MozillaZine

Seamonkey NOT affected by the Firefox extension disaster??

Discussion of general topics about Seamonkey
videobruce
 
Posts: 216
Joined: March 25th, 2006, 11:38 am
Location: Buffalo NY

Post Posted May 4th, 2019, 1:46 pm

Seamonkey is not affected by this FF certificate expiring issue causing many of the extensions to become disabled ?? :shock:
Chrome-Dome is a poor excuse for a browser. It doesn't even have a Menu Bar which should be standard for any & all programs in spite of M$'s 'toy phone' look change in W10.

Frank Lion

User avatar
 
Posts: 20294
Joined: April 23rd, 2004, 6:59 pm
Location: ... The Exorcist....United Kingdom

Post Posted May 4th, 2019, 1:57 pm

Correct, it's not.
Metal Lion latest SeaMonkey & Thunderbird Themes - Sea Monkey and Silver Sea Monkey
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)

videobruce
 
Posts: 216
Joined: March 25th, 2006, 11:38 am
Location: Buffalo NY

Post Posted May 4th, 2019, 4:15 pm

I can then assume Palemoon isn't either?
If so, why not, they are both Mozilla forks, aren't they? :-k
Chrome-Dome is a poor excuse for a browser. It doesn't even have a Menu Bar which should be standard for any & all programs in spite of M$'s 'toy phone' look change in W10.

rdtom
 
Posts: 16
Joined: February 26th, 2016, 3:48 pm

Post Posted May 4th, 2019, 4:57 pm

The FireFox extensions are web extensions.
FireFox certificate for signing extensions expired.
SeaMonkey doesn't require the signing of extensions.

LordOfTheBored
 
Posts: 280
Joined: December 7th, 2005, 8:36 pm

Post Posted May 4th, 2019, 10:52 pm

videobruce wrote:I can then assume Palemoon isn't either?
If so, why not, they are both Mozilla forks, aren't they? :-k

Neither Seamonkey nor Pale Moon require extension signing, so expiration of a signing certificate is irrelevant to them.

Also, Seamonkey isn't a fork of Firefox. Firefox is a fork of Seamonkey.

James
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 27563
Joined: June 18th, 2003, 3:07 pm
Location: Made in Canada

Post Posted May 5th, 2019, 12:16 am

LordOfTheBored wrote:
videobruce wrote:I can then assume Palemoon isn't either?
If so, why not, they are both Mozilla forks, aren't they? :-k

Neither Seamonkey nor Pale Moon require extension signing, so expiration of a signing certificate is irrelevant to them.

Also, Seamonkey isn't a fork of Firefox. Firefox is a fork of Seamonkey.

Palemoon is just a third-party build of Firefox.

Firefox or rather under first name of Phoenix was Mozilla's effort to have a stand alone browser instead of only the bundle that was the Mozilla Application Suite.

SeaMonkey is a community effort to keep the Mozilla Application Suite going after Mozilla discontinued development on it back in April 2006.

videobruce
 
Posts: 216
Joined: March 25th, 2006, 11:38 am
Location: Buffalo NY

Post Posted May 5th, 2019, 3:03 am

Sheesh!
For a minute there, I thought you guys were describing some legal corporate language of a merger or takeover of some type. Well, all of that is some good news.

I realize the reason that users of SM & PM exist is because of FF's misguided direction and poor decisions regarding the changes in the past few years. FWIW, I agree, but the reasons I haven't abandoned FF are a couple of important GUI functions are not available in PM or SM for some unknown reason(s) that make both browsers not really usable for me. Without going too far OT, those reasons are;
1. No "Simplify page' in print preview for SM which is a HUGE negative (deal breaker) for me since I print a lot from poorly composed web pages with half not working in regular print mode,
2. No ability to move the 'tabs to the bottom of the page (below the active web page itself) in SM which is just my preference since historically they have always been there untill the post teenage idiots at M$ decided to move them with the 'toy soldier' software drones following.

In PM; no Print Preview at all & no availability of additional navigation buttons like SM (for starters) at least the version I tried less than year or so ago.
Chrome-Dome is a poor excuse for a browser. It doesn't even have a Menu Bar which should be standard for any & all programs in spite of M$'s 'toy phone' look change in W10.

Frank Lion

User avatar
 
Posts: 20294
Joined: April 23rd, 2004, 6:59 pm
Location: ... The Exorcist....United Kingdom

Post Posted May 5th, 2019, 4:38 am

Long thread....considering that this is all a total non-event as regards Seamonkey and this SeaMonkey forum, isn't it?
Metal Lion latest SeaMonkey & Thunderbird Themes - Sea Monkey and Silver Sea Monkey
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)

therube

User avatar
 
Posts: 19678
Joined: March 10th, 2004, 9:59 pm
Location: Maryland USA

Post Posted May 5th, 2019, 4:57 am

Palemoon is just a third-party build of Firefox.

Well, not really, in particular more recently.
Still based on FF, but it has gone its own way.

Far more so then say, Waterfox.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball CopyURL+ FetchTextURL FlashGot NoScript

videobruce
 
Posts: 216
Joined: March 25th, 2006, 11:38 am
Location: Buffalo NY

Post Posted May 5th, 2019, 6:04 am

Frank Lion wrote:Long thread....considering that this is all a total non-event as regards Seamonkey and this SeaMonkey forum, isn't it?
SM users are lucky. As the OP, I just wanted to know if this affected SM and if not why. I didn't want to open either with the fear the same destruction would happen to those. :wink:

Also, I'm sure SM users that don't use FF are, or at least were unaware of this in the 1st place. S in a FYI. :wink:
Chrome-Dome is a poor excuse for a browser. It doesn't even have a Menu Bar which should be standard for any & all programs in spite of M$'s 'toy phone' look change in W10.

LordOfTheBored
 
Posts: 280
Joined: December 7th, 2005, 8:36 pm

Post Posted May 5th, 2019, 10:38 pm

James wrote:Firefox or rather under first name of Phoenix was Mozilla's effort to have a stand alone browser instead of only the bundle that was the Mozilla Application Suite.

First name was Moz/b, actually.
I actually used a Moz/b build, briefly. It was remarkably unstable, and it was literally just the browser portion of Mozilla. There really was nothing to recommend it over actual Mozilla.

...

You know, I've actually used at least one build from every name the most popular Mozilla fork has shipped under.

James
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 27563
Joined: June 18th, 2003, 3:07 pm
Location: Made in Canada

Post Posted May 5th, 2019, 10:56 pm

First name was Phoenix for 0.1 to 0.5 then due to Phoenix Bios having name they renamed it as Firebird for 0.6, 0.7 but due to the open source Firebird SQL having it a bit earlier Mozilla decided to rename it again as Firefox for 0.8 to present.

It was Jason Kersey (kerz) that has been running mozillaZine for several years now that suggested the Firefox name.

LordOfTheBored
 
Posts: 280
Joined: December 7th, 2005, 8:36 pm

Post Posted May 5th, 2019, 11:40 pm

James wrote:First name was Phoenix for 0.1 to 0.5 then due to Phoenix Bios having name they renamed it as Firebird for 0.6, 0.7 but due to the open source Firebird SQL having it a bit earlier Mozilla decided to rename it again as Firefox for 0.8 to present.

It was Jason Kersey (kerz) that has been running mozillaZine for several years now that suggested the Firefox name.


I hate to cite Wikipedia, but I'm not sure I want to sit there convincing search engines that the slash isn't whitespace/the word mozilla doesn't mean I want the current version of Firefox.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_v ... y_versions
"The project that became Firefox today began as an experimental branch of the Mozilla Suite called m/b (or mozilla/browser). "

I remembered it as moz/b, in fairness. That could've been an informal abbreviation, or just almost two decades of time on what is a footnote in computing history.



I do remember the rapid series of name changes. It was kinda hilarious.

James
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 27563
Joined: June 18th, 2003, 3:07 pm
Location: Made in Canada

Post Posted May 5th, 2019, 11:57 pm

I was not referring to experimental test builds but when they started making the browser available which was Phoenix 0.1 in Sept 2002.

Still though due to Mozilla doing Fireworks around the 1.0 Release many mistakenly think Firefox 1.0 was the first for the browser.

If it stayed as Phoenix it could be using these icons or perhaps ones refined since.
Image .. Image

LordOfTheBored
 
Posts: 280
Joined: December 7th, 2005, 8:36 pm

Post Posted May 6th, 2019, 2:44 am

James wrote:I was not referring to experimental test builds but when they started making the browser available which was Phoenix 0.1 in Sept 2002.

That's fair. I guess I got the impression M/b was more available than it really was. I remember I got the link from a friend, and was all "That's cute... and it crashed already. And again. Yeah, I think I'm going back to real Mozilla now."

Still though due to Mozilla doing Fireworks around the 1.0 Release many mistakenly think Firefox 1.0 was the first for the browser.

Man, I think some people think Firefox 1 was the first browser, period.

Return to SeaMonkey General


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests