> First off, Mozilla didn't have FF "fall into their lap" from Netscape. Netscape spun it off and gave birth to Mozilla.
Not that this is a critical point worth arguing about or getting bogged down with pendantics... but I don't see any meaningful distinction in what we're saying.
Mozilla was bootstrapped with Netscape IP. They maintained Navigator/Communicator for awhile, then split its browser and email features into separate slimmed-down applications. My point was that their flagship applications come from inherited IP, and none of their original IP developed since the Netscape split has been remotely as impactful.
> They absolutely do not consider Firefox legacy software and you'll need to back that up somehow for me to believe it.
I struggle to name any meaningful developments in Firefox over the past 7 years that are not direct imitations of something done by Chrome. The situation with Thunderbird during that same window of time, and Mozilla leadership's view of it going forward, has been discussed at length. All major new initiatives and public visibly is directed toward mobile OS or IoT hardware unrelated to their flagship applications.
In my view, that is legacy software. The definitions and wordsmithing of others may vary, but that's the rationale behind my use of the term.
> the back half of your comment sounds bitter and angry at what appears to be Mozilla's recent announcement on Thunderbird
It is challenging to communicate in an online written medium, without being able to use voice inflection and body language to convey cues and emphasis on certain words as you would in person.
So if I capitalize a few words, or use Markdown formatting on a couple of phrases, that doesn't necessarily denote "anger or bitterness". Italics isn't a microaggression.
For what it's worth, I switched my personal domain's email hosting to Google Apps, and haven't used a desktop email client in years. I'm not personally bitter over the decline of focus on Thunderbird.
I'm simply wholly uninspired by everything that Mozilla leadership is trying to inspire me with today. The declining usage of their flagship applications, along with failure to gain traction for new initiatives, indicates that I'm hardly a minority. They need a more focused vision and identity.
> I'm simply wholly uninspired by everything that Mozilla leadership is trying to inspire me with today. The declining usage of their flagship applications, along with failure to gain traction for new initiatives, indicates that I'm hardly a minority. They need a more focused vision and identity.
I miss being enthusiastic about Firefox. I've used it since it was Phoenix. It was an absolute joy to use until some time in the 2.x series, IIRC. These days? Chrome's snappier, I like its interface better, its extension ecosystem is nearly as good, and it's ~1/10 as likely to make my fan kick on. Safari's so much easier on my battery that it's like the others aren't even trying, so I end up using it most of the time even though it's my least-favorite of the three.
I'd like something that is to Firefox what Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox was to the Mozilla Suite.
Not that this is a critical point worth arguing about or getting bogged down with pendantics... but I don't see any meaningful distinction in what we're saying.
Mozilla was bootstrapped with Netscape IP. They maintained Navigator/Communicator for awhile, then split its browser and email features into separate slimmed-down applications. My point was that their flagship applications come from inherited IP, and none of their original IP developed since the Netscape split has been remotely as impactful.
> They absolutely do not consider Firefox legacy software and you'll need to back that up somehow for me to believe it.
I struggle to name any meaningful developments in Firefox over the past 7 years that are not direct imitations of something done by Chrome. The situation with Thunderbird during that same window of time, and Mozilla leadership's view of it going forward, has been discussed at length. All major new initiatives and public visibly is directed toward mobile OS or IoT hardware unrelated to their flagship applications.
In my view, that is legacy software. The definitions and wordsmithing of others may vary, but that's the rationale behind my use of the term.
> the back half of your comment sounds bitter and angry at what appears to be Mozilla's recent announcement on Thunderbird
It is challenging to communicate in an online written medium, without being able to use voice inflection and body language to convey cues and emphasis on certain words as you would in person.
So if I capitalize a few words, or use Markdown formatting on a couple of phrases, that doesn't necessarily denote "anger or bitterness". Italics isn't a microaggression.
For what it's worth, I switched my personal domain's email hosting to Google Apps, and haven't used a desktop email client in years. I'm not personally bitter over the decline of focus on Thunderbird.
I'm simply wholly uninspired by everything that Mozilla leadership is trying to inspire me with today. The declining usage of their flagship applications, along with failure to gain traction for new initiatives, indicates that I'm hardly a minority. They need a more focused vision and identity.