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

281–290 of 473 posts

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#281

Post by nashashmi »

imiric wrote: post #203

I'll add one more negative sentiment. > Using a solid base architecture like Firefox is the perfect starting point. No, but why? Why does an email client need a web browser to function, and why is that the "perfect starting point"? The only reason an email client might use a web _view_ for, is for reading HTML emails, and even then that web view should be a far more restricted and barebones version of a traditional b…

Dropping XUL really broke so many extensions. I think everyone dumped FF then and started over with chrome.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#282

Post by warrenski »

Mathnerd314 wrote: post #118
haunter wrote: post #75

I wish Eudora was still around. The source code is available, my secret dream is to work on somtimes in the summer... https://computerhistory.org/blog/the-eudora-email-client-sou...

My parents still run Eudora 7, can't convince them to switch to anything else...

For your future self: At some point they may ask you for some tech support to get their secure connection to mail servers working again. Start with the HermSSL package available here: https://sourceforge.net/projects/hermesmail/files/

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#283

Post by pmontra »

spoils19 wrote: post #277
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…

It's crazy that it's slower than an Electron app! Like most HNers, I fully believe that any JavaScript is slower than native, so how can this be false for this app???

The post said that Thunderbird is an app running on top of Firefox, so it's not much different than an Electron app. There are probably many more layers than a native one. Slowness is too new expected but actually I never felt that Thunderbird is slow. I use it daily.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#284

Post by jraph »

mulmen wrote: post #263
jraph wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> go make one It's not like it's easy. It crossed my mind a few years ago, actually. But why should I when the email client I actually happen to use decided to actually rebuild its interface? I'm not the one who is unhappy, I'm happy either way actually, I could answer "go fork Thunderbird if you are not happy". There was an interesting talk at FOSDEM by OpenProject on how to handle UI revamps [1], there are ways to…

What if I decide to remap your keyboard every 12 months because I think I have a better layout? If you practice for an hour a day you'll adjust in a month! Of course that will go out the window 11 months later, but I will have my promo in by then. Apple literally does this with keyboard shortcuts and UI elements in MacOS. This is what I imagine when I hear someone wants to "revamp" a UI. In modern software "UI revamp…

If you decide to turn my functional if bulky 70s office building into something a bit fresher I won't mind. Of course don't do it every month but Thunderbird hasn't changed for twenty years.

Apart from the attach button that was put at the other side of the compose window. That was annoying.

I fully expect the new UI to have a mode resembling the current one and the current keyboard shortcuts to still work. Now, if it's not the case I'll agree with you.

I too am pretty pissed off by many UI revamps and modern web UIs in general, but I'm quite confident because Thunderbird is not your regular shitty web app powered by a horde of investors.

We will see.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#285

Post by Accacin »

Liquidor wrote: post #22

I hope they focus and improve on search. It's probably the worst of all email clients we've tested at work and it made my bosses switch to a paid version of Outlook. Sometimes you can't find emails when searching for a name. It's so bad. There are other quirks and bugs too that definitely make it feel outdated, which sucks because I like it (although it is kinda old looking too as mentioned in the article hehe).

I also hate search. The other day someone gave me a tip though, which has helped quite a bit. The global search and the other search you get in your inbox suck so don't use them.

The actual search that works "okay" if when you right click on a folder and select 'Search Messages'. Sorry if you know this already, but I didn't know and it's so much better searching through this interface as opposed to the other two.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#286

Post by pmontra »

iillexial wrote: post #107
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.

It doesn't look old, it looks overloaded and inconvenient. HN UI looks old, but it's the most convenient UI to use.

I think it's the UI an email client must have, no less, no more. I quote the post

> A UI that looks and feels modern is getting initially implemented with version 115 in July, aiming at offering a simple and clean interface for “new” users, as well as the implementation of more customizable options with a flexible and adaptable interface to allow “old” users to maintain that familiarity they love.

I don't understand why today's new users shouldn't be able to cope with an interface any old new user didn't have any problem using. However as long as they keep the promise not to take away the current convenient interface, they can do whatever they feel like to remove functionality for a dumb modern mode.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#287

Post by pmontra »

andix wrote: post #251
iillexial wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't look old, it looks overloaded and inconvenient. HN UI looks old, but it's the most convenient UI to use.

HN is really bad on touch devices. Call me young and naive, but I mostly read HN on the couch on my tablet.

I use HN half on my phone and half on my desktop. It's OK on both, I just have to zoom the upvote buttons sometimes before touching them.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#288

Post by arthurcolle »

I started using Thunderbird with 4 or 5 mailboxes (split out via ProtonMail Bridge) and it is usable especially after I archived the bulk of my emails going back to maybe 2016, and I can't believe they are going to waste engineering cycles on something that sounds like a rewrite.

Bonkers. Might have to take a look at the alternatives mentioned in this thread

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#289

Post by mulmen »

jraph wrote: post #284
mulmen wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if I decide to remap your keyboard every 12 months because I think I have a better layout? If you practice for an hour a day you'll adjust in a month! Of course that will go out the window 11 months later, but I will have my promo in by then. Apple literally does this with keyboard shortcuts and UI elements in MacOS. This is what I imagine when I hear someone wants to "revamp" a UI. In modern software "UI revamp…

If you decide to turn my functional if bulky 70s office building into something a bit fresher I won't mind. Of course don't do it every month but Thunderbird hasn't changed for twenty years. Apart from the attach button that was put at the other side of the compose window. That was annoying. I fully expect the new UI to have a mode resembling the current one and the current keyboard shortcuts to still work. Now, if i…

> if you decide to turn my functional if bulky 70s office building into something a bit fresher I won't mind.

I worked in one of these and it was the best office space ever. Built into a nature preserve. There were paths along the water between the buildings. Everyone had an office with a window and view of trees and water. It was dated but I had zero complaints. We got bought by a company in Silicon Valley and they moved us to an "open office" in what was essentially a warehouse. Fancy new furniture and desks, none of it better than what we already had. Attractive but uncomfortable. The development team was placed next to sales, which is about as loud as an elementary school at recess. It was horrible. The only view was of a retaining wall in the parking lot. Nothing about it was better. Even the HVAC was worse.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#290

Post by ktm5j »

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…

I feel like you could argue that UI performance falls under the "look so old" statement.
Post reply on HN