> The best solution would be for the web browsers to stop this behavior. SeaMonkey is the only "modern" browser I know of that has it disabled by default.

finally, credit where it's due!

Howdy , I was in here yesterday yapping about Seamonkey not starting up after an upgrade of my Debian box (running bookworm (testing)). I for some reason found out that I was one release short of 2.53.9 so after downloading the latest version everything works as it always have done. I had a network outage about at the same time I got everything working again so sorry for "disappearing". Thanks for your help, all is well and I am happy

! :)

now it's a good time to make backups~

(already done)

awesome~!

Waxhead: also good you figured it out so now you can try to help others instead of like other who just compalin.

butbutbut complaining is freeeeeedumz!!!!!

yes but fixing and sharing the fix is better than just complaining!

everyone cna compalin

isn't "complaint-driven development" a thing?

is easy to complain, not that easy to fix the issue

eve na bad fix willpoint developers to get to a better fix.

just bitching that it does not work is kind of non-productive

constructive feedback...

is "complaint-driven development" where you see what users complain about and do more of it? :-P

mhy point was you want it to work differently, you have the source. please provide a patch to make it work the way you want if not Shut the fuck up!

WG9s: sure thing , if that helps I'll stick around every now and then and try to help out.

Waxhead: exactly my point try to be helpful and not one of those who only complains.

adn you don;t need to provide patches but if you can provide better feedback for those of us who do to try to fix an issue instead of those who just bitch about i have been complaining about this for x number of years and still not fixed. if you help we can perhaps fix.

Even if you can't code, there are many ways you can contribute

WG9s: I understand what you mean, and I know the drill. I made a program for Windows called DriveGLEAM so I know what users tend to request / demand / want to kill you for if you don't implement it. That being said , I really think that complaining is more important than focusing on things that work. Those things may not need improvement , but those that don't may need it.

unfortunately I'm at the conclusion that the biggest bug with software is... having users :/

but then, why make software that nobody will use?

it's... complicated

ironically you tend to hear the loudest complaints at small projects

No matter how good your software is - if you can't use it - it is pointless.. for example pfsense had a traffic shaper that was impossible to understand unless you knew everyting from before. opnsense fixed that and made it understandable. So if your sotware is intutive enough chances are - people do not complain as much :)

tomman I am more interested in roking on issues that the person with the issue is willing to help with the effort.

reminds me of the CPU hog issues

WG9s: Amen to that.

it was BOOOOOOOOOOORING as hell to debug

but hey, eventually we came down to something

the best defense is a good offensive

with software, those bugs whose debugging could evolve into Indiana Jonesesque plots might be a bit too much sometimes

but then I love those bugs where you get 3 for the price of one

wait, "with software", scratch that, it's not like hardware is bug-free

BUG SALE!

that's even where the word came from

reminds me of the time I found a dead PSU with a roasted gecko inside

that's alarmingly on-topic

I am also try8ing to be able to post 2.53 nightly builds to archive.mozilla.org which should make it easier to bisect regressions.

tomman: did you fill a bugzilla.mozilla.org bug report on that? "gecko fried my PSU"?

I would tweet it instead, get Big Media involved :D

(okay, okay, let's not fill joke bugs :-) )

it wasn't even fresh!

noone had noticed that this one computer was dead until some bored soul (that's me!) tried to power it up

btw as just a humble seamonkey user - what does the future hold? anyone seen into the crystall ball? is there a magic 3.0 out there or a SeaOrangutang in the works?!

the war on Chromeisms

Waxhead the 2.53 line is getting backport over backport and kept current as time permits. At the same time we fix up the code for a possible future version based on a more current Gecko. Next planned version is 2.57 but this will only appear if we can make Web Extension support to work with SeaMonkey. Gecko has unfortunately degenerated and functionality outside of web compatibility either...

...ripped out or dumbed down.

My 2 cents not the view of the project.

Got it... generally speaking there is something in me that really wish for a "new" internet. A simpler one http -1.1 or something like that that only supports basic css, text and no fancy script stuff.

for that we would have to ban Google and Apple

I have ZERO problem with that.

I'm not concerned on Web Extensions (but then it isn't like we have a choice, since addon developers don't really care these days)

but more and more websites breaking because Mac webdevs can't stop building crappy sites, er "single page applications" using Chromeisms 2 seconds after Google pushes them to the latest Chrome stable is a big threat

not only to SeaMonkey, but to web browsers in general

Websites today are more of a tech-demo than anything even remotely close to useful in my oppinion.

the fact MS gave up and just embraced Chrome is a rather psychotic example of what we're seeing

Thus, if I have to complain at someone, it isn't at SeaMonkey (or other alternate browsers) devs

but at webdevs themselves!

But then, they stopped listening years ago, because users like me are "disruptive" (and not in the Silicon Valley meaning of the word!)

instead all I hear these days is "M1 is the greatest CPU ever" and "window.customElements is not defined" :/

oh, and my personal favorite

Blasphemy the 6502 is the greatest CPU ever next to the MC680x0 line :)

"$BROWSER developers should update their browser!"

curiously, two CPU archs that Apple used in their humble beginnings

Commodore used them too... C64 and Amiga (hold your applause please)

but they didn't CPU-hopped to PPC->x86->"ARM the greatest CPU arch ever it should be the one and only CPU arch EVER!!!"

Waxhead: have you heard of Gopher?

I have actually . Never used it.

I was more on BBS'ing

Waxhead Everybody know the 6802 and the 6909 are the best ones :)

Never heard about the 6909 but otherwise - sure those too :D

tomman the fact is that we are more than a bit behind. Part because mozilla did a good job trashing the source part because there are not enough people helping out and part because of the web standard and so "modern" web site of a day. Not all black and white unfortunately.

well, it doesn't help that webdevs quickly embrace the latest Chromeisms the very minute they get released

back when us dinosaurs roamed the earth surface, we waited until tech got mature enough to jump on it

Waxhead 68B09E is used alot in 90ies pinball pcbs which I repair. So popular with me. Same for the 6802/08 :)

frg_Away: Slurp... maybe I will have a look at the mame sourcecode to learn a bit. Anyway , gotta go so ciao for now! :)

tomman yes but mostly big frameworks with help to reduce compleity and drive standardzation. You bet .... blarg...

"standardization"

same junk

OK, framework devs jump on the latest Chromeisms™ the very minute they get released, and webdevs jump on the latest frameworks the very minute someone tweets about how great is the latest megabyte of Javascripts additions

it's still an horrible experience because it's change for the sake of change!

devising something and naming it a standard doesn't magically make it widespread

let alone make it almost universally supported...

perhaps some stuff shouldn't be in a standard if lynx and elinks don't do it, for example

or maybe the standard should have better fallback mechanisms for optional features

tomman well if you don't have content you need to make it up with bloat. Something lots of these site have perfected. Form over function.

the Apple's model, essentially

for example, the latest rage is making personal blogs using SPAs, because static HTML+CSS is, y'know, "not disruptive enough"

completely breaking basic features like browser history

and if you happen to be "dumb enough" to disable JS, all you get is a "wtf, you're crazy for having disabled Javascript - no content for you!"

just recently I saw a blogpost about someone running Doom on a desk phone

the entire blog post was like 4MB

1.3MB for a single photo (that was in PNG for no good reason at all!)

and the rest was Javascript

...for like, what, 20KB in actual content?

njsg to be honest market share of alternative browser is probabaly <1%. So as long as people don't switch and tell google and co where they could shove their ad ridden privacy intrusive junk nothing will happen. I still remember the Pentium serial number desaster. I doubt Intel would need to backtrack today. Would be marketed and embraced as a "security feature" in a minute by todays crowd.

the loads and loads of stuff a page tends to drag these days is appalling

I guess some will say "cache", but I also guess the problem might rely on libraries, templates and people who are simply following the examples they know of.

frg_Away: oh, I didn't mean to correct the spelling, just really put quotes around it

frg_Away: I didn't even notice the i was missing

njsg no worries :)

tomman: just a thought: perhaps framework devs shouldn't jump on such latest Chromeisms™ that soon

I mean, if it's something that's likely a dependency for many sites and packages...

one thing is a single site going that way, the other thing is rendering everyone backwards-incompatible