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

SeaMonkey All-in-One Internet Application Suite

seamonkey-project.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 79 posts

Re: SeaMonkey All-in-One Internet Application Suite

#51

Post by StuffMaster »

helboi4 wrote: post #47
hulitu wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This definitely no. The reason i use it is the UI. Firefox, Chrome, Edge UI is a mess, a disgrace of UI design. I had to edit the user.css to get scrollbars at reasonable width.

Having scrollbars of reasonable width is not antithetical to having a UI that looks like it was made after 2006. You could easily have something that looks like Chrome and has a larger scrollbar. You could go for a different look, just not one that literally looks ancient.

It looks perfectly fine to me.

Changing for change's sake would mean that Chrome will need a new interface soon in order to not look ancient...

Re: SeaMonkey All-in-One Internet Application Suite

#52

Post by Elbrus »

cowmix wrote: post #45

This still has the best SOCKS5 proxy abilities, even over normal Firefox. This browser + "ssh -D" has saved me many times working in highly restrictive networks.

> This still has the best SOCKS5 proxy abilities, even over normal Firefox

Could you please elaborate a bit on what exactly do you mean by that?

E.g. in Firefox one can do the following:

- Connection -> SSH -> Tunnels in Putty connection options.

- Add a dynamic tunnel there.

- Start the session.

- Then enter 127.0.0.1 and the chosen port as a SOCKS v5 proxy in Firefox options.

Congratulations! A poor man's VPN is ready.

An extension like FoxyProxy can be added for further convenience.

What can be done in SeaMonkey on top of that?

Re: SeaMonkey All-in-One Internet Application Suite

#53

Post by StuffMaster »

helboi4 wrote: post #46
looopTools wrote: post #17

I really like the concept of SeaMonkey, but the project needs some major UI updates and way more love to be relevant today.

Strong agree. Concept sounds great. The UI looks like something out of 2005 and that's just not okay. It simply cannot be relevant while looking like that and updating its UI would not have to cause any loss in functionality. It's honestly a waste of time for devs to be working on something that looks like that, since you're cutting out half your audience.

I think I now understand the mentality of a Cybertruck buyer

Re: SeaMonkey All-in-One Internet Application Suite

#54

Post by helboi4 »

StuffMaster wrote: post #51
helboi4 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having scrollbars of reasonable width is not antithetical to having a UI that looks like it was made after 2006. You could easily have something that looks like Chrome and has a larger scrollbar. You could go for a different look, just not one that literally looks ancient.

It looks perfectly fine to me. Changing for change's sake would mean that Chrome will need a new interface soon in order to not look ancient...

Not the same thing dude. This interface is straight outta 2005. Chrome's interface has been being tweaked constantly over the years. It doesn't need an overhaul because it's not 15+ years out of date.

But I mean, you do you man. There's nothing wrong with liking retro interfaces. I once tried to do everything to make my computer look like Windows XP just for nostalgia. Regardless, the product has nice features that would be cool to use, except most people don't want one application on their computer to look like it was there when 9/11 happened while everything else looks new. There would be nothing wrong with having an application with the same features that's not off-putting to most users.

But sure, they can block themselves into a niche of people that don't care if UI looks nice if they really want. That's allowed. Not illegal lol.

Re: SeaMonkey All-in-One Internet Application Suite

#55

Post by ajtjp »

I keep an install of SeaMonkey 2.49.5 on my desktop. It's my preferred platform for browsing FTP and Gopher (the latter with the OverbiteFF add-on), and is the last version of SeaMonkey that has full NPAPI support, useful if I find an old site with a Java applet, or would for some reason need Silverlight. And being based on Firefox 52, it still works with most web sites as well; more recent versions would work even better with modern web sites.

I should try its HTML editor, it might be a nice upgrade from writing my HTML pages in Notepad++.

The vintage UI is part of the charm. Admittedly the "Stop" button is less useful than it was in the '90s, but I'm a believer that we've lost more than we've gained with the trend towards low-chrome browser designs.

Re: SeaMonkey All-in-One Internet Application Suite

#56

Post by helboi4 »

StuffMaster wrote: post #53
helboi4 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strong agree. Concept sounds great. The UI looks like something out of 2005 and that's just not okay. It simply cannot be relevant while looking like that and updating its UI would not have to cause any loss in functionality. It's honestly a waste of time for devs to be working on something that looks like that, since you're cutting out half your audience.

I think I now understand the mentality of a Cybertruck buyer

Lmao. Nice roast but I'm not sure I'd get a Cybertruck even if I could afford one. It's sorta cool in its own way though. I respect the Cybertruck. #CybertrucksDeserveRespect

Edit: I mean that it's cool in how it looks but yeah I would never buy Tesla because the products seem unreliable and dangerous as hell

Re: SeaMonkey All-in-One Internet Application Suite

#57

Post by SpaceL10n »

ajtjp wrote: post #55

I keep an install of SeaMonkey 2.49.5 on my desktop. It's my preferred platform for browsing FTP and Gopher (the latter with the OverbiteFF add-on), and is the last version of SeaMonkey that has full NPAPI support, useful if I find an old site with a Java applet, or would for some reason need Silverlight. And being based on Firefox 52, it still works with most web sites as well; more recent versions would work even b…

Why not VSCode? It's support for extensions are great. Emmet for rapid HTML scaffolding, inline hex color preview, autocomplete for attributes, and not to mention great multi-line editing support. And, of course, CoPilot which can write/edit HTML so much faster than I can type. Can you tell I'm a fan?

Re: SeaMonkey All-in-One Internet Application Suite

#58

Post by mxuribe »

conductr wrote: post #44
mxuribe wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to work for a company owned by Apollo - if its the one i'm thinking of...and if so then "corporate raider from the 80s" is putting things mildly. Those guys really were the type to squeeze every ounce of value of any org without remorse for the future or without thinking of the long-term value that an org could produce.

I'm pretty sure AOL and yahoo had self inflicted the value extraction long before these guys came on board

I've never worked for AOL nor yahoo so I have only an outsider view...and I'm sure to a degree you're not wrong. But still, these Apollo guys are just another level of value extraction.

Re: SeaMonkey All-in-One Internet Application Suite

#59

Post by Dwedit »

sharpshadow wrote: post #18

It seems like a lot of Firefox addons are not longer compatible with Seamonkey after Firefox changed their addon functionality and Seamonkey is still using a old Firefox version. The old addon system was more powerful so I guess they kept it also for backwards compatibility of existing addons. But now the new addons won’t work and the old ones are old and probably not longer maintained. Usually all email clients have…

Extensions explicitly designed for the old extension system still work.

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy

Also works with Pale Moon. There are even special builds of Pale Moon that will run on Windows XP.

Re: SeaMonkey All-in-One Internet Application Suite

#60

Post by StuffMaster »

helboi4 wrote: post #54
StuffMaster wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks perfectly fine to me. Changing for change's sake would mean that Chrome will need a new interface soon in order to not look ancient...

Not the same thing dude. This interface is straight outta 2005. Chrome's interface has been being tweaked constantly over the years. It doesn't need an overhaul because it's not 15+ years out of date. But I mean, you do you man. There's nothing wrong with liking retro interfaces. I once tried to do everything to make my computer look like Windows XP just for nostalgia. Regardless, the product has nice features that w…

>Not the same thing dude. This interface is straight outta 2005. Chrome's interface has been being tweaked constantly over the years. It doesn't need an overhaul because it's not 15+ years out of date.

You basically repeated my point. Change for change's sake. And it looks similar to 2009 Chrome, so yeah it's quite literally 15 years out of date.

>look like it was there when 9/11 happened while everything else looks new

So change for change's sake it seems.

Post reply on HN