immediately. You did a great job, friend.

--
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.

What's new: by karmaflux · 2006-01-31 07:43 · Score: 2, Funny

Autoscroll! HOORAY!

canvas tags! Boooo!

Drag and drop tabs! Eh.

Also, "Attempting to compose, forward, or reply to a message may result in a non-functional compose window." Sounds handy.

Really, I've just been waiting for autoscroll.

More at http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/releases /seamonkey1.0/README.html

--

REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.

Re:What's new: by Randle_Revar · 2006-01-31 08:16 · Score: 1

Why would you boo canvas? If you don't go to any sites that use it, it will not affect you other than the fact that gecko builds svg on top of the canvas interface.

Drag and drop tags have turned out to be much more useful to me than I thought they would be.

I can't comment on autoscroll as I don't use it (does it even work on Linux?).

--
Climate Progress - Hell and High Water
Re:What's new: by Hatta · 2006-01-31 08:32 · Score: 1

Autoscroll! HOORAY!

Autoscroll? How does it know when you reach the bottom of the page?

canvas tags! Boooo!

wtf are they?

Drag and drop tabs! Eh.

Wake me up when you can attach and detach tabs at will.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:What's new: by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 08:47 · Score: 3, Informative

Canvas is a WHATWG (Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group) recommendation for a "resolution-dependent bitmap canvas, which can be used for rendering graphs, game graphics, or other visual images on the fly". In other words, it's some of that web 2.0 stuff. More info here.
Re:What's new: by AeroIllini · 2006-01-31 08:56 · Score: 2, Interesting

canvas tags! Boooo!

What's wrong with <canvas> tags? I think they are a revolutionary idea.

Once they become part of the HTML5 spec (and WHATWG is working on it now), then suddenly web developers will have a way to show those corny Flash movies without needing a plugin. The browser will support dynamic bitmap refresh natively. Eventually, it will support 3D rendering natively too, probably through OpenGL. Imagine playing Doom in a web browser, with no plugins. Or a contractor showing clients around a virtual model of their home before construction begins.

Does it have the potential to be horribly abused? Of course. So does the <script> element, and even the   element. And who can forget the abuses of the <embed> and <object> elements?

Does it offer limitless opportunities for a more dynamic website? Yes.

Does it mean the fragmented world of browser+plugins is converging to browser+JavaScript/AJAX? Yes.

Plugin functionality with no plugins--just JavaScript and a <canvas> tag. I like it.

--
For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
Re:What's new: by monkeydo · 2006-01-31 10:12 · Score: 0, Flamebait

Wake me up when you can attach and detach tabs at will.

You mean like in Opera?

--
Si vis pacem, para bellum
The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
Re:What's new: by HeroreV · 2006-01-31 15:55 · Score: 1

and even the   element

" " is not an element.
Re:What's new: by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 22:13 · Score: 0

Or Konqueror.
Re:What's new: by fbjon · 2006-01-31 22:28 · Score: 1

Parent post isn't a flamebait. SeaMonkey is nice and all, but Opera has a lot of the features already. No seriously, people always say that "Opera already does/has that", but it's for a reason!
Is opera.com blocked for most slashdotters, or what's the problem, really? Are you all totally blinded by the awesomeness of t3h Open Source?
I'm not trolling either, because I just tried the thing out. Here's my conclusion:
The composer is nice, it's simple and generates valid HTML. I can imagine it being useful in the future if it can be made more modern, or able to put out better-looking pages. As it is, no-one is probably going to actually use it, other than for nostalgia trips.
The IRC client is usable, but thoroughly unimpressive.
The interface generally has a nostalgic Netscape-y feel.
The rest (browser+mail) is as we know it.

--
True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
Re:What's new: by monkeydo · 2006-02-01 14:20 · Score: 1

I must have burst someone's bubble.

--
Si vis pacem, para bellum
The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian

SeaMonkey is not Mozilla... by digitaldc · 2006-01-31 07:44 · Score: 3, Funny

It's a cheap packet of cryptobiotic shrimp you can order off the back of any comic book. By the way, they never look as friendly or as big as the pictures. :(

--
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson

Re:SeaMonkey is not Mozilla... by i.r.id10t · 2006-01-31 08:19 · Score: 2, Funny

Those are brine shrimp you are thinking of... my fish love 'em as treats, and when they are babies and still have their yolk sack they are very nutritious for raising fry...

--
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
Re:SeaMonkey is not Mozilla... by jacksonj04 · 2006-01-31 08:44 · Score: 3, Informative

Actually, Sea Monkeys are a specific brand of these brine shrimp, designed to be easy to set up and feed and stuff.

http://www.sea-monkeys.com/

--
How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
Re:SeaMonkey is not Mozilla... by GoodbyeBlueSky1 · 2006-01-31 13:46 · Score: 1

Sea People + SeaMen = Sea-Ciety

--
why? forty-two.

Firefox extensions? by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 07:44 · Score: 0

Do Firefox extensions work with SeaMonkey? I hate having a separated e-mail client (Thunderbird), but I'll only switch if I can still use the Firefox extensions.

Re:Firefox extensions? by garbletext · 2006-01-31 07:47 · Score: 0, Flamebait

those bastards don't even work between version of firefox. in other words, no.
Re:Firefox extensions? by savala · 2006-01-31 07:57 · Score: 4, Informative

Do Firefox extensions work with SeaMonkey?
Some do, some don't. It mostly depends on how much effort the extension developer put into his work. A lot of basic extensions should be completely compatible between the two programs, with only needing to use a different installation system, and most of those will indeed have versions for both. A lot of other extensions depend on Firefox specific UI / code, and probably won't (if they even make sense at all in the SeaMonkey/Mozilla world), unless the developer cared, or got lots of requests from people to make the extension compatible. You can browse the Mozilla/SeaMonkey extensions at addons to see what's there.
Re:Firefox extensions? by unamiccia · 2006-01-31 14:37 · Score: 1

Just installed SeaMonkey and Adblock -- seems to work fine -- but see no compatible Flashblock extension. Does anyone know if that exists yet? These are the two Firefox extensions I can't do without . . .

Link on Seamonkey site is bad by solaufein · 2006-01-31 07:44 · Score: 3, Informative

Link to download Seamonkey 1.0 for win32 leads to a 404.
Link for full download is: ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/re leases/1.0/seamonkey-1.0.en-US.win32.installer.exe
Link for ftp of releases: ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/re leases/1.0/

--
I'm of a mind to give them a piece of my mind, but I seem to have lost my mind.

Mod: +1 Funny by ZephyrXero · 2006-01-31 07:46 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Who the hell modded the parent troll? It's pretty funny :P

--
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."

For those of us not in the know... by stefanlasiewski · 2006-01-31 07:46 · Score: 1

I haven't been paying close attention to developments in the Mozilla world outside Firefox, Thunderbird and the Calendaring application.

Is the "Mozilla Suite" project dead? Is Seamonkey the replacement for the old Mozilla Suite? Will the next version of Netscape be based on Seamonkey 1.0?

For whatever reason, many people in the business world don't know what "Mozilla" means, and may take them a while to recognize the name of "Seamonkey". However, they still recognize the name "Netscape".

I'm shocked to find out that many Managers at web companies still talk about "IE vs. Netscape" in terms of browser compatability. These folks often lump "Firefox" into the column for "Other, less supported browsers". It's not suprising, but that "Other" column now represents somewhere between 10-20% of users.

--
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."

Re:For those of us not in the know... by CTho9305 · 2006-01-31 08:01 · Score: 5, Informative

Is the "Mozilla Suite" project dead? Is Seamonkey the replacement for the old Mozilla Suite? Will the next version of Netscape be based on Seamonkey 1.0?

"Mozilla Suite" will only get security updates. No more new development. SeaMonkey is a good replacement for the old suite - it's effectively Mozilla 1.8 (SeaMonkey 1.0 alpha was what would have been Mozilla 1.8 beta 5). If Netscape decides to ship annother "Communicator" (rather than just a browser), they would be wise to use SeaMonkey as a base for it.

--
My server

That explains a lot by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 07:46 · Score: 0

I think we all know now what IE7 is based on.

wow that was brave by BitterAndDrunk · 2006-01-31 07:47 · Score: 0, Troll

You're in trouble. Trollish funny posts are the bane of a concerned citizen. ;)

You're going to get -1 troll and +1 funny, sinking your karma to new depths.
I salute your bravery, sir. (someone salute mine for my offtopic karma burn!)

--
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . . .

Re:wow that was brave by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 08:31 · Score: 0

The grandparent made me laugh my ass off and it's STILL getting modded troll even after it's at +5 funny. Somebody give that guy a +1 interesting.

Somehow I doubt meta-moderation catches these sort of atrocities.

Seamonkeys.... by revery · 2006-01-31 07:48 · Score: 5, Funny

I have been a bit leery of anything called "Seamonkeys" ever since I ordered a kit off of the back of my Amazing Spider-Man comic book many years ago. I was quite disappointed when it arrived and the creatures that hatched in my goldfish bowl were not the family of happy trident-bearing mer-creatures pictured in the ad, but a bunch of freaking shrimp.
So go ahead Mozilla, and sell the world on your little state-of-the-art web browser and powerful email client, as well as a WYSIWYG web page composer and a feature-rich IRC chat client. I'm not gonna be sucked in to your little scheme. In the words of our great President Bush, "Fool me once, shame on... you.... The Fooled man can't be fooled again"

Re:Seamonkeys.... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 08:07 · Score: 2, Funny

"There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on -- shame on... shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again."

Sheesh... I mean if even the president can get it right you should at least put some effort into quoting him correctly.
Re:Seamonkeys.... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 08:48 · Score: 0

Funny, that is exactly what I was thinking when I was playing around with the browser after I downloaded it. What an appropriate name; I was all excited while downloading it, but after trying out for a bit I felt a bit let down... just like with those damn Sea Monkies!
Re:Seamonkeys.... by joeytsai · 2006-01-31 09:42 · Score: 1

If you haven't seen Bush's malapropism, you ought to check it out: I love the internet. And the Daily Show.

--
http://www.talknerdy.org
Re:Seamonkeys.... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 10:01 · Score: 0

I heard the saying was: "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool Chuck Norris, and die of roundhouse kick-related injuries."

Compilation instructions? by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 07:49 · Score: 0

Anybody know how to build this behemoth?

Re:Compilation instructions? by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 12:11 · Score: 0

Off the top of my head, without seeing the source or anything:

$ ./configure
$ make
$ su
$ make install

Hope this helps.
Re:Compilation instructions? by kbrosnan · 2006-01-31 12:58 · Score: 1

Ignore the AC that replied to you, those instructions are not any good for building any Mozilla release be it SeaMonkey, Firefox, Thunderbird or others.

Use the following links.
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Build_Documen tation
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Category:Buil d_Documentation
For help
http://irc.mozilla.org/
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewforum.php?f=42

--
These people look deep within my soul and assign me a number based upon the order I joined. -Homer Simpson

Yay! by beforewisdom · 2006-01-31 07:56 · Score: 1

Yay! I like my browser, email client and irc app integrted out of the box. I'm happy this is still around.

Now, if people would start making themes for mozilla again. The default and the ones I have found are butt ugly.

Maybe I will learn to make some myself. I wouldn't mind a firefox themse for mozilla or a kde theme ( for current releases ).

Re:Yay! by Malc · 2006-01-31 08:07 · Score: 1

Sigh! The monolithic app where everything runs in the same process is so braindead. Apps don't have to run in the same process space to be tightly integrated. My memories of the Mozilla Suite were a crash in the browser caused me to lose the last half-hour's edits of an email - such a bad architecture.
Re:Yay! by Eric+Giguere · 2006-01-31 08:17 · Score: 1

Yeah, it's kind of funny that they went with such an architecture to begin with, it's so un-Unix like.

Eric
Real-life applications for PageRank
Re:Yay! by hairyfeet · 2006-01-31 09:12 · Score: 1

Here is what I use-http://www.tom-cat.com/mozilla/seamonkey.html It even has a dancing tux for a throbber!

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Re:Yay! by pe1chl · 2006-01-31 09:38 · Score: 1

It doesn't crash so often anymore. I have it running for weeks on end.

I think it is not good to have multiple html rendering engines running in different processes either... in theory they could be shared, but un Firefox/Thunderbird practice this does not seem to happen.
Re:Yay! by sremick · 2006-01-31 09:56 · Score: 1

Now, if people would start making themes for mozilla again. The default and the ones I have found are butt ugly.

There are a bunch here:

https://addons.mozilla.org/themes/?application=moz illa
Re:Yay! by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 12:44 · Score: 0

http://markbokil.org/downloads/seamonkey/install.h tml
Re:Yay! by Bing+Tsher+E · 2006-01-31 16:23 · Score: 1

I cannot recall the last time the Mozilla suite crashed on me. It's been robust enough to not crash for years, in my experience. I don't use the email component, though. There are far, far better choices for email, I personally use Sylpheed. But I will NEVER want to migrate to a 'browser' (brings visions to me of a stupid cow browsing in a pasture) that doesn't include a bundled HTML editor. Last week I commented about the importance of HTML editing, and someone responded about how 'we all post on blogs now, HTML editing is obsolete.' Wow, man. Is this still Slashdot?
Re:Yay! by fbjon · 2006-01-31 22:38 · Score: 1

Are you talking about the basic editor in Seamonkey, or a real HTML editor? And why should it be integrated into the browser? I mean, it could be nice, but I'd have to integrate PHP as well, then.

--
True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
Re:Yay! by Malc · 2006-02-01 01:06 · Score: 1

Why does an HTML editor have to run in the same process space as your browser? I can see how you might want an embeddable HTML editor control/widget, but that's a different story. Microsoft Office products are extremely tightly integrated (probably more so than say the browser and mail app in Mozilla Suite/Seamonkey), yet they do not run in one process space unless it's an OLE type of situation.
Re:Yay! by Bing+Tsher+E · 2006-02-01 12:27 · Score: 1

I want there to be an HTML editor, installed by default, on every computer that has a browser. It's an ideological thing, about the web being useful for two way communications. And I mean beyond the idea that people can type into text boxes on web forms that end up on someone else's website.

It's just an idealistic vision, and I think one that was fostered at Netscape for a long time. Communications is a two way process.

10 years over due but finally here by bensch128 · 2006-01-31 07:58 · Score: 0

Good lord!
this thing was supposed to be finished like 10 years ago...
Talk about vaporware.

On the other hand, it looks like a REALLY nice combination of technologies....
Can't go wrong with SVG and reorderable tabs...

Cheers,
Ben

drag&drop reordering of tabs.... by mobby_6kl · 2006-01-31 07:59 · Score: 0, Flamebait

drag&drop reordering of tabs, support for a common inbox for multiple email accounts, SVG, ,

Hmmm, wonder where I've seen (or used these) before...
Any suggestions? Oh wait... wasn't it Opera 7?

Ok, SVG support was added only recently, and Opera doesn't have most of the developer features, but these nifty features are quite lame.

Re:drag&drop reordering of tabs.... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 09:50 · Score: 0

and various linux browsers for a while, not to mention firefox 1.5
Re:drag&drop reordering of tabs.... by CTho9305 · 2006-01-31 11:40 · Score: 1

Are you suggesting we shouldn't bother implementing features just because somebody else came up with it? That's a pretty stupid idea. We find a feature we like, we implement it, even if we're not the first.

Note that the release announcement mentions features added since Mozilla 1.7, since that's what we figured many users would be coming from, so we've actually had a lot of these features in the nightlies for quite a while.

There are a lot of other features too - these are just ones we happened to think were interesting.

--
My server
Re:drag&drop reordering of tabs.... by mobby_6kl · 2006-01-31 12:11 · Score: 1

Nope, that's not what I'm saying at all. I only wanted to say that these didn't seem like very exciting features to me, even compared to other stuff in this new release.

From the way you say 'we' it looks like you're involved with the project, so... thanks, even if probably not I'm not going to use SeaMonkey for now. People, myself included, certainly appreciate your effort.
Re:drag&drop reordering of tabs.... by CTho9305 · 2006-01-31 14:46 · Score: 1

I'm this guy (copy the URL if /. referrer is blocked).

--
My server
Re:drag&drop reordering of tabs.... by pembo13 · 2006-01-31 20:13 · Score: 1

I see you've been waiting to drop in your Opera comment. I'm sure Opera is nice browser and all. But this comment is offtopic.

--
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft

Pssh. You call that life-like? by fanblade · 2006-01-31 08:03 · Score: 4, Funny

Here is the exciting new logo for this suite. Oddly, it looks nothing like a real sea monkey.

Personally, I think it's a cross between a blue bird and a scorpion stinger.

Re:Pssh. You call that life-like? by Ninjy · 2006-01-31 08:31 · Score: 1

It kind of smells like OpenOffice. Somewhat. Yes, I realise this comment is quite pointless, but the blue waves compelled me!
Re:Pssh. You call that life-like? by Trixter · 2006-01-31 09:08 · Score: 1

That is indeed what a "seamonkey" (brine shrimp) looks like.
Re:Pssh. You call that life-like? by glsunder · 2006-01-31 10:36 · Score: 1

best pics of real seamonkey I found via google:

http://community.livejournal.com/sea_monkeys/75714 .html
Re:Pssh. You call that life-like? by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 11:18 · Score: 0

Better than a fox humping North America....
Re:Pssh. You call that life-like? by Moofie · 2006-01-31 12:20 · Score: 1

Uh huh. That moist "splat" was the joke hitting you in the forehead. Nice catch, Sparky.

--
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
Re:Pssh. You call that life-like? by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 21:55 · Score: 0

The current seamonkey logo looks like the larva of a mosquito or similar insect... blechh

The King by dangil · 2006-01-31 08:04 · Score: 0, Offtopic

I shall name him BANJO...... KIIIIIIIIIIIING of the seamonkeys......

When will lightning strike? by baldinoos · 2006-01-31 08:04 · Score: 2, Interesting

Continuing the old Mozilla suite is fine, but one thing I am missing is a way to integrate my email and calendar. Mozilla "Lightning" was supposed to do this but the page hasn't been updated since January of 2005. Anyone have any clue if this is still on the Mozilla radar?

Re:When will lightning strike? by petenz · 2006-01-31 08:22 · Score: 2, Informative

Lightning is still being worked on, and progress is happening, as detailed in the calender weblog http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/calendar/. The project page itself is here http://wiki.mozilla.org/Calendar:Lightning. It's good to see progress happening - for those of us using Thunderbird in a work environment I think it's obvious that a Lightning style integrated calender will be an important part of mozilla's mix - those that currently use outlook won't easily switch to Thunderbird due to loss of functionality.
Re:When will lightning strike? by Randle_Revar · 2006-01-31 08:26 · Score: 1

It is being worked on. I don't think there are many people on the team, which could explain why it is taking so long. They post status updates on the calander blog: http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/calendar/

--
Climate Progress - Hell and High Water
Re:When will lightning strike? by jcorno · 2006-01-31 08:39 · Score: 1

The front page hasn't been updated, but if you dig a little deeper, they claim version 0.1 will be released next month. Unfortunately, they seem to be moving at a crawl, and they don't have any immediate plans to integrate PDA synchronization. I don't think SeaMonkey will be any kind of threat to Microsoft until they can pull it all together.
Re:When will lightning strike? by baldinoos · 2006-01-31 08:53 · Score: 1

Thanks guys, too bad it's moving so slow. I can't stand evolution and I refuse to use Windows. I guess people will have to be surprised when I walk into a meeting whose invitation I didn't reply to for a while longer. I don't think that this will be viewed as an "Enterprise" solution even when everything gets integrated. In my experience, any product that you can't pay someone an exorbitent amount of money to support just isn't worth using according to most management types.

Already uninstalled it by DnemoniX · 2006-01-31 08:06 · Score: 0, Flamebait

I'm sorry but this was my fault. I use Firefox and really do not pay attention to mozilla.org. Here I thought it was something shiney and new, then I installed it...

Lasted less than 5 minutes. If you like it great, but damn it is ugly by default.

Re:Already uninstalled it by Randle_Revar · 2006-01-31 08:47 · Score: 1

Yeah, the classic netscape theme is ugly. They are considering making Modern (which is pre-installed) the default in the future. IMHO the Modern theme looks better than the default Firefox theme.

--
Climate Progress - Hell and High Water
Re:Already uninstalled it by pembo13 · 2006-01-31 20:15 · Score: 1

So you uninstalled a themeable application becuase you didn't like the default look?

--
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft

Composer by __aahgmr7717 · 2006-01-31 08:08 · Score: 1

At least twice over the last year that Mozilla has said it has a web page composer and yet I have never found it. In the current SeaMonkey release there is no component called "Composer". Where is it?

Re:Composer by savala · 2006-01-31 08:13 · Score: 2, Informative

In the current SeaMonkey release there is no component called "Composer". Where is it?
Assuming an install that includes mailnews, it's the third icon in the bottom left (otherwise the second), also accessible through the menu bar: Window -> Composer, or by hitting ctrl-4, or ctrl-e to edit the current page.
Re:Composer by __aahgmr7717 · 2006-01-31 09:42 · Score: 1

Savala, Thank you very much! Unfortunately that is not a solution for me. I already use Firefox and Thunderbird for my web and email/news access and do not wish to install yet another system. All I want is to be able to compose web pages. I have NVU but it is inadequate since it does not (seem) to support Greek symbols which I need for mathematical technical postings. Still looking for a free web page composer. Thank you again.
Re:Composer by SirTalon42 · 2006-01-31 09:48 · Score: 1

If NVU doesn't work for you most likely Composer won't work either (NVU was forked a while back and had lots of development done on it, now all the NVU code is being sent back up stream to Composer before the next release of NVU will happen).

what the by Dashcolon · 2006-01-31 08:10 · Score: 0, Offtopic

that blue thing doesn't look like a monkey at all!

--
Trout's epitaph: Life is no way to treat an animal.

WYSIWYG Followup: server side scripting? by iamlucky13 · 2006-01-31 08:18 · Score: 1

I maintain my site using VIM, but a WYSIWYG html editor with syntax highlighting of PHP for my initial development efforts would be kind of handy for working on my local machine. Do either of these editors happen to include that feature?

Re:WYSIWYG Followup: server side scripting? by plague3106 · 2006-01-31 08:46 · Score: 1

I think Nedit can highlight PHP code. If not there are certainly other applications that can. One I know of is KDE based..can't remember the name.
Re:WYSIWYG Followup: server side scripting? by chrismcdirty · 2006-01-31 09:02 · Score: 1

Kate is probably what you are thinking of.

--
It's like sex, except I'm having it!
Re:WYSIWYG Followup: server side scripting? by NullProg · 2006-01-31 09:15 · Score: 1

but a WYSIWYG html editor with syntax highlighting of PHP for my initial development efforts would be kind of handy for working on my local machine. Do either of these editors happen to include that feature?

Try Bluefish
http://bluefish.openoffice.nl/index.html

Enjoy,

--
It's just the normal noises in here.
Re:WYSIWYG Followup: server side scripting? by jZnat · 2006-01-31 15:02 · Score: 1

Kyzis does that too (similar to Vim but with new goals and whatnot).

--
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
Re:WYSIWYG Followup: server side scripting? by ZephyrXero · 2006-02-01 08:54 · Score: 1

As far as I can tell from the screenshots, Bluefish is not a WYSIWYG editor...

--
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."

Dear Mozilla by Call+Me+Black+Cloud · 2006-01-31 08:21 · Score: 1, Funny

In case you missed it, let me clue you in. Suites are dead. People want lean applications with user-selected add-ons. Funky cutesy names are out...they lingered on a bit after the dot com bust (along with e- and i- names) but descriptive branding is the order of the day. "Microsoft Office" "Mozilla Internet Suite" "Apple Music Player". Oops...Jobs is going to kill me for leaking the last one...

What's wrong with Thunderbird? by Beefslaya · 2006-01-31 08:30 · Score: 0

How about a calendar plugin for Thunderbird that works?

No need to go off on a tangent here. Take what you got, and make it better.

I don't need another suite (Bad enough I'm forced to have IE and OE on my windows systems)thank you. Especially not a super version of the old Netscape package.

Ask people what they would like, they will tell you.

Nice effort, but not for me. Lasted 30 seconds on my machine.

Re:What's wrong with Thunderbird? by pembo13 · 2006-01-31 20:18 · Score: 1

It would be nice if you did some research before complaining. This is doen by and for those of us who WANT a suite. You remember the whole OSS, do what you want thing? This is not being worked on by people who would want to work on a carlendar app. I am not even sure that it is being worked on my Mozilla people at all.

--
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
Re:What's wrong with Thunderbird? by Beefslaya · 2006-02-01 01:55 · Score: 0

There are 2 current calendar projects going on right now through Mozilla,
Sunbird and Calandar.

For myself, I do OSS research and development on my own projects at freespamfilter.org, which I host, and support in the forums.

My statement was saying that, instead of developing something "new" from old stuff, why not work with a project that is totally successful like Firefox and Thunderbird. You could even install them together on the same system, just like your Suite you speak of. Only one thing missing from those, a calendar that is as funtional with current 'payfor' server applications.

Autoscroll? Why not click&drag by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 08:33 · Score: 0

When I click and drag the mouse off the page, it already scrolls just about any HTML page - and it has since Netscape 3.X / IE3.X. What does autoscroll do that's better?

This Theme Helps by DirkBalognapantz · 2006-01-31 08:37 · Score: 1

Good to see work still being done on this, but I had to install something to make it easier on the eyes. Glad I found this theme.

READ PREVIOUS POSTS PLEASE by wolff000 · 2006-01-31 08:40 · Score: 2, Insightful

How many times are people going ask what is SeaMonkey or is it the same as FireFox? If you don't know then go google it for god's sake! The other half of this question is why do people keep answering? If someone is not intelligent enough to read the previous 50 posts that answer this question they shouldn't be on /. Now back to the topic, please excuse my rant. I love that this going to continue being worked on. I like it more than firefox especially the debugging tools. If you are a developr this is a great suite and worth the time checking out!

--
WTF?

Re:READ PREVIOUS POSTS PLEASE by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 22:43 · Score: 0

What's Firefox?

does (browser + mail = monkey) package help? by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 08:49 · Score: 0

Does packaging these together make sense?

The two do not need to be used, or built together, right.

That was the point of Phoenix-Firebird-Firefox and Minitour-Thunderbird.

Re:does (browser + mail = monkey) package help? by pembo13 · 2006-01-31 20:24 · Score: 1

Yes it does help. That's how I like. And there is more that those 3 compontents.

--
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft

Hmm by Merenth · 2006-01-31 08:49 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Can you spank a Sea Monkey?

Hehe, thats ironic by HeliumHigh · 2006-01-31 08:53 · Score: 3, Funny

Right as I clicked on the link, Windows BSOD'ed on me. Hehehe... it must really be good!

Re:Hehe, thats ironic by RealGrouchy · 2006-02-01 03:19 · Score: 1

I think you're giving MS too much credit. For it to BSOD on that, they'd have to have either anticipated it, or created a quick patch in response to it.

Frankly, I'm happy that I updated from Mozilla 1.7.12 to SeaMonkey 1.0 100% painlessly.

BTW, suites are good for people like me. I didn't know what an IRC client was, but I decided to install the full mozilla (at the time) suite. When I clicked on an IRC link, it took me to the IRC client and I could start IRCing. If I had to learn about IRC, research available clients, download, install and configure it, just to visit #wikipedia to ask a very simple question, I wouldn't have.

--
Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!

Is it compatible with extensions and plugins? by antdude · 2006-01-31 08:58 · Score: 0, Redundant

Curious. Is it safe to use Seamonkey to replace my Mozilla v1.7.12 in Windows, Mac OS X 102.8, and Linux? Orare there lots of incompatibilities with the current extensions, plugins, etc.?

--
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).

Re:Is it compatible with extensions and plugins? by Randle_Revar · 2006-01-31 09:34 · Score: 1

It should be perfectly safe. If you want to be really safe, you could back up your profile, but everthing should work fine. As far as extension incompatability, Moz 1.7 -> SeaMonkey 1.0 is about like FF 1.0 -> FF 1.5. Maybe a little less, as FF 1.5 had more UI (non-gecko) changes than SeaMonkey. I am using the 1.0 beta with the Extension Manager extension, Stumble Upon, Web Dev and Flashblock

--
Climate Progress - Hell and High Water
Re:Is it compatible with extensions and plugins? by pe1chl · 2006-01-31 09:34 · Score: 1

Seamonkey is just Mozilla 1.8 under a new name.
I have been testing the alpha and beta for some time and have not yet run into incompatabilities.
Re:Is it compatible with extensions and plugins? by antdude · 2006-01-31 09:44 · Score: 1

Interesting. So it is just v1.8. I got it. I will just overinstall over my 1.7.12 then.

--
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Re:Is it compatible with extensions and plugins? by asrail · 2006-01-31 12:07 · Score: 1

Most extensions works, but some don't. It's better to uninstall them and go installing one by one latter ;).
Re:Is it compatible with extensions and plugins? by antdude · 2006-01-31 12:13 · Score: 1

Which ones didn't work? I use Prefbar, Session Saver, Adblock, Flashblock, BugMeNot, IE View, Coral, etc.

--
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Re:Is it compatible with extensions and plugins? by asrail · 2006-01-31 13:12 · Score: 1

Users said it works: Mnenhy and MIDF, also Tagzilla, infoRSS, DeleteDuplicates, Enigmail (except the GTK2-Linux-Compiler-Issue), JSLIB, Flashblock 1.3.3 http://flashblock.mozdev.org/installation2.html>, LCARStrek, adblock, RadialContext, extuninstall. extuninstallapi, gdirections-0.9.9-fx+mz+tb, ie_view-1.2.7-fx+mz, jslib_lite-0.1.234-fx+mz+tb, tabx, timestatus, undoclosetab-20040617-fx+mz... PrefBar I haven't tested myself. One developer said it worked and one user said it didn't worked, but they don't cited the version. I think that a not released version is working (maybe out soon). Themes: Really Modern Orb Colors Classic http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewforum.php?f=3&si d=4ed53bfe2a2d7a5ac375ce39876f866b> Mostly Crystal http://www.tom-cat.com/mozilla/ EarlyBlue and LCARStrek http://www.kairo.at/download
Re:Is it compatible with extensions and plugins? by antdude · 2006-01-31 13:20 · Score: 1

Thanks! I think I will wait a few weeks to be sure everyone is able to upgrade.

--
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Re:Is it compatible with extensions and plugins? by whitehatlurker · 2006-01-31 14:21 · Score: 1

Perhaps.
Part of the install docs say that you should uninstall older Mozillas, and delete the older install directory, if you used extensions (they note the spell checker as one). They also caution: "Do not install over an old Mozilla version." (They have it in bold, too.)
Apparently, you can have the older version co-existing with SeaMonkey, (not a surprise) so you can still use the old extensions with the old version.

--
.. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.

The flexibility of OSS by danielk1982 · 2006-01-31 09:06 · Score: 2, Insightful

I think its awesome.

A browser that was dumped in favour of something newer and shiner was picked up by a community willing to put work into it. This is a perfect example of what Open Source is all about. Compare that to software like OS/2 or BeOS, both of which have a following and a community which is willing to back them. Instead they are gathering dust in some proprietary repository.

Live Bookmarks When? by xdc · 2006-01-31 09:13 · Score: 1

I like the Seamonkey suite, in part because it discreetly bundles the ChatZilla IRC client with a Gecko-based web browser. On my Windows box at work, Seamonkey seems to render web pages faster than Firefox.

However, I am disappointed that there seems to still be no support for "live bookmarks" (RSS feeds in bookmark form). That is the killer feature that made me switch from the Mozilla suite to Firefox. Are there any plans to implement this handy functionality in Seamonkey? If so, when?

Re:Live Bookmarks When? by savala · 2006-01-31 09:29 · Score: 1

However, I am disappointed that there seems to still be no support for "live bookmarks" (RSS feeds in bookmark form). That is the killer feature that made me switch from the Mozilla suite to Firefox. Are there any plans to implement this handy functionality in Seamonkey?

The bug for this is bug 240393 (copy paste link, as /. referers are blocked) and doesn't have any activity. If a developer who cares about this steps up to the plate, it could be in soon, but otherwise I wouldn't expect it for a while.

However, turning the mailnews client into a feedreader, similar to Thunderbird (both using Myk Melez's ForumZilla extension as a starting point) is being worked on in bug 255834 (idem), and is targetted for SeaMonkey 1.1, to be released late this year. It would've been in SeaMonkey 1.0, but unfortunately the lead Thunderbird dev didn't want this code to be shared, so extra effort had to be spent to fork it between the SeaMonkey and Thunderbird trees.
Re:Live Bookmarks When? by xdc · 2006-01-31 09:53 · Score: 1

Thanks for the info! That was helpful.

I hope that live bookmarks will get implemented, because it makes it extremely easy to find out what's new at all of my favorite sites, and jump straight to interesting articles, all within the web browser (and compactly yet accessibly stored within my Bookmarks Toolbar Folder).
Re:Live Bookmarks When? by Halvy · 2006-01-31 15:13 · Score: 0

I am disappointed that there seems to still be no support for "live bookmarks" (RSS feeds in bookmark form)
Kazehakase brower has rss bookmarks. It is gecko based and therefore very similar to Mozilla, but a completely different branch.
http://freshmeat.net/projects/kazehakase/
It is quite cutting edge so expect 'quirks', but it is fun to run it.
Personally I settled on Mozilla because it is still the granddaddy, and therefore I believe the best balance of new features & stability.
I don't care that Mozilla doesn't have the newest toys, support or following like 'FireFox'.. because I'v (we've) been through that before with (you know what-- 10 years ago) so I 'purposefully' don't use FireFox (ie. because 'everyone' else does) =:]
-- My favorite thing about OSS-- IS its militancy.

--
I will gladly loose all of life's battles.. in order to win the war..

Re:so un-Unix like by bobv-pillars-net · 2006-01-31 09:16 · Score: 1

So un-Unix like, in fact, that it's positively Emacs-like!

Actually, my favorite description of the difference between Windows and Unix philosophies goes like this:

In Windows, whenever the OS succeeds in doing something, you expect to see a friendly message box pop up.

In Unix, you typically only see a message when a command fails.

But in both systems, it is the rarer case that gets reported.

--
The Web is like Usenet, but
the elephants are untrained.

Does anyone know if they fixed the chatzilla bug? by Tezkah · 2006-01-31 09:20 · Score: 1

I keep running into a chatzilla bug where it uses up 100% CPU until you quit the chat portion of the browser, and it gets you disconnected due to "Excess Flood" from servers, even if you dont type anything in. It got me banned from an IRC server a couple days ago... but I was running 1.0B, any word as to if that is fixed?

SeaMonkey themes by xdc · 2006-01-31 09:27 · Score: 1

I wholeheartedly agree that the Modern theme looks better than Classic, and I think it should be the default. Actually, I think Modern - Mozillium looks quite nice, as does Graymodern.

Hopefully theme developers will give us nice new themes for SeaMonkey, like they do for Opera and Firefox.

The developers rock! by ursabear · 2006-01-31 09:44 · Score: 1

The folks that work/have worked on this rock! I appreciate their efforts tremendously and am using it as my secondary browser full-time.

Paraphrasing Dori from Finding Nemo, "The SeaMonkey took my money, but they gave me an internet suite."

--
A Passionate Independent Musician

The Sea Monkeys... by ashitaka · 2006-01-31 10:09 · Score: 1

... have my money.

Yes, I'm a natural blue.

--
If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.

Re:Does anyone know if they fixed the chatzilla bu by teromajusa · 2006-01-31 10:11 · Score: 1

According to this its a bug in Firefox 1.5 (look under Developer Comments). Here's the bugzilla entry: 318419

Internationalization? by pe1chl · 2006-01-31 10:23 · Score: 2, Interesting

Is there still an i18n project? I see two local builds, but not the long list of language packs.
Are the current i18n groups willing to translate Seamonkey or will this have to be setup completely from scratch?
Presumably a Mozilla 1.7 translation can be used as a basis...

I would like to install a Dutch version at work, but I see no mention at all of Seamonkey on the Mozilla-NL site. It is centered around Firefox and Thunderbird these days, but still had a Mozilla 1.8a translation last year.

Redundant by Radak · 2006-01-31 10:49 · Score: 1

...and a feature-rich IRC chat client.

You have no idea how much time I've wasted with the Internet Relay Chat chat. If I only had a nickel from the Automated Teller Machine machine for every day I've wasted...

Re:Redundant by gregm · 2006-01-31 16:41 · Score: 1

If you hadn't have forgotten you Personal ID Number number you might not have lost so much time at the automated teller machine machine. I just sold a car and had to go out and find the vehicle identification number number. It was cold out so I warmed my hands up by using host water from the hot water heater.

G

Different numbers of download options between OSes by Millenniumman · 2006-01-31 11:10 · Score: 1

I sort of amused me that the Windows version has 3 different installers, the Linux version has five installers, and the Mac OS X version has 1 download for an application that doesn't need an installer. Simplicity? Some might say this is bad for Macs as it limits customizability, but the application isn't very big anyway.

Upon looking at the application, it's interface is as bad as Mozilla, and it isn't a standard Mac OS X application at all. In fact, I can't see its difference from Mozilla. I guess it has good integration, but I don't see how it is better than Safari, Mail, and Address Book which work together very well and work with a lot of other applications.

--
Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.

too many name changes by lamp540 · 2006-01-31 12:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

first they called it netscape(which was mosaic), then they change it's name to mozilla, then firefox, and now it's called sea monkey? and it's always the same, just a web browser...nothing amazing.

Re:too many name changes by pembo13 · 2006-01-31 20:20 · Score: 1

How in the world did this get modded insightful? This isn't anywhere near the truth. Google is your friend.

--
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft

The IT Crowd. by ncurtain · 2006-01-31 13:10 · Score: 0

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !

What are you laughing at?

Ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho !

What is it?

This green thing.

What?

Someone has run a something right through the other thing. Hee hee hee hee !

Re:IE! by gd23ka · 2006-01-31 14:43 · Score: 1

Was this scheduled? According to Terence McKenna there's no such thing as random coincidence and I happen to agree with
him more and more lately.

Let me put it this way... Microsoft is already planning on a complete rewrite from scratch following IE7.. I wouldn't be
surprised if they would just switch to Firebird and owning up they did so and maybe integrate Mozilla code into their
Desktop and OLE enabled apps like they do with IE's mshtml.dll. Microsoft already knows that they will have to open the
sources to a lot of their code, it's just they're not done whining about it yet.

It looks like TinMan, but blue by T-Ranger · 2006-01-31 14:44 · Score: 1

Worst. TNG. Episode. Ever.

I'm not impressed so far by Tim_F · 2006-01-31 16:37 · Score: 1

First, the dafault UI is terrible. Firefox is very minimal, only showing you what you need.

Second, SeaMonkey 1.0 is incompatible with a number of great Firefox extensions. This may be easily fixable, but I don't know how to do that.

It's tough to decide between this and Firefox 1.5 with its huge memory leak. Oh well, I'll stick with Firefox 1.0.7 for now.

Re:I'm not impressed so far by augur_seer · 2006-02-01 01:52 · Score: 1

i have spoken perodnally with the co-developer and his team for firefox and he says that the memory issues will be dealt with by 1.5.1 or around there, appernetly the issue of memory leaks and spike is almsot 100% windows fault and is a relsut of windows code not handling some of trhe new c script and compiler options they used on FF 1.5+. anotrher example of windows lagging in code bases. it cant even render C code properly now? LMAO

--
Death isnt the door wya you think it is but it us defiantly a way out
Re:I'm not impressed so far by Zephiris · 2006-02-01 12:28 · Score: 0

Luckily, like many previous Mozilla versions, it also comes with the "Modern" theme, which is easily selected.
This of course goes well with the Modern icon pack. Firefox has "always" had big memory leaks, as far as I've noticed, and Firefox has always had the "bug" where the page rendering is coupled to the entire UI. Firefox is unusable when it takes a half-second or more to switch between a 'relatively' large (cough, 20) number of tabs, and can take thirty seconds or more to load a plugin like Shockwave or Java, even on a fast machine. Then there are all of the security issues with Firefox, like that they're more or less supporting spyware tracking, nevermind the issue where it ignores most Java security; it's the only browser I've seen anymore which actually gets affected by Java Viruses, even Internet Explorer (6 SP2 or better) won't. They also tend to have a policy of inserting code which may not be stable, and may not be in the best interest of...anyone.

Also, it's not incompatible with particularly useful extensions. Even ForecastFox and Reminderfox work, as do EnigMail nightlies, Adblock (and Adblock Plus with automatic filter update extensions), Googlebar, StumbleUpon, even the web developer toolbar, and various tab browsing functionality can be replicated with Nightly builds of Multizilla. The only thing I can't easily replicate on SeaMonkey is GreaseMonkey (ironically). Ancient versions depend on Mozilla 1.7 or so, newer versions want Firefox 1.5, though I'm told there'll be a Seamonkey-compatible sometime soon.

And while Firefox may have originally been meant to "trim the fat" of Mozilla, the per-tab usage of SM vs. Firefox isn't a substantial difference (about 30MB difference on 100 tabs, which at that point is a drop in the bucket), and Mozilla/SeaMonkey also include the email client (which only adds about 4MB, compared to 40+ for Thunderbird, and 60+ or so for Outlook 2003), and can rack up more savings the more you use it to replace other things, like IRC client and Calendar (which now has a working version for Seamonkey). It also tends to render pages faster, with less CPU time, and less CPU time used for 'idle pages'. I can't count the number of times I've had to kill Firefox and restart it because some random tab or another started using 100% CPU time, even when it wasn't the active one. Animated GIFs also made the browser crazy (though I was getting that as late as December or so, before Firefox was finally purged permanently from my machine). Between SeaMonkey and Miranda, I save about 150MB of memory and a lot more CPU power compared to using other (standard) possible combinations of applications.

--

"A Goddess rarely smiles for she is forced by others to be an island unto herself." - Zephiris

Idea: Call it Mozilla by gatzke · 2006-01-31 16:48 · Score: 0, Troll

Why not just have this as the next Mozilla Release, maybe 2.0.

Why come up with another stuping name for a project that already has a stupid name?

Firefox is a cool name. Mozilla has history due to netscape. SeaMonkey? OSS guys are obviously not PR guys.

Maybe follow the MS lead and name everything in simple to understand terms. How about "Browser" like explorer.

Stupid. Chewbacca naming. It makes no sense.

Bravo SeaMonkeys! by wikinerd · 2006-01-31 16:59 · Score: 1

Although I primary use and love Konqueror, I wish to congratulate the SeaMonkey developers for continuing the suite project. I actually hate Firefox, although I have it installed (together with Epiphany, Mozilla, Opera and other browsers).

Re:Bravo SeaMonkeys! by Synic · 2006-02-01 06:34 · Score: 1

Wouldn't using Konqueror be the same as Firefox? Konq isn't a suite either, so you'd be using KMail or something else for your mail...

Hooray by a.koepke · 2006-01-31 17:11 · Score: 1

I have been a Mozilla Suite user for a very long time and have never gotten used to the different feel Firefox has.

Originally they were talking about phasing out the Mozilla Suite and just having Firefox and Thunderbird. Good to see things have been progressing on SeaMonkey and we now have a release.

For me this is great news.

--

(\(\
(^.^)
(")")
*This is the cute bunny virus, please copy this into your sig so it can spread

Monkey Seamonkey Do by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 17:23 · Score: 0

Why do they keep changing the name, and why do they pick such silly names?

Re:Monkey Seamonkey Do by chawly · 2006-02-01 17:21 · Score: 1

'cause they can depend on "monkey seamonkey do" ! And they like to laugh.

--
How many beans make five, anyhow ? ... Charles Walmsley

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2006-01-31 21:16 · Score: 2, Informative

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Please mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · 2006-01-31 21:39 · Score: 0

Despite its somewhat incendiary tone, the parent post makes several valid points.
The facts are these:

IE7 does suck.
In general, people who use IE7 are stupid.
(Either that, or they are ignorant, which is nearly as bad.)
The suckiness of IEx and the stupidity of the people who use it are making things worse for the rest of us.

These facts are indisputable, and thus should not be disputed.

Re:Different numbers of download options between O by Ash-Fox · 2006-02-01 00:37 · Score: 1

I doubt it runs on MacOSX 10.0 or 10.1... Now if we had someone to confirm the compatability.

--
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.

Sunbird Calendar Works with Seamonkey by frank249 · 2006-02-01 06:16 · Score: 1

There is a version of the Sunbird calendar that integrates with Seamonkey here. I installed it and now there is a calendar button on all my Seamonkey apps.

--

Today's vices may be tomorrow's virtues.

Re:Different numbers of download options between O by mcubed · 2006-02-01 23:25 · Score: 1

but I don't see how it is better than Safari, Mail, and Address Book which work together very well and work with a lot of other applications.

Perhaps if you're running Tiger or even Panther. But on Jaguar Safari is crippled and featureless ... even Gmail displays a notice that you need to update your browser. But of course you can't because more recent versions of Safari won't run on Jaguar. And the version of Mail I'm stuck with is pretty bad as well. If you set it to block images you can't click on any URLs (well, you can click on them, but nothing happens). That means you either have to view everything plain text, which doesn't work very well with a couple of email newsletters I receive, or view full html, exposing you to bugs and ads. Thunderbird 1.0.7 is much more configurable.

I won't be installing SeaMonkey on my OS X partition, but I'll try it on Debian. I liked the old suite a lot, and only switched to Firefox because that seemed to be where the momentum was. On OS X, Camino rules. It manages to seem even more integrated than Safari, and its feature set is up-to-date. I didn't realize when I bought a Mac how quickly the OS would date. I won't make the mistake of buying another one.

Michael

--
"No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality;..."

229 comments