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

Thunderbird 115

thunderbird.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 358 posts

Re: Thunderbird 115

#201

Post by perihelions »

geek_at wrote: post #179
zvmaz wrote: post #116

The tone and level of entitlement of some comments is astonishing. Thunderbird is a free and open source tool, used by many (including me). The least we can do is to be a little nicer.

I love thunderbird but I don't understand their update schedules. I just now got an update (thought it would be to 115) but it's to 102 [1]. In the release notes of 102 it says it was made public only 5 days ago (and they say 115 is coming soon). And seemingly it can't update to 115? Am I missing something here? [1] https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/102.13.0/relea... [edit] okay it seems 115 is not yet re…

The janky versioning is because Thunderbird releases are tied to ESR (extended-support release) versions of Firefox.

- "Thunderbird Project version numbers for releases match to Mozilla Firefox ESR numbers. Thunderbird also provides consecutive betas between the ESR numbers, for example 92-101, which match to Firefox (non-ESR) beta numbers. Future Thunderbird (ESR) releases upcoming are 115, 127, etc."

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:Home#Releases

Re: Thunderbird 115

#202

Post by globular-toast »

danpalmer wrote: post #144
asdajksah2123 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Misaligned lines are not bad UX. They are bad design/UI, but misaligned dots have no impact on the UX.

If software doesn't appear "trustworthy" people won't use it, particularly if it's holding sensitive personal data such as email. The worst UX is people never using the software. Design plays a big part in how people perceive trustworthiness. It implies effort and understanding. The reason people spot fake products on AliExpress is not because they're intimately familiar with the legit versions, but because typically…

And we really want to reinforce this stupid belief that good looking things are trustworthy?

Re: Thunderbird 115

#203

Post by petre »

velosol wrote: post #200
petre wrote: post #130

Does it still crash with lots of mail? I have mail filters and get like 500 mail a day. Always crashes. It gives me the option to wait or kill the app. I blame the mbox folders.

I've got over 10GB in my profile and have no issue although I use maildir and I believe I converted precisely because it was so slow.

Can you switch the thunderbird mail storage to Maildir? I've got Maildir on the server, but locally it stores in a regular Mailbox and builds an index file.

Re: Thunderbird 115

#204

Post by asdajksah2123 »

danpalmer wrote: post #144
asdajksah2123 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Misaligned lines are not bad UX. They are bad design/UI, but misaligned dots have no impact on the UX.

If software doesn't appear "trustworthy" people won't use it, particularly if it's holding sensitive personal data such as email. The worst UX is people never using the software. Design plays a big part in how people perceive trustworthiness. It implies effort and understanding. The reason people spot fake products on AliExpress is not because they're intimately familiar with the legit versions, but because typically…

People using Thunderbird are not basing its "trustworthiness" on the alignment of ellipses.

Given the laundry list of issues they need to resolve, and as apparent from this thread the choice by UI experts to complain on HN instead of leaving feedback, I'm absolutely fine with them prioritizing other issues which are easier to address and have far more of an impact on their users.

Re: Thunderbird 115

#205

Post by suavesito »

andix wrote: post #126
globular-toast wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good software doesn't need to look good, though. Looking good is just a bonus. I don't care in the slightest how it looks because it's still better than the alternatives.

Good software also looks good. Looking good can't make up for bad functionality. that's true. But good UX design is an important part of software.

I think you're thinking of UI. Functionality I categorize it as UX and looking good as UI.

Re: Thunderbird 115

#206

Post by danpalmer »

nerdponx wrote: post #159
danpalmer wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I like how you conveniently left out that you're using a retina display until maybe your fifth post complaining about this. It's possible that none of the developers can afford to buy a $2000 laptop for testing. If the icons are obviously fuzzy on your machine, grab a screenshot, post a bug on the bug tracker, and let it be. I assume also that you are already a substantial monthly donor. If not, then I think all this…

I'm not going to write feedback because I'm not a user looking for it to be solved. My original comment is critiquing the process that has lead to them shipping software that doesn't meet modern standards – something entirely within the remit of Hacker News discussion.

My "retina" display is actually a 4k monitor, a very commonplace and cheap piece of hardware, maybe even the norm nowadays for software engineers.

Re: Thunderbird 115

#207

Post by asdajksah2123 »

nik736 wrote: post #173
lousken wrote: post #163

I feel like half of this comment section are senior UX designers. If that is the case, why not pitch in and work on Thunderbird directly?

Sorry but they announced something, hyped users (including me) and didn't deliver (yet). I understand this is a lot of work and it's free software, but it still doesn't feel right and has nothing to do with being senior UX designers. They already announced and showcased a very good looking version of Thunderbird.

They announced and showcased designs, which is nothing like any version of Thunderbird.

Re: Thunderbird 115

#208

Post by stevedh »

dktnj wrote: post #169
joiqj wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone correct me if wrong but "outlook for windows" is not the same as "office outlook". The first one seems like it was created to fill the hole of outlook express and the mail app that came out later. i.e. the free email application that windows ships with.

There are actually four "outlook" implementations now. 1. Outlook desktop - old MFC / win32 crapfest 2. Windows Mail / Calendar - new WPF crapfest. 3. O365 online outlook / outlook.com - fat web app. 4. "New" Outlook - this is a fat Electron style app based on the web app. The latter is actually pretty good - been using it for a couple of months. This is apparently going to replace all the other ones on the desktop.

5. iOS Outlook

6. MacOS Outlook

Re: Thunderbird 115

#210

Post by cutler »

I have Thunderbird to thank for allowing me to migrate the GMail accounts of several clients whilst retaining the original timestamps. You'd think a behemoth like Google would be able to handle this but Thunderbird is what you need for this.
Post reply on HN