Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Future of Thunderbird

blog.thunderbird.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 473 posts

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#51

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

tannhaeuser wrote: post #46
formerly_proven wrote: post #5

> “Why does Thunderbird look so old, and why does it take so long to change?” ~ A notable percentage of Thunderbird users Honestly this doesn't seem like the main issue with Thunderbird; the main issue is that the UI is very slow, it tends to use a lot of CPU and memory just sitting there and a lot of operations block the UI. This got a lot worse with 102. 102 unfortunately is so low in responsiveness that it's liter…

> ... so low in responsiveness that it's literally quicker for me to open a new tab [and] load Google Mail Might have to do with us having allowed to infest mail, like so many other things, with the piece of shit that is CSS. As it's formulated, it would indeed appear gross, but coming to think about it, it's no wonder that loading a document into an already running browser is faster than starting a web browser albat…

> Might have to do with us having allowed to infest mail, like so many other things, with the piece of shit that is CSS.

Wouldn't that only make sense if your Gmail tab wasn't also loading up the same CSS?

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#52

Post by jeltz »

tannhaeuser wrote: post #46
formerly_proven wrote: post #5

> “Why does Thunderbird look so old, and why does it take so long to change?” ~ A notable percentage of Thunderbird users Honestly this doesn't seem like the main issue with Thunderbird; the main issue is that the UI is very slow, it tends to use a lot of CPU and memory just sitting there and a lot of operations block the UI. This got a lot worse with 102. 102 unfortunately is so low in responsiveness that it's liter…

> ... so low in responsiveness that it's literally quicker for me to open a new tab [and] load Google Mail Might have to do with us having allowed to infest mail, like so many other things, with the piece of shit that is CSS. As it's formulated, it would indeed appear gross, but coming to think about it, it's no wonder that loading a document into an already running browser is faster than starting a web browser albat…

Nope, the issues seem to lie more in just plain bad code. It is seems to be mostly their IMAP code and their mbox code which goes crazy and starts using all CPU, not the UI. The issues happen when opening folders too.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#53

Post by college_physics »

I never gave up on thunderbird and hope it will rise again to represent "power, protection, and strength for the user". Thunderbird, in contrast with the sibling "browser" is still a desktop app that asks the user to have some agency and exercise it.

Here are my two cents in hashtags and slogans for the future of thunderbird: embrace activitypub/fediverse, expand rss functionality, reinvent bookmarks, think about audio/podcasts, improve filtering and smart search. Leverage open source ecosystems and tools for next generation content management. In sum, become the local app where people spend quality time to organize their online life and experience the digital ocean.

Yeah, you could improve on the looks. But keep in mind: "In architecture, functionalism is the principle that software[/buildings] should be designed based solely on their purpose and function". If the purpose and function are beautiful, people will think thunderbird is beautiful. On the other hand no amount of eye-candy can hide the lack of purpose.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#54

Post by mr_machine »

I've used Thunderbird exclusively for desktop mail for many years. To my knowledge, it still sucks less than any other free and open option, but that's not much of a bar.

Over time, Thunderbird has become slower and less reliable, most notably in the area of search. While the advanced search tools are excellent, the results are lousy. Email that I know exists is often unfindable until I force Thunderbird to re-index my whole mailbox.

Seeing F/OSS devs of (what I consider to be) a critical app like Thunderbird talk about "modernizing the interface" is the worst. The interface is fine and there are far bigger problems -- problems related to actual functionality as opposed to prettiness -- that desperately need work.

And to echo others' comments: courting the "average user" is worse than a waste of resources, it's an active turning away from the core users and supporters.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#55

Post by progx »

superkuh wrote: post #29

Uhg. This is the exact opposite of what direction I want from Thunderbird. I want it to remain stable. I want it to remain looking like an email client I run on my native OS. I do not want giant white-space webshit design and an entire rebuild that makes all my extensions and well trained spam detection .dat unusable. Please stop changing things just to change. Thunderbird works.

Extensions are not really a problem, cause Thunderbird have made it to scare off many over the years. They change rules, api, etc. many extension are not maintained, not compatible, whatever. I stopped installing and using Thunderbird extensions, it took me too much time and nerves on updates.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#57

Post by PopAlongKid »

boplicity wrote: post #50

Unfortunately, at least for me, I've had to mostly switch away from Thunderbird. It has becoming rather frustratingly slow. For example, if I archive an email, it takes 10 to 15 seconds for this to be reflected in the interface. When I have 50 or so emails to deal with, this adds up to a surprising amount of time, and becomes rather frustrating. (I suspect having large volumes of email is part of the issue.) On the m…

> the very useful feature of showing the complete conversation history (across all accounts)

Isn't this the same as the unified inbox feature in Thunderbird? All your accounts can be displayed sorted and threaded together.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#59

Post by squarefoot »

Veen wrote: post #40
VyseofArcadia wrote: post #34

> Why does Thunderbird look so old UI isn't a fashion show. I'd much rather have a UI that looks older but is comfortable to use than something trendy.

> UI isn't a fashion show. Yes, it is. At least, it is for UI designers.

Only for UI designers who put aesthetics before usability.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#60

Post by mauvehaus »

boplicity wrote: post #50

Unfortunately, at least for me, I've had to mostly switch away from Thunderbird. It has becoming rather frustratingly slow. For example, if I archive an email, it takes 10 to 15 seconds for this to be reflected in the interface. When I have 50 or so emails to deal with, this adds up to a surprising amount of time, and becomes rather frustrating. (I suspect having large volumes of email is part of the issue.) On the m…

Want to recommend one of those other email clients for Mac? The threading/conversation support is my biggest gripe apart from the slowness. I am also guilty of rarely deleting things.

EDITED TO ADD: Using gmail and fastmail.

'nother edit: should deal gracefully with emailing files to myself. C.f the threading in fastmail's webmail, which is ... weird?

Post reply on HN