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

391–400 of 473 posts

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#391

Post by magnat »

kdtsh wrote: post #334
magnat wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For example, if I archive an email, it takes 10 to 15 seconds for this to be reflected in the interface Have you tried changing local storage format from default mbox (one big linear file per folder) to maildir (each message in its own file)?

Maildir support has been considered beta for a long time in Thunderbird, and using it for anything ‘critical’ doesn’t sound possible unless you like to live dangerously (for me, everything to do with email is critical- some messages are more important than others, but I really can’t deal with email being unstable, it’d be like the postal system being consistently unstable). Do you use the maildir format with Thunderb…

I have been using maildir storage for a few years now, on 4 instances of Thunderbird, each with 10-50GB worth of messages per folder, on both NTFS and ext4. So far not a single case of lost message or usability issues. All operations are instant and don't block UI.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#392

Post by emodendroket »

I welcome efforts to try and improve it. Frankly, between the Thunderbird search being bad and the inability to configure server-side Gmail filters in the client, I find myself using it less and less despite being a loyal user for I don't know how many years now.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#393

Post by emodendroket »

tux3 wrote: post #39
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…

That's also the main problem I have with it. The UI is what it is, but it has the considerable advantage that I'm already used to it. I'm not really clamoring for a different UI, there's bigger problems. Unfortunately, it has some serious performance bugs. It often sits there idle on a brand new laptop eating 50% or 70% of a core. Doing who knows what, without giving any indication or any sort of pause button to the…

It sounds like they're rebuilding the whole thing practically, so the UI isn't all they're changing.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#394

Post by emodendroket »

orbital223 wrote: post #329
throw0101a wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's also the main problem I have with it. The UI is what it is, but it has the considerable advantage that I'm already used to it. I'm not really clamoring for a different UI, there's bigger problems. If they want to grow the user base (or even maintain it against attrition) then relying on just the current folks isn't enough: you have to get new people to use it. (And hopefully support/donate to it.) Getting ne…

> Getting new blood thus may entail getting rid of the Old School interface and going with whatever is 'current'. Reminds me of the arguments for Firefox getting rid of the "Old School" interface and copying Chrome to bring in new users. Didn't exactly work out very well...

Isn't Thunderbird still using XUL stuff that has been retired from Firefox? It doesn't seem that wise to keep working on that to be honest.

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#395

Post by emodendroket »

miroljub wrote: post #13
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 remember the times when I was the only Thunderbird user in an Outlook infested company. I remember it was crazy fast, especially real-time search folders were a game changer for me, so I could filter messages however I liked and let them appear in multiple folders without affecting performance. I haven't used it in a while, but if it's true, it's a pity that once so useful and fast piece of software deteriorate so…

It's funny you mention that because the experience of trying to connect to Exchange with it is bad enough to cow me into using Outlook after all (of course it doesn't help that calendar support is also shunted off to an extension that never worked that well for me).

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#396

Post by zymhan »

rany_ wrote: post #387

Actual Thunderbird users don't care about the UI. That made up quote probably applies to someone that just gave Thunderbird a try though and left disappointed.

> Actual Thunderbird users don't care about the UI

Because it runs so many potential users off.

Obviously the only folks using it don't mind the antiquated UI. I think that's called a tautology?

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#397

Post by chefandy »

orbital223 wrote: post #329
throw0101a wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's also the main problem I have with it. The UI is what it is, but it has the considerable advantage that I'm already used to it. I'm not really clamoring for a different UI, there's bigger problems. If they want to grow the user base (or even maintain it against attrition) then relying on just the current folks isn't enough: you have to get new people to use it. (And hopefully support/donate to it.) Getting ne…

> Getting new blood thus may entail getting rid of the Old School interface and going with whatever is 'current'. Reminds me of the arguments for Firefox getting rid of the "Old School" interface and copying Chrome to bring in new users. Didn't exactly work out very well...

You think Firefox would have more users if they hadn't updated their interface?

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#398

Post by newscracker »

nobody9999 wrote: post #342
HNAbusesUsers wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After getting my parents new computers, setting them up from scratch, and finding that Windows is an even more depressing shitshow than ever and lacking any competent E-mail program... I installed Thunderbird for the first time in at least a decade and a half. And I was pleasantly surprised to find that it's better than I remember, and worked great for the 20,000 messages or so in each of their AOL In boxes. Sadly, I…

>For my accounts I rely on Apple Mail and SpamSieve, which works well. The dealbreaker for me when I tried Thunderbird years ago is that it lacked any way to export the filters you'd set up, so you could copy them to your other computers. Has this been addressed? No. You can't even copy them to other accounts on the same computer. I had to recreate dozens of rules last year for just that reason. If TB wasn't head and…

Please see my other comment in this thread on how to copy filter rules from one profile to another. [1]

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34735788

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#399

Post by TheChaplain »

I pray the UI will be modifiable so we can fix the for certain upcoming use of trends of mobile designs on desktop with margins wider than a football fields and useful functionality hidden/removed "because of simplicity".

Re: The Future of Thunderbird

#400

Post by chefandy »

People get mad about it but I haven't seen one open source project without paid designers and product managers at the helm that successfully incorporates non-technical users' needs well enough for them to compete with commercial offerings. Firefox? Android? Blender? Chromium? Signal?

Mozilla is doing this right. They're doing this right. They have a simple mode to suit inexperienced users and a full mode for folks who don't need the simplified experience. If you really think this kind of work ruins applications, then fork it and surely other developers who are enamored with the clunkyness will help maintain it right?

Post reply on HN