[HN Gopher] Thunderbird 102
___________________________________________________________________
Thunderbird 102
Author : moojacob
Score : 753 points
Date : 2022-06-28 23:09 UTC (23 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.thunderbird.net)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.thunderbird.net)
| m-ueberall wrote:
| If you're already using an older version of Thunderbird, _be
| sure_ to first check https://addons.thunderbird.net/en-
| us/thunderbird/addon/addon... (Addon Compatibility Check for TB
| 102) ...
| mmaunder wrote:
| It's projects like these that continue to make it feasible to run
| an entirely open source productivity stack. And that is very
| important, or a proprietary internet will become the only
| Internet.
| rambambram wrote:
| You take the words out of my mouth. This is a strong and
| important realization, if you ask me.
| wufocaculura wrote:
| So happy that thunderbird is still alive :)
|
| I like the new UI - seems a bit more compact than previous one -
| a nice chnage comparing to useless space wasted in most of the
| apps we have today.
|
| Hope they will focus on editor in the upcoming versions - if only
| they could make html tables as good as they are in Outlook...
| krono wrote:
| Glad this is still being actively developed!
|
| A little bit odd, perhaps, for an email client to feature Matrix
| chat functionality but no support for Exchange accounts. Hope
| it's on their roadmap though.
| MengerSponge wrote:
| It's annoying to have the extra subscription, but Beonex's Owl
| works well, and is recommended by by university IT department.
| krono wrote:
| Outlook might be bad, but I also don't think Thunderbird is
| worth the $200 in yearly Owl subscription fees (with their
| per account and per device licensing) it'd cost me to make
| the switch :)
| cycomanic wrote:
| I'm surprised that davmail is not mentioned more often when
| talking about exchange support. It's an exchange to
| imap/caldav/LDAP translator, so you just run it in the
| background and connect to a local running server. It works very
| well in my experience (much better than exchanges IMAP support
| which has been extremely flaky for me).
| tristan957 wrote:
| Why does Thunderbird have to support Exchange and not Microsoft
| support Thunderbird?
| Barrin92 wrote:
| because the latter is dominant in the market and you don't
| get to dictate the terms when you're on life support.
| cube00 wrote:
| Just look at all the specialisation they had to add to work
| with GMail's "interpretation" of OAuth2 under threat of
| regular app passwords being removed by Google.
| tristan957 wrote:
| Thunderbird raised over 2 million dollars last year. They
| aren't on life support. They don't need to implement
| Exchange.
| Beltalowda wrote:
| Exchange does support IMAP, and it works well with
| Thunderbird. A lot of administrators like to disable it
| though, but you can't lay the blame for that on Microsoft.
| You can still use proxies for Exchange's protocol to IMAP and
| use Exchange with Thunderbird that way. The last time I did
| this it worked quite well, but does take a bit of time to set
| up.
| oorza wrote:
| SecObs (https://swagitda.com/blog/posts/the-security-
| obstructionism-...) at it again!
| Tainnor wrote:
| IMAP doesn't support 2FA which is probably the reason why
| more security-conscious businesses generally disable it.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| IMAP supports OAuth2 and if you set up an IMAP account in
| Thunderbird for a Google/Microsoft account, you get a
| standard OAuth2 popup with all the bells and whistles.
|
| It's possible that your Yubikey/Titan Security Key
| doesn't get recognised by the in-application browser
| window, but IMAP definitely support this standard.
|
| When the token's been retrieved there's obviously no 2FA,
| but neither is there any 2FA for Exchange once it's been
| set up.
| zerocrates wrote:
| You can do 2FA with IMAP, it's the standard setup
| nowadays in Thunderbird for Gmail, and I've set up an
| O365 account that way too. You can use OAuth as the auth
| method and have it work that way.
| Beltalowda wrote:
| Administrators have been doing it well before 2FA was in
| common use.
| smaudet wrote:
| Why?
|
| I can't tell if it's just being lazy or there is some
| FUD. Owa is a poor client on multiple accounts...
| jeroenhd wrote:
| It's quite strange to see IMAP/SMTP disabled like that,
| especially with 2FA having been available in Thunderbird
| for ages now. I'm guessing it's paranoia and not being up
| to date with IMAP's extensions over the years.
| pmontra wrote:
| Exchange is a server you might want to connect to with its
| proprietary protocol. Thunderbird is only a client and
| Mozilla already makes it work on Windows. What would
| Microsoft have to do to support it that's not already done by
| Mozilla?
| tristan957 wrote:
| Not use a proprietary protocol or alternatively implement
| support for it in Thunderbird.
| cycomanic wrote:
| I really wish muttator was still working. It was an extension
| which turned thunderbird into mutt with a GUI, in other words a
| keyboard driven email client without the hassle of dealing with
| calendars, HTML, images... of cli clients. Also unfortunately
| firenvim (an extension to use Neovim for textfields) is currently
| broken.
| jsilence wrote:
| Its all nice and dandy and I really appreciate that development
| of Thunderbird has awoken from its hiatus, but I really really
| wish they would fix the Maildir storage and make it standards
| compatible, so that one can use other mail tools like offlineimap
| (aka nbsync) or mu on the same Maildir store.
|
| Please let form follow function...
|
| Edit: some other user pointed out that Maildir support is on the
| roadmap:
| https://developer.thunderbird.net/planning/roadmap#maildir
|
| Great news!!
| cutler wrote:
| Unusable Address Book. For me horizontal view is essential and
| now it's borked, ie. all email addresses lumped together as Email
| Addresses and the same for Phone Numbers and Addresses. How can
| this possibly be touted as an improvement? For me it's exactly
| the opposite. Columns are no longer resizable and the Notes
| section, which I rely on heavily, has been reduced in size YET
| AGAIN. Mozilla, there's an old adage - If It Ain't Broke Don't
| Fix It. Switching back to 91 immediately and looking to disable
| updates.
| drewzero1 wrote:
| A few months ago I was tasked with switching our office from
| Gmail's web interface to Thunderbird and it's gone surprisingly
| well. Usually new software meets a lot of resistance and
| complaints from the staff, but I've heard mostly praise.
|
| I've been playing around with a testing version (beta? nightly?
| can't remember) and am very excited about the chat integration.
| I'm not sure if it will be useful in the office, which is small
| enough for people to just talk to one another, but it could come
| in handy in some circumstances where we'd normally use an email
| chain.
| wonderbore wrote:
| > switching our office from Gmail's web interface to
| Thunderbird
|
| For what reason? Are they planning to leave Gmail? That's just
| about the only reason for an office to mandate a specific UI
| for email.
| zelphirkalt wrote:
| Even if I had merely one e-mail account, I would make the
| switch, because Thunderbird is simply no BS and 10 times
| faster to work with, once you know what you are doing.
| agumonkey wrote:
| gmail used to be lean and mean, now it's bloated.. alas
| nothing new under the sun, and yeah in that regard TB is a
| massive relief.
| drewzero1 wrote:
| Yes, kind of. We had been using a super janky forwarder setup
| to pass emails sent to our domain on to gmail accounts. We
| had some issues with it and I finally convinced the
| management to switch to actual email accounts. (Yes, I know
| there are pitfalls associated with using hosted email that
| isn't Gmail or Outlook in 2022.)
|
| Thunderbird ended up being an easier option than Roundcube
| webmail (probably in part because some users had used
| Thunderbird in the past). It wasn't a mandate per se but my
| users aren't super technical and like to all use the same
| program, plus local storage makes it easy to keep local
| backups of mailboxes.
| wanderingmind wrote:
| How do you handle calendar invites from thunderbird to include
| a google meet link?
| timwis wrote:
| Fantastical can do this, so I assume/hope there's a plug-in
| for it.
| drewzero1 wrote:
| We haven't tried... our office is small enough that we just
| use paper calendars, and rarely need to arrange meetings or
| other events beyond a few people.
| FastMonkey wrote:
| That's kind of funny, our problem with Google calendar is
| that it keeps adding that when we don't want it!
| Tainnor wrote:
| I had to switch to evolution for my work computer because the
| company uses Exchange accounts and at least with the setup we
| have, it's not supported in Thunderbird on Linux. Supposedly
| there's a paid add-on that does this, but even if I was willing
| to pay for it, I wouldn't know beforehand if it actually works.
|
| Evolution supports exchange properly, by contrast (well, I did
| have to ask my boss to whitelist an app id somewhere in the
| server settings, but that was no problem).
|
| After some initial adjustment, I find evolution equally as
| capable as thunderbird. Both don't necessarily win design prizes
| (well maybe this new version of thunderbird does, but certainly
| not the old one), but if that was important to me, I wouldn't use
| Linux. :) I would even say that I prefer the calendar integration
| in evolution.
| red_trumpet wrote:
| The Owl addon[0] has a the first month free, so you can try it
| out.
|
| [0] https://addons.thunderbird.net/en-
| us/thunderbird/addon/owl-f...
| nswest23 wrote:
| Serious question: what is the point of an email client?
| timbit42 wrote:
| More consistent user interface because web email user
| interfaces change regularly.
|
| Ability to read/reply if the internet is down or you are
| traveling outside of internet areas.
|
| Easier and faster to make backups of your email and contacts.
|
| More features than web email interfaces.
| StuffMaster wrote:
| To use email.
| reagle wrote:
| I'm still stuck pre78 because I like to use an external editor.
| https://github.com/exteditor/exteditor/issues/74
| seraphine wrote:
| Thunderbird is finally paying attention to the UI side of things.
| Hopefully they finally implement the standard multiline email
| list view which has been on the back burner for 19 years XD
|
| https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213945
| sph wrote:
| Yeah lack of it is a deal breaker. I guess it needs a few more
| years to get it out of the door.
|
| They said it might be fixed before the bugs 20th anniversary,
| so less than one year to go, but I somehow doubt it.
| einpoklum wrote:
| While some UI elements do improve, others are being degraded,
| becoming more mobile-phone-web-page-like.
| toomim wrote:
| Noooooo...
|
| The reason I switched _to_ thunderbird is that it displays each
| email on a single line, which is sooooo much more information
| dense, and thus efficient! There 's no better way to manage a
| large amount of email than displaying a large amount on screen!
| seraphine wrote:
| Even if they add it, the single-line display will always be
| around. It isn't mutually exclusive by any means. All clients
| that support multiline also have single-line support.
| currysausage wrote:
| One of the attached screenshots made me deeply nostalgic
| because it reminded me of a time when GUI icons were both
| elegant and easy to comprehend and distinguish:
| https://bug213945.bmoattachments.org/attachment.cgi?id=30701...
|
| This era ~15 years ago must have been peak GUI design, with
| many applications being both beginner-friendly and powerful.
| And if your grandma called, you could easily steer her through
| menus over the phone. Nowadays, good luck describing the latest
| incarnation of the hamburger icon over the phone, especially
| when all the other monochrome line drawings look quite similar
| to aging eyes.
| teddyh wrote:
| A recent poster in that thread claims that multiline email list
| view is now implemented:
|
| https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213945#c214
| sph wrote:
| It's been implemented in a fork, not in thunderbird.
| teddyh wrote:
| Ah, right. My mistake.
| cardanome wrote:
| > Thunderbird is finally paying attention to the UI side of
| things
|
| I wish they would not. I don't want any UI changes on my email
| client. Ever. It is one of my most important tools for work, so
| I don't want to tolerate anything that breaks or changes my
| workflow.
|
| I am super happy user of thunderbird but if they keep doing
| this "modernizing" thing I will have to switch to a more stable
| mail client (after my current version that I never plan on
| updating breaks that is).
| vnkr wrote:
| If you don't want your software to change, don't update it.
| The way Thunderbird looks and the messages list is a large
| part of it is horrendous and is a deal breaker for me, for
| example.
| tux2bsd wrote:
| > don't update it
|
| It is an application that receives content from the
| Internet, your advice is dreadful. Email is a primary
| vector for exploitation.
| vnkr wrote:
| Correct. And also customer needs, UI technologies, the
| way people use apps and services change. So it's all
| right for apps to change as well.
| elric wrote:
| I'm fine with little UI tweaks. I'm not a fan of how the UI
| is becoming "flatter" with every release, and I wish they had
| toggles for some of the more questionable features (like
| those recipient bubbles which can't be easily edited, or the
| absolutely inane treatment of TO/CC/BCC).
| waynesonfire wrote:
| But does it have support for smartkeys? You know, like it use to
| prior to thunderbird 78. Huge regression dropping support for
| enigmail plugin and gnugpg for some built in solution that's half
| complete and as far as I'm aware doesn't support smartcards like
| yubikey. So crummy.
| kaiengert wrote:
| Yes, you can use smartcards with S/MIME.
|
| You, you can use smartcards with OpenPGP, if you configure
| Thunderbird for optional GnuPG support. This way Thunderbird
| can use your secret key that is managed by GnuPG, for secret
| key operations, including keys on smartcards.
|
| How to do that is documented here:
| https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:OpenPGP:Smartcards
| mdrzn wrote:
| I really can't stand how SLOW Thunderbird is, from starting the
| app to doing searches, to any action at all. Even with 32gb ram,
| i9-9900, SSDs.. sooooo slow.
| hsbauauvhabzb wrote:
| i9 with 64gb of ram and a Samsung pro SSD. I have no issues.
| Either your mailbox is substantially bigger or your database is
| broken.
| mdrzn wrote:
| I have the 16years old Gmail in it, so that must be the
| cause. Should I just delete the .db and let it rebuild? Would
| that fix/mitigate the issue?
| hsbauauvhabzb wrote:
| I don't know, please backup .Mozilla or whatever path it
| sits in before you experiment.
|
| Another use in this thread suggested deleting .db, but ymmv
| timbit42 wrote:
| Doing this will speed it up: https://support.mozilla.org/en-
| US/kb/rebuilding-global-datab...
| cassianoleal wrote:
| MacBook Air M1, 16Gb RAM. Opening TB takes <2s and everything
| is snappy. Searches are very fast. I still find the UI and UX a
| bit clunky but performance has not been an issue for me.
| sudobash1 wrote:
| > One of the core philosophies behind the development of
| Thunderbird 102 was doing more with less.
|
| > ...you'll find out-of-box support for the popular,
| decentralized chat protocol Matrix in Thunderbird 102
|
| Personally, I see these two statements as being directly
| contradictory. I'm glad to see Thunderbird's maintenance
| continuing well, but I want it to be a focused app. On the other
| hand, I have been glad to have out of the box Lightning
| integration, so perhaps I will come to enjoy the Matrix addition
| as well.
| cowtools wrote:
| To be fair, Matrix is a very email-like protocol. I think it
| makes sense to have it in an email client, especially if you're
| going to have RSS feeds as well.
| anotherevan wrote:
| Agreed, we should take them both out. :-)
|
| To be honest though, I'm interested in how the Matrix support
| will look. While I think the Element client is nice, and
| certainly the best of the Matrix clients I've tried, I
| wouldn't mind not having to have that during work hours so
| much.
|
| For RSS, I'm sticking with Newsblur though!
| abnercoimbre wrote:
| Thank you for the tip with newsblur! I'm struggling to see
| pricing info. How much is the subscription?
| anotherevan wrote:
| It's about two thirds of the way down the page of
| https://newsblur.com/ (when you're not logged in).
|
| Paid account is US$36/year.
|
| You can sign up with a free try-before-you-buy account to
| give it a go first, though.
| nirui wrote:
| > well, but I want it to be a focused app
|
| Best of the both worlds can be achieved, for example, with good
| extension support. That way, Thunderbird devs can focus on a
| set of core features, while the community handles the rest.
|
| Also, why not look Thunderbird as a Communication Software
| instead of just an Email Client?
|
| Let's just face the fact here: email is dying. Once it was one
| of the most important tools for communicating on the Internet,
| now days for majority of people, it's just something comes with
| a Google/Microsoft/Apple account.
|
| The protocols (POP3/SMTP/IMAP) are heavily outdated as well,
| and no one is seriously improving it in order to make them more
| fitting for today's needs (by improving, I mean to make it more
| real-time, more multi-media friendly, and more efficient so it
| can transmit a huge amount of data simultaneously at lighting
| speed). Just take look how many improvement has been done to
| HTTP as a comparison, it's sad that email protocols received so
| little loves.
|
| At this circumstances, I would say any optimization done to the
| ecosystem is welcome. Also, I like the new interface more, IMO
| it makes Thunderbird at least 10 years younger.
| thesuitonym wrote:
| What do you mean by "more real-time"? Email is instant,
| unless you have a SEG in front of your server scanning
| everything. Do you want email to be chat? If so, I'd say
| maybe you don't really understand email.
| wizofaus wrote:
| "Email is dying" - one of those statements folks keep making
| while the number of email messages sent/received each year
| continues to grow. There's a lot wrong with email protocols
| (it's still stupidly easy to craft very convincing phishing
| emails, and most junk filters are dangerously bad), but
| what's the alternative for the most common use cases? There's
| no other protocol where you can just hand over or publish
| your address in order to receive important/
| structured/persistent information from another party. It
| doesn't require signing up to some single proprietary
| messaging platform and the fact it's existed for 50 years
| gives reasonable confidence it will still be around in
| another 50.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| Well the solution to old email protocols is JMAP, which
| Fastmail supports. But it's going to probably take time until
| JMAP support really picks up with both mail providers and
| client developers.
| tankenmate wrote:
| JMAP was largely designed by Bron, the CEO of Fastmail, and
| his team.
| nirui wrote:
| Based on what I've read from RFC8620, their approach is
| quite smart. It's basically turning email protocol into a
| set of HTTP RPCs, thus shifts all the transport-related
| technical problems away.
|
| The downside is that, JSON codes creates redundancy,
| sometime the redundancy is bigger than the meaningful data
| itself. But on the other side, you can now host an email
| server behind a web CDN. I like the development overall.
| einpoklum wrote:
| > with good extension support
|
| Except that Thunderbird has been actively holding back its
| own extension support, diverting people to the silly
| "WebExtensions" and making it more difficult to load and run
| regular extensions.
|
| (In Firefox it's even worse - it seems you can't load regular
| extensions at all these days.)
|
| > Let's just face the fact here: email is dying. Once it was
| one of the most important tools for communicating on the
| Internet, now days for majority of people, it's just
| something comes with a Google/Microsoft/Apple account.
|
| It is not dying, but rather - powerful commercial interests
| are trying to assassinate it. These companies love to control
| your private data, analyze it, sell it, pass it on to the
| government (Snowden revelations), and use it to market stuff
| to you. We all need to make a concerted effort to change this
| state of affairs.
| mgaunard wrote:
| The only "improvement" to HTTP I'm aware of is HTTP/2, which
| is just plain retarded. HTTP/3 is the same thing but
| implemented correctly, and is barely used at all.
|
| Both are overengineered systems designed to solve one thing
| only: establish multiple reliable transmissions streams
| between two endpoints while only doing the handshake once.
|
| It does very little that's actually useful in practice.
| Closi wrote:
| Ah yes, Matrix support added before Exchange support!
| Zardoz84 wrote:
| you not need that. Ask to enable SMTP on the exchange server,
| and use any email client with it.
| addicted wrote:
| Exchange support is probably ridiculously hard because I
| can't imagine there's all that many open source
| implementations for it.
|
| Matrix support is probably a ton easier.
|
| Besides, matrix is designed to be implemented by multiple
| parties. Exchange isn't. In fact, exchange is almost
| certainly the opposite.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| > Exchange support is probably ridiculously hard because I
| can't imagine there's all that many open source
| implementations for it.
|
| There are at least two, based on EWS (Exchange Web
| Services):
|
| - evolution-ews (Gnome)
|
| - akonadi-ews (KDE)
| plus wrote:
| In addition to Evolution mentioned in another reply, KDE's
| KMail supports exchange (through Akonadi), and it seems to
| work quite well for me.
| digisign wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNOME_Evolution
|
| Believe there are libraries available as well.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| The exchange support for Evolution never worked well for
| me. There was always something that didn't sync, didn't
| get detected, or wasn't supported.
|
| I don't blame the devs, Exchange is a proprietary
| standard so you can't expect it to work well. It's like
| the reverse-engineered drivers for hardware the
| manufacturer doesn't bother to write Linux support or
| sufficient documentation for: it doesn't work great, but
| that's despite the devs' best effort, not because of it.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| > The exchange support for Evolution never worked well
| for me.
|
| it has been working beautifully for me in the past 6-7
| years
|
| including calendar and contacts
|
| > the manufacturer doesn't bother to write Linux support
| or sufficient documentation for
|
| you mean documentation, like this?
|
| https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/exchange/client-
| developer/w...
|
| Microsoft has many flaws, but not writing documentation
| it's not usually one of them.
| mr_toad wrote:
| The exchange protocol is like CORBA and the US tax system
| got together and had a baby. You'd also need an exchange
| server to test it with, and running an exchange server
| isn't trivial.
| WastingMyTime89 wrote:
| Honest question: is exchange support still relevant nowadays?
|
| A lot of companies seem to have switched to Office365 which
| is not the same thing and most of the one I have worked with
| block third-party clients in their security policies.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| Office365 is pretty much just Exchange underneath. And tons
| of larger orgs still use on-prem Exchange. Microsoft just
| announced the next version of on-premise Exchange for
| launch in 2024.
|
| As cloud costs ratchet up and the weaknesses become more
| apparent, I suspect you'll see orgs start migrating back
| away from the cloud.
| nvr219 wrote:
| I've always used Exchange support to include Exchange
| Online support and yes that's very important. I would
| switch to Thunderbird the day they announced full Exchange
| support.
| gpanders wrote:
| Unfortunately yes. Some organizations (like mine) use
| Office365 and disable IMAP/SMTP, so the only way to
| interface to the mail server is via Exchange :(
| dizzant wrote:
| This. I've been looking for a new Exchange client since
| Outlook Web stopped properly supporting Firefox. I reached
| immediately for Thunderbird, but switched away quickly
| because of the need to pay for (somewhat clumsy) Exchange
| integration. If Owl were free, I wouldn't mind the long
| delays or weird synchronization issues. As a subscription
| service, I'll take my business elsewhere.
| chrjxnandns wrote:
| How is OWA not working for you on FF? (Genuinely curious)
| dizzant wrote:
| OWA has a known issue with Firefox on Linux where it
| incorrectly believes that Ctrl is pressed while typing an
| email. This results in frequent missed characters and
| spurious actions, including moving focus to the search
| bar, archiving messages, saving the current message as a
| draft and closing it, etc. This makes OWA extremely
| frustrating to use. Another issue with OWA is the
| unhelpful completions (which I've noted before on HN),
| which in my experience seem to be related to the spurious
| actions (more suggested completions = more spurious
| actions)
| pure_simplicity wrote:
| Finally, so this is what was happening.
| fsiefken wrote:
| What specific long delays or weird synchronization issues
| do you experience? I just bought the plugin but don't
| notice any yet with ~7000 mails. Did you find a good
| alternative? I read above that using DavMail as a proxy can
| also work.
| _emacsomancer_ wrote:
| There's DavMail ( http://davmail.sourceforge.net/ ) - which
| you can use with Thunderbird or any other client.
| inferiorhuman wrote:
| Matrix support while the editor itself is left to rot. I
| finally switched away from self-hosted to Proton. Buh bye
| thunderbird!
| defrost wrote:
| My only current grief with Thunderbird is minor.
|
| I recently circled about RSS feeds again and looked into "not
| Browser Addon" RSS clients - Feedbro as an extension is pretty
| good, has some shortcomings, and requires the browser to be left
| active 24/7 to catch ALL of a few of the feeds I follow.
|
| Thunderbird accepts RSS feeds but, for better or worse, is
| extremely strict about only accepting fully compliant RSS | ATOM
| spec verified feeds.
|
| There are a number of older "RSS feeds" that are compliant XML
| but missing a few recent feature fields - these work in Feedbro
| and other more accepting clients but fail in Thunderbird.
|
| It's a minor quibble, I should write a note to the devs I guess,
| but it did dash my idea of having the one email+RSS feed hub
| active 24|7.
| mario_kart_snes wrote:
| I love Feedbro, but agree it's slightly unfortunate you have to
| run it in browser. Running Feedbro as standalone would be cool.
| newsarchive88 wrote:
| The beast is back...
| clircle wrote:
| Long Live Thunderbird
| sph wrote:
| Eh it should just die so it can be born again. I feel it's
| glacial in its updates and unfocused. People that like its
| current iteration are OK with it, people that want a more
| modern email client have to wait 5 more years, but then it'll
| be 5 years out of date.
| mgaunard wrote:
| I stopped using Thunderbird with version 3 when all the new
| database indexing features made it very slow and unusable.
|
| Haven't tried it again since then.
| yyyk wrote:
| Cool, a UI upgrade. Yet they still omit proper tray support on
| Linux, barring hacks (birdtray, systray-x, etc.). Oh, well. At
| least it's maintained.
| anony999 wrote:
| This looks great! The only reason I didn't fully migrate to
| Thunderbird yet is the search feature which seems to be lacking
| in some areas compared with the mail.app
| timbit42 wrote:
| The search feature doesn't bother me because I never have to
| use it. My email is organized.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| Last I checked Thunderbird still doesn't support Maildir by
| default and is hidden behind an experimental flag with the
| following warning:
|
| > We suggest you leave Maildir disabled unless you are an
| advanced user, willing to risk your data, and know how to back up
| your email before turning on Maildir and how to restore it if you
| run into problems.
|
| Have they fixed that or has other things like Matrix integration
| taken priority over email?
| user3939382 wrote:
| I use an extension that does Maildir in thunderbird flawlessly.
| I'll post the link of you like
| beagle3 wrote:
| I've been using built in Maildir support for many years now
| (at least since early 2018, perhaps as early as 2013) and it
| works flawlessly, no extension needed. What extension are you
| using and why?
|
| The mail store conversion feature is still behind an
| about:Config swatting, though.
| bhaney wrote:
| > The mail store conversion feature is still behind an
| about:Config swatting
|
| Do you by chance know how to actually trigger the
| conversion after turning this flag on? I can't seem to find
| a way to do it.
| beagle3 wrote:
| The per-account "Message Store Type" under
| Tools->Accounts->(your account)->Server Settings
|
| Becomes modifiable, rather than read-only, after toggling
| the flag.
| ssivark wrote:
| You should post it anyway! I'm sure many silent readers are
| curious :-)
| ssivark wrote:
| Related post by Karl Voit, explaining part of the problem:
| https://karl-voit.at/2020/01/13/thunderbird-notmuch/
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| Please share the link. The current implementation is too
| scary for my liking. I don't want to end up with deleted
| messages.
| SiempreViernes wrote:
| Here are the release notes: https://www.thunderbird.net/en-
| US/thunderbird/102.0/releasen...
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| So no proper Maildir support in an email client, but adding
| chat functionality is higher priority? Geezus... this is the
| Mozilla we know all too well.
| gbear605 wrote:
| I don't know how it actually went down, but since it's open
| source software the Matrix integration could have been
| written by a random developer who doesn't work for Mozilla.
| numlock86 wrote:
| Surely there is a Matrix to Maildir thing or something you
| can use, now that it supports Matrix. Duh. /s
| matthewn wrote:
| Thunderbird has been more than "an email client" for so
| long that people made the exact same kind of complaint
| _when RSS support was added_.
|
| Thunderbird is a messaging/communications client, and way
| more people will benefit from Matrix support than would
| ever benefit from Maildir support.
|
| Further, my understanding from the Thunderbird team's comms
| is that they are very much in control of their own destiny.
| I don't get the sense that Mozilla has much say in
| Thunderbird's roadmap (or even cares) at this point.
| Dan_Sylveste wrote:
| >Thunderbird is a messaging/communications client
|
| It's an email client.
| digisign wrote:
| That's what extensions are for.
| dugite-code wrote:
| > but adding chat functionality is higher priority?
|
| Absolutely yes. Maildir support is a niche want, where as
| chat has become essential for many offices replacing email
| for most internal communication.
|
| Additionally the chat fuctionality has been available in
| one form or another for years but has been quite neglected.
| They have just finally extended it and cleaned it up
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| Offices aren't replacing email. Email has logs... Matrix
| is designed to not keep logs.
| dugite-code wrote:
| For internal real time coms Slack, Microsoft teams and
| all the other productivity chat servers sugest otherwise.
|
| You can keep logs from a Matrix server if you configure
| it to do so.
| inferiorhuman wrote:
| That sounds like a good feature for a chat client, not
| Thunderbird.
| linker3000 wrote:
| Trying to use Thunderbird in the corporate world was frustrating
| - but just for two reasons:
|
| 1) Accepted recurring calendar events that started in the past
| would pop up reminders that could not be dismissed (they would
| just pop up again immediately).
|
| 2) Thunderbird had problems embedding meeting links in the
| calendar event (especially, if the meeting was rescheduled), so
| you'd have to go find the original meeting invite email.
|
| For those two reasons, I ended up installing Outlook to handle
| corporate stuff while TB took care of everything else.
|
| I see from the release notes that these two issues have been
| worked on so I'll have to see what happens when I re-add my
| corporate account again; it will be great if the calendar is
| fixed.
| GRBurst wrote:
| Yeah, these things are not handled very well in TB.
|
| What you can do:
|
| For 1) You can configure TB to not show event notifications
| from the past
|
| For 2) Things improved at least a bit, so for me, this is
| usable now
| linker3000 wrote:
| I found that #1 occurred for all events as they rolled
| forwards, so, for example, if the event occurred every
| Wednesday and the first one was in January, I will get a
| popup for today's meeting, but I will not be able to dismiss
| it on TB - I'd have to use my phone to delete the current
| event once it had passed to stop the nagging.
| heavenlyblue wrote:
| Yeah, I had exactly the same issue.
| agilob wrote:
| >You can configure TB to not show event notifications from
| the past
|
| How do I do that?
| bigpeopleareold wrote:
| I tried TB once a year or two ago - it was slow and the GUI was
| hard to read (maybe the same design worked on lower resolutions?)
| I completely forgot what I used in the 2000s, it could have been
| TB. A month ago, I gave it another shot. Not slow, GUI still hard
| to read, but at least there is a nice theme I found that now
| makes it usable ("Monterail Full Dark" is what I use). With that,
| I decided to stick with TB; it feels very comfortable and feels
| better than jumping into all the different webmail clients for
| various email addresses I have. I am curious to see what 102's UI
| re-design will bring.
| dusted wrote:
| my knee jerk reaction is "oh god no why!?" but I guess I'll just
| keep using it because it's what I've always used..
| lobocinza wrote:
| I've tried Thunderbird and Evolution a few times in the past and
| I'll will not be fooled again. The experience is always the same:
| clunky interface, sync issues and a lot of time wasted. With
| Thunderbird I had to install a few extensions just to have some
| that barely was a proper Mail/Contacts/Calendar integration.
|
| Nowadays I just run the default web app in Ferdium and use
| vdirsyncer to backup my mail and calendars to disk. And I use
| Evolution only because Gnome uses it for showing my events on the
| shell calendar. Like it or not Gmail (and Fastmail) interfaces
| are great and native PIM is dead.
| siraben wrote:
| I've been using Thunderbird on and off for several years now, but
| I'm repeatedly confused by the search feature. Has anyone else
| found it inadequate?
| AnonC wrote:
| I've been a long time Thunderbird user (except for the last few
| years). The global search feature was a good addition when it
| was launched, but it doesn't work very well and it doesn't seem
| like more effort was put into fixing/improving it. What I've
| observed is that using it to find specific emails may or may
| not work. I'm not talking about search performance but about
| the quality of results and the ability to narrow down. My
| mailbox was already a several GBs in size at that time.
| endorphine wrote:
| Now that you mention it, yes. But I'm not sure what it is
| specifically.
|
| For what it's worth, I usually find myself trying both
| searching for something and if I don't find what I'm looking
| for, I resort to filtering. Maybe that's a clue for what
| confuses me.
|
| Also, I think I don't know in which mail accounts it is
| searching (everywhere or the current one)?
|
| And sometimes I _think_ it doesn't find things that are there
| and I find them differently.
| addicted wrote:
| I've found search results are pretty good. I don't like the UI
| for the results I get. It just seems really strange and
| incompatible with the rest of the application.
| mtmail wrote:
| Are they following Firefox version numbers for theeir stable
| releases? Thunderbird jumps from v91 to v102 (Firefox is
| currently at v102).
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| 91 is the latest stable, 102 is the latest unstable.
| tristan957 wrote:
| Thunderbird rebases on every Firefox Extended Support Release
| (ESR). 91 was the previous ESR release. 102 is the new one.
| Animats wrote:
| Oh, gawd, the mobile people got into Thunderbird.
| ruph123 wrote:
| I really wish they would do away with tabs. Somehow this has
| always bothered me about TB. I don't know why. Maybe because it
| adds more layers in ehat should be a clean interface. Or maybe it
| is just tab-anxiety I have from using browsers. I just don't want
| to micro-manage tabs in my email client.
| Zhyl wrote:
| Matrix integration is big. Maybe not for Thunderbird, but this is
| probably the most venerable application to support it.
|
| Probably not surprising as Mozilla moved from IRC to matrix.
| MikusR wrote:
| Have they added the ability to increase font size of the email
| list?
| sudobash1 wrote:
| I see the option in "view > font size", although it increases
| the font size across the entire application (not just the email
| list).
| DavideNL wrote:
| Yea, it changes the font size of the entire UI. I'm so glad
| they added this feature. The previous font size was tiny,
| unworkable!
| matthewn wrote:
| There is a new global font size setting in this release:
|
| https://twitter.com/mozthunderbird/status/153930732204379750...
|
| If you want to target the message list specifically, I'm pretty
| certain that can be done with a userChrome.css tweak.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| I'm sure Matrix and Pocket integration, and adding some more
| non-email features are more important than email features in an
| email client.. no?
| mrtweetyhack wrote:
| aceazzameen wrote:
| Funny! I just installed Thunderbird two weeks ago and my biggest
| gripe was importing my contacts from Gmail. It was a bit of a
| hassle until I used vcards. VCards ended up working but didn't
| have birthdays? It may have been missing more data too. I haven't
| verified it all. I might have to try again.
| miles wrote:
| Glad to see Maildir support hasn't fallen off the map:
|
| https://developer.thunderbird.net/planning/roadmap#maildir
|
| > Maildir is a message storage format that should improve data
| safety, allow for incremental (delta) backups of messages and
| allow for antivirus to interact better with messages. Maildir
| will be vastly improved for 102, but may not be pref'd on by
| default.
|
| > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=845952
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| They should be focusing their efforts on this instead of Matrix
| integration IMHO.
| Scramblejams wrote:
| Me too! The lack of maildir was one of three reasons I moved to
| Evolution. Boring backup tools would generate a huge
| incremental any time I used Thunderbird.
|
| The second is that it didn't deal well with accounts where I
| might've had 50-100k messages in the inbox. Lots of
| intermittent freezing during interaction.
|
| Finally, I used it for a decade but it never seemed to be
| without memory leaks. I wasn't using any extensions, it just
| leaked. Had to restart it every day.
|
| Evolution doesn't have any of these issues. Would love to come
| back to it, though!
| nsxwolf wrote:
| I haven't looked at Thunderbird in over 10 years so I decided to
| download it. It was very easy to set up my Gmail account.
|
| My initial impression is that it is delightfully old-fashioned.
| It reminds me of the mail clients we used to use in the good old
| days - The list view has tiny fonts and is packed with all kinds
| of information. It isn't at all "slick" like Apple Mail or even
| Outlook.
|
| It feels clunky, like it's an ancient codebase that's been
| redesigned a million times. But it's charming.
| Diti wrote:
| Kudos to Thunderbird for being the only reliable Windows email
| client to get S/MIME certificates right. A feature that no
| current webmail implemented.
| Avamander wrote:
| Gmail does do S/MIME, though non-gsuite users can only view
| signature status.
| jcims wrote:
| That just boggles my mind. I worked for an ecommerce company in
| 1998 and told them they should just use S/MIME instead of some
| bullshit proprietary encryption mechanism they used with their
| messaging client. It just works. But 24 years later encrypted
| email is still a mess.
| Avamander wrote:
| Probably because S/MIME is too expensive to reach critical
| mass.
| jcims wrote:
| It is if you're interested in the identity of the human due
| to the administrative costs. Email providers could issue
| subscriber certs for every registered address pretty
| trivially.
|
| The biggest UX hurdle is handling the private keys.
| Avamander wrote:
| Considering how macOS/iOS will start synchronizing
| Webauthn tokens, I don't think S/MIME would be that
| difficult really. Email-validated certificates would be a
| nice start, but even those are expensive right now.
|
| Identity-validated is indeed administratively harder,
| though in my opinion that part should be done by the
| state/country authorities - digital driver licenses,
| state ID's and national ID's could just have that as
| well. Some EU countries have done exactly that, but
| software support is lacking.
| jcims wrote:
| I helped deploy a Verisign affiliate in Australia that
| had planned to do just that. I believe the post office
| was going to be the registration authority to vet users
| identity, and then there was going be some mechanism to
| issue a subscriber certificate from there, maybe on a
| smart card. This was 20 years ago, no idea how far it
| got.
|
| The physical security they built into the facility
| housing the root CA was pretty intense.
| Dan_Sylveste wrote:
| >But 24 years later encrypted email is still a mess.
|
| By design. Why do you think gmail strips encrypted archive
| attachments? Surprised they even allow S/MIME.
| kccqzy wrote:
| > Why do you think gmail strips encrypted archive
| attachments?
|
| Because Gmail can't scan for malware inside those
| attachments?
| Dan_Sylveste wrote:
| That's the stated reason, but it isn't the one I believe.
| teekert wrote:
| I love the new look, and Matrix, as far as I'm concerned is the
| only true alternative to Email with its fully open protocol, open
| source server and multitude of clients! Absolutely great move,
| and it looks great too!
|
| Now I can just tell family to use Thunderbird and they already
| have their first Matrix client, which they can install on mobile
| in a jiffy. It would be nice if it could make another dent in
| Whatsapp's monopoly (in my country). I just hope account creation
| is easy... Will check it out!
|
| Thanx TB team!
| throwaway81523 wrote:
| I wonder if they could fix basic things like letting the user
| control the font size, before messing with "serious upgrades"
| which almost always turn out to be downgrades.
| visiblink wrote:
| This is the issue that keeps me using Claws Mail. With Claws
| Mail I can set a consistent, universal font size (meaning that
| the font in each email body is the same size). With
| Thunderbird, that seems to be impossible, even with a custom
| .css file.
| Normille wrote:
| It's the modern way of Application development.
|
| Ignore your application's serious usability issues for years at
| a time. But make a great fanfare about your new dark theme or
| the fact you've contributed to the further descent of the human
| race into moronic illiteracy, by adding more fucking emojis.
| tristan957 wrote:
| I can already control the font size on Thunderbird so I'm
| confused.
| throwaway81523 wrote:
| There are many threads on the thunderbird support forum
| complaining about no way to do this. I have not been able to
| find a way, at least with 91.7 which is what Debian comes
| with. If you can tell me how to make all the fonts (not just
| the ones in certain panes and panels) nice and large, I'd
| appreciate it. It is for a family member who has weak
| eyesight.
| MatthiasPortzel wrote:
| From elsewhere in the thread =>
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31914572
| throwaway81523 wrote:
| Thanks, nice find, it sounds like they are couthing up
| about this. I'll see if I can try it out.
| lproven wrote:
| > couthing up
|
| Pardon?
|
| That is not a word, and I can't guess.
|
| To "cough up" is a thing (to pay belatedly or
| reluctantly) but I can't see how it would fit.
| xionon wrote:
| I can confirm that in Thunderbird 102 on Windows 11, you
| can use View -> Font Size via the menu. It changes all UI
| font sizes I could find. I don't remember if this setting
| existed in the 9x releases.
|
| The default is 12px. The max appears to be 30px.
|
| Changing font size only appears to change the UI font, not
| the message fonts, but it does appear to change all UI
| sections I tested. I saw increased font in the 5 major UI
| sections and the Settings section.
|
| When setting size to 30px, the the email panes looks
| mediocre, but usable. The icons do not increase in size,
| but the bounding boxes for text areas do, so things lay out
| approximately correct. It's clear this is not yet fully
| supported.
|
| The Address Book looks like garbage, and clearly has a
| layout bug. In the list of contacts, the selectable boxes
| around different contacts do not scale appropriately, and
| the text from one sits over the text from its neighbors. It
| functions properly, and the individual contact view is
| usable, so this may not be a deal breaker until its fixed.
|
| The other sections I use (calendar & tasks) look fine. I do
| not have any chat accounts set up, so I cannot test that
| section.
|
| Overall, I would rate it as a usable first step, but
| hopefully they do not consider it finished. As a minimum,
| icons need to scale with font sizes, and the padding
| between elements at high font size needs to scale, or at
| least have some breakpoints.
| throwaway81523 wrote:
| Thanks, View->Font Size is not present in the version I'm
| using, but it sounds like they may have just added it. I
| guess they finally listened to the cries of users. I will
| look into how to run the new version without confusing
| apt too much.
| bprasanna wrote:
| I really appreciate the Thunderbird development team for
| proactively going through the list of add-ons and reaching out to
| the add-on developers if there is any concern to be addressed
| before moving the add-ons to 102. I can feel the commitment to
| keep Thunderbird a great email client.
| awinter-py wrote:
| recently tried to switch to desktop from web gmail -- logging
| into gmail with a client is terrifying and painful
|
| typing my google password into a random popup isn't exactly
| confidence inspiring -- neither is the 'less secure apps' flow
| they invented
|
| hard to set up threading, sync took forever before newest part of
| inbox was ready, unclear impact on how replies look
|
| IMO it's 2022 and the open niche for email clients is 'offramp
| from gmail' -- how can I get a temporary gmail-like experience on
| desktop w/out an overnight sync, without a giant security hole,
| and with minimal changed experience. Solve this and you can
| eventually migrate people to other email hosting.
| apocalyptic0n3 wrote:
| > neither is the 'less secure apps' flow they invented
|
| You can't have done that recently. Less Secure Apps was
| recently deprecated and removed. They've been actively
| discouraging using it for around 5 years. Thunderbird has
| supported the OAuth flow for Gmail since at least 2017 (I swear
| it's been there longer, but 2017 is the earliest reference I
| can find). It's used it as the default option when detecting
| Gmail since before COVID at least. It did promote the use of
| "Less Secure Apps" previously and that option was still
| available after the introduction of OAuth, but not as the
| default.
|
| I no longer use Thunderbird (I switched to Spark, which solved
| a number of issues I was experiencing with unread email
| counts), but it's been a pretty good experience for a long
| time. Especially if you have multiple email accounts from
| different providers.
| awinter-py wrote:
| ah you're right, I created an app password -- didn't use less
| secure apps
|
| assumed they had just renamed it
| anujkumars wrote:
| its bike or company.. please suggest
| lproven wrote:
| It is neither.
|
| https://www.thunderbird.net/
| digisign wrote:
| Looks nice, but I'm worried they broke more things. It has been a
| number of releases that the mail pane no longer respects my dark
| system theme. It looks horrible.
|
| Also I have a portrait monitor so not interested in getting rid
| of title-bars... better be able to keep them and not be forcing a
| widescreen layout.
| plannnnnt wrote:
| grilla001 wrote:
| spacechild1 wrote:
| Happy Thunderbird user here. Just wanted to say thanks!
| endorphine wrote:
| Add me to the list! Thanks to the team working on Thunderbird!
| jazzyjackson wrote:
| Really nice to see a new matrix client. I was never able to get
| the hang of the discord UX, I think treating chat "channels" as
| email threads might be easier for me to grok, now I just need to
| find some matrix communities to join...
| black_puppydog wrote:
| I took this as a reminder to finally set up Thunderbird for my
| work email.
|
| After figuring out that gmail login will only work with cookies
| being enabled in the setting I am super happy to finally have a
| sane folder & filtering interface. I'll probably stick with
| google's UI for the agendas for now, but overall this is being
| really smooth.
|
| Ironically, the search in thunderbird, while not perfect, is _so
| much better_ than on gmail, where I often have trouble finding
| emails from half an hour ago, searching for the exact subject
| line.
|
| EDIT: and spam filtering! It's amazing how many really important
| emails gmail flagged as spam for me. Like, mails coming from
| colleagues on the same custom domain, as replies to emails I sent
| them. I really don't get why people use google's products,
| honestly. At this point it's just pure monopoly I guess, and
| increasingly network effects since the big providers don't play
| well with smaller ones.
| wizofaus wrote:
| And I thought outlook (live.com)'s spam filtering was bad. It
| just doesn't seem like it should be that hard of a problem to
| solve - there's almost no case as a human I can't instantly
| tell that an email is spam or not-spam and give a concrete
| reason why. E.g. almost any email that uses my real name in the
| greeting isn't spam, and certainly one that's a reply to an
| email I've sent, yet I've seen examples of both end up in junk
| folders. It's distinguishing important emails specifically
| written to me providing key info or requiring my response vs
| mass-email or automatically generated email that I would think
| is a harder problem, but live.com seems to do it moderately
| well. If Thunderbird does auto categorization well that'd be
| reason enough to try it out (but where does the categorization
| execute, if you're using it from multiple devices?)
| heavenlyblue wrote:
| > out that gmail login will only work with cookies being
| enabled
|
| What are other options of having your web-based client log into
| your email?
| black_puppydog wrote:
| I meant I have to enable cookies _in Thunderbird_ to be able
| to log into my gmail account via oauth
| Klonoar wrote:
| Any reason that the Matrix blurb is the only one without a
| graphic attached? I'm curious to see how it looks.
|
| _Edit: ah, there 's an image here at least
| https://matrix.org/docs/projects/client/thunderbird_
| preya2k wrote:
| I supposed they don't feel very confident about the UI. When I
| looked at the Nightly a couple of weeks ago, the UI experience
| inside tha Matrix features was horrible. I hope this has been
| fixed/will be fixed soon.
| eddieroger wrote:
| I downloaded Thunderbird just to play with Matrix
| integration, and I think this is the right answer. The rest
| of the UI looks much more refreshed and new, and the Matrix
| window feels a lot closer to older IRC apps than anything
| else. Not that it's a problem, just an observation, but I
| would prefer it looks a little newer and fresher, personally.
| pers0n wrote:
| I've been using Thunderbird for decades, nice to see color is
| back!
| VWWHFSfQ wrote:
| I'm on an Ubuntu 22.04 Desktop computer. I click on the big green
| Free Download button. It downloads a .tar.bz2 file. I double-
| click on that in the Firefox download manager. It opens the Gnome
| archive extractor. I'm looking at... .gif files? .so files? I see
| something called "thunderbird" and another thing called
| "thunderbird-bin". I double-click on those and some other dialog
| pops up that says "No applications found for 'thunderbird'".
|
| Will desktop Linux ever solve these basic usability problems?
|
| Or will this always just be user error! you're doing it wrong!
| dmustillo wrote:
| It blows my mind how many comments here think you are wrong.
| You are absolutely correct. A new user does not care how great
| x,y,z feature is if they can't do basic things that are
| ubiquitous in other operating systems. New users might hear
| Unix is better, but if it doesn't feel that way, they're going
| to go back to what they know works when the next
| deliverable/project/essay/game comes out.
| usrn wrote:
| If Linux distros implemented every feature "new users" wanted
| then you would end up with something nearly identical to
| ChromiumOS (and those same users would probably just run
| ChromeOS.) If you want that then go run that.
|
| EDIT: Everyone here knows how to type "sudo apt install
| thunderbird." People are failing to install _bleeding edge
| software._ This shouldn 't be surprising or upsetting.
| landryraccoon wrote:
| I think we're assuming that if an application ever wants to
| be "mainstream", it has to be useable by people who don't
| know what a command line is, let alone what "sudo" means.
| usrn wrote:
| Oh you know what I mean. "Mainstream" distros have GUIs
| that wrap package managers. Also my girlfriend figured
| apt out like a week after installing a debian based
| distro. It's not exactly rocket science.
| umanwizard wrote:
| I'm not sure why it matters. In discussions like this
| there seems to be the assumption that Linux must be
| usable by non-technical people, and if it isn't, then
| someone is doing something wrong.
|
| Linux is immensely useful to me and everyone else who
| uses it. It doesn't really bother me that my mom doesn't
| use it; she is perfectly happy with Windows. If someone
| made a Linux distro that was exactly as polished and
| easy-to-use for non-technical people as macOS or Windows
| is, it would not affect me at all.
|
| Who is this strawman entity who "wants Linux to be
| mainstream" ? Does anyone really care? Certainly my mom
| doesn't, and as far as I can tell, most Linux users who
| are happy with it don't either.
|
| Furthermore, it's quite easy to understand why this
| hasn't happened, as doing that would cost huge amounts of
| money and there is no incentive structure that exists to
| raise it.
| scoutt wrote:
| > Who is this strawman entity who "wants Linux to be
| mainstream" ?
|
| The ones doing desktop environments, UIs, package
| managers, etc. They thrive for mass adoption.
|
| Developers that want their applications cross-compatible
| and painless for the users.
|
| People that cannot (or are not willing to) pay for a
| Windows license.
|
| The ones waiting for the "year of Linux Desktop".
|
| > a Linux distro that was exactly as polished and easy-
| to-use for non-technical people as macOS or Windows
|
| While I truly appreciate the efforts, the problem is that
| the above is the intention, but it's kind-of half baked
| right now.
|
| For example, having to search online, open a console and
| editing files for simple stuff like regulating the speed
| of the mouse wheel.
| umanwizard wrote:
| > They thrive for mass adoption
|
| I doubt it. I have never seen anyone in the Ubuntu
| community for example claiming that their goal is the
| "mass adoption" of Ubuntu. That's, obviously, an
| impossible pipe dream. Can you provide recent examples?
| landryraccoon wrote:
| I'd prefer if I could use a single OS for most of my
| needs instead of having to context switch between
| platforms.
|
| In particular, I hate that I need to have a Windows
| machine for gaming in addition to a Unix machine for
| everything else. If Linux were a substantial competitor
| on the desktop, more developers would feel compelled to
| port their games to Linux, and I wouldn't have to make
| that choice.
| smaudet wrote:
| > Who is this strawman entity who "wants Linux to be
| mainstream" ? Does anyone really care?
|
| I think it's basic human desire for things to be
| relatable, but more than that there are those who
| experience the tyranny of 'modern' life - if you
| interface with the world, it is perhaps natural to want
| to do so simply, constantly switching contexts is not
| productive.
|
| I suppose, I do really care, because every time I am
| forced to use a system which I don't really want to use,
| is another time I don't really like the world I live in,
| I am resentful, and ultimately I really want to not care
| at all about the device in question.
|
| So, for a wide range of devices I interact with, I view
| them as trash, because I don't care about trash either,
| except to remove it from my home on a regular basis.
|
| There are others like me, I know, and there are others in
| similar positions but not about linux I know as well,
| e.g. anyone who has ever read a good book and wishes the
| author were more well read, and simultaneously is
| affronted by the cheap dime novellas they encounter while
| e.g. browsing a department store.
|
| "Furthermore, it's quite easy to understand why this
| hasn't happened, as doing that would cost huge amounts of
| money and there is no incentive structure that exists to
| raise it."
|
| There isn't, yet. There are various companies which have
| sought to bring it there. To use the (perhaps bad) author
| metaphor, we haven't had our JK Rowling moment yet.
|
| There have been pushes, e.g. Ubuntu, Redhat, but so far
| market forces have conspired against us, not necessarily
| because no one cares or no attempts have been made.
| usrn wrote:
| It's not market forces conspiring against you, it's
| nature. You're not making the system simpler, just
| building more systems inside it.
|
| Linux based OSes will never be popular _and_ have the
| same freedom they have. The principles the developers
| have that make it free are the same ones that create
| these "usability problems" which make it so unpopular.
| suby wrote:
| This isn't just a feature, this is installing apps. Many
| users are failing to install apps. Users on this forum,
| even, which is telling because this forum is a sort of
| filter to select those who are more tech savy than the
| average person. There is a usability issue here that
| absolutely should be talked about and addressed, which
| involves a solution that isn't "switch to chrome OS".
| zdragnar wrote:
| I would hazard a guess that many users on this forum are
| really only familiar with macOS and a smattering of CLI
| magical invocations.
|
| Package managers exist for a reason. Flatpack, snap etc
| all exist. You can't just hand wave real complexity away
| by yelling "usability!" without having fiat power over an
| incredibly diverse ecosystem.
|
| The lowest common denominator for installing software on
| Linux distributions is well below what an incurious user
| will put up with. If you don't want to understand that
| kind of low level tinkering, you have to wait for
| whatever ecosystem you bought into to catch up.
|
| That might mean moving back to Apple's curated
| experience. That's fine; so long as Linux itself isn't a
| curated walled garden, it'll never be as seamless in
| every instance, and that's not for everyone.
| umanwizard wrote:
| > There is a usability issue here that absolutely should
| be talked about and addressed
|
| Addressed by whom, exactly? "The Linux community" is busy
| addressing the things they care about. Nobody is telling
| anybody to use Linux if it doesn't work for their needs.
| rtpg wrote:
| If you download a .deb file on Ubuntu, click on it, it will
| install it and do all the right things.
|
| There is Windows files also distributed as zip files, just as
| unusable.
| lproven wrote:
| > If you download a .deb file on Ubuntu, click on it, it
| will install it
|
| Yes, this is true.
|
| _But_ it is no help on RPM-family distros, or Arch-family
| ones, or Alpine or Void or whatever.
|
| > and do all the right things.
|
| No, mostly, it won't. Because the file won't be added to
| the OS's list of repositories and it will never get
| updated.
|
| This is not automatic behaviour, but it can be: Google does
| this right. Do this with Chrome or Google Earth or whatever
| and it just magically happens, and that is the Right
| Thing(tm).
|
| https://www.google.com/linuxrepositories/
| rtpg wrote:
| "It will never be updated" is a property that is just as
| true/false on Windows or Mac applications. What do people
| do? They build self updated into their programs!
|
| And like you said, Google does it. They do it with a
| single deb you click on.
|
| I feel like package managers on distos are a thing that
| kinda make people forget that applications can be
| distributed "normally" outside this chain.
| lproven wrote:
| This is a fair point, and valid and true.
|
| However, for better or for worse, it is not the Linux
| way.
|
| Maybe it should be, but it isn't.
|
| I can't think of a single Linux app that self-updates
| this way. I suspect that on most distros, permissions
| issues would prevent it.
|
| I also suspect that if it were easy, Google would have
| done it. It is not a company that does things the hard
| way for fun.
|
| Packaging apps as distro-native packages isn't trivial
| but there's tons of existing tooling for it. Ditto for
| hosting repos.
|
| So what Google did is package stuff so that it adds its
| own repos when you install it, and then it is left up to
| the OS to keep it updated.
|
| That to me says that that was an easier job than writing
| self-updating Linux apps, like Chrome on Windows or on
| macOS.
| usrn wrote:
| The "right thing" is submitting a patch to popular
| distros to have your package included in the repos.
|
| IME: it's always application devs who are upset about
| this, not users.
| [deleted]
| lproven wrote:
| No, I disagree. I can see at least 3 reasons:
|
| [1] That will happen in time anyway. This is a flagship
| app.
|
| [2] I would not expect any distro to include a major
| version in its stable release. So, even if they do that,
| it will take months to percolate out.
|
| [3] When it happens, it will need an OS version upgrade.
|
| This is a standalone app release, not an OS release. It
| is in many OSes and it will make its way to them in time.
| You are conflating 2 different things.
|
| The question we are discussing here is: I run T'bird on
| my own box, and I want to try the new version; how do I
| do that?
|
| There are 2 possible solutions to this: either provide
| distro-native packages (as Google does; this is mainly
| appropriate to proprietary apps, which T'bird is not);
| or, provide some kind of cross-distro package. Since both
| Snap and Flatpak need support tools installed, and
| AppImage does not, that makes AppImage the best choice,
| IMHO.
|
| Snapcraft and Flathub will do their own thing in time.
|
| On which note, T'bird 102 _is_ already on Snapcraft, but
| it does not pick up existing T 'bird settings or
| profiles.
| faemir wrote:
| How many of these inexperienced linux users are running
| Arch linux?
| lproven wrote:
| It is an _example_.
|
| OTOH do not forget that Arch is a family of distros now,
| not a single distro, just as Debian is.
|
| In fact I suspect that it is the 2nd biggest family of
| distros, after Debian.
|
| Debian encompasses many dozens: Ubuntu, plus dozens of
| Ubuntu derivatives including Mint, Elementary, PopOS,
| ZorinOS, Linux Lite etc.; LMDE; Devuan; MX Linux;
| SpiralLinux; etc. etc.
|
| Arch now encompasses at least Manjaro, EndeavourOS,
| Garuda and more. https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Arch-
| based_distributions
|
| But that is not the point.
|
| The point is that _tens of millions_ are running non-
| Debian-derived distros, mostly ChromeOS and
| CloudReady/ChromeOS Flex.
|
| Offering a .deb package is _not_ a useful approach to
| offering a generic Linux package, no.
| Nextgrid wrote:
| I believe the GUI-based DEB installed was removed from
| recent Debian/Ubuntu versions. You can of course install it
| from the CLI but that's terrible from a user experience
| point of view.
| Gigachad wrote:
| The problem is deb files don't work on all distros and
| browsers tend to hide the specific distro from the user
| agent for privacy.
|
| Never link to a deb or rpm as the primary "download". It
| should be a flatpak or app image and then an advanced
| options section for distro specific packages.
| smaudet wrote:
| The problem is flatpack/appimage are equally bad/opaque,
| they solve one problem at the expense of being better off
| just in windows or osx.
|
| tar.gz is opaque in a different way - the solution would
| be more like an interpreter - something which has a good
| guess how you should install/run the file.
|
| There is the issue also of integration with the
| distribution, this is a problem with distribution apis -
| package maintainers are invested in their formats and
| distribution list not solid apis with which to interact.
| If you could build against such a set of Apis you could
| bundle an interpreter which just knows what to do.
|
| Tar.gz is a hell of a lot simpler than any other format,
| it's not the issue, it's the desktop distros who are
| underfunded/at fault.
| TimTheTinker wrote:
| > New users might hear Unix is better, but if it doesn't feel
| that way, they're going to go back to what they know works
|
| For anyone who doubts the above, think about how much help
| you'd have to give many of your family members (spouse,
| parents, kids, etc.) for installing Thunderbird or another
| popular desktop app.
|
| For all of my family members, the moment they have to open a
| terminal to do something basic they'd say "that's it, I'm
| going back to macOS (or Windows)."
| cycomanic wrote:
| So how did that work for you on your mobile?
|
| I find it funny that people are perfectly fine using the
| appstore and not being able to just download apps from a
| website (easily) on mobile (amny even say it is a feature), but
| when it is not possible on desktop than it is somehow a massive
| usability issue that users never be able to adjust to (apart
| from the fact that MS and Apple also try to push you to their
| appstores).
| lproven wrote:
| Bypassing all the arguments about hows and whys...
|
| There is an AppImage. It just works.
|
| https://github.com/srevinsaju/thunderbird-appImage/
|
| Try it.
|
| And yes, IMHO, the Thunderbird organisation should distribute
| it.
| cowtools wrote:
| I think you are doing this wrong. If I want to install some
| software on linux, I install it from my distro's package
| repository or I compile it myself. There's no reason to expect
| different linux distros to have binary compatibility. This
| isn't closed-source software on a backwards-compatable ABI like
| on windows, there's no reason to install binaries from an
| unsigned source.
|
| If the developers of thunderbird want, they can supply a binary
| compiled against your specific distro/version, or a statically-
| linked binary, or a container like an AppImage
| Yhippa wrote:
| It's astounding that someone new to Linux has to wrap their
| head around all of that. It actually kind of makes it like a
| cool, secret club.
| oldjavacoder wrote:
| What's truly astounding is that Windows and Mac have
| developed their own Linux like distribution managers over
| the years indicating it's probably far better than the
| proprietary crap they created in the first place.
| Avamander wrote:
| It's not a problem for new Linux users, it's a problem for
| old Windows new Linux users who are accustomed to the
| idiosyncrasies of Windows.
| diffeomorphism wrote:
| It is astounding that you think phones need you to join a
| "cool, secret club". Open app store, click install is not
| new, not secret and much easier than download stuff from
| websites to sideload.
| [deleted]
| djent wrote:
| If you extracted the entire thunderbird folder from the archive
| instead of attempting to execute a single binary in a
| compressed archive, you could have avoided this entire flame
| war. And you would have had a functional email client
| riverdroid wrote:
| The easiest and best way for you (you'll get updates through
| signed packages, etc) is probably to install via the Ubuntu
| Software Center.
|
| Though it can be difficult to download and run random software
| from the internet, I have to say, most Linux distributions have
| got the software distribution challenge through their package
| managers right compared to OSX and Windows. First thing I do on
| an OSX machine is install homebrew which helps a little.
| Normille wrote:
| >The easiest and best way for you (you'll get updates through
| signed packages, etc) is probably to install via the Ubuntu
| Software Center.
|
| Even that aspect is a confusing mess. On a Ubuntu Desktop
| installation, click on the 'Show Applications' icon in the
| dock and you'll see icons for:
|
| * Software & Up...
|
| * Software Upda...
|
| * Ubuntu Software
|
| The first two have virtually the same icon and [as per my
| transcription above] the names are truncated but are
| presumably "Software & Uodates" and "Software Update" --why
| two almost identical looking apps for this?
|
| The third "Ubuntu Software" [which is the one I actually need
| to install 3rd party applications] isn't even visible until I
| scroll to the second screen of icons.
|
| So three different apps for installing / updating software.
| Two of which look almost identical. And that's Ubuntu being
| the supposedly most user-friendly distro!
| pleb_nz wrote:
| I don't use unbuntu. But doesn't it's software centre always
| try to push you to snaps? Or can this be disabled. Last thing
| I would want is snap variants.
| quotemstr wrote:
| Moving to Snaps gets us to a world of sandboxed
| applications, defined permissions, and OS version
| independence. That's the world that exists on mobile, and
| it's pretty great. Shouldn't desktop learn from mobile's
| successful experiment in sandboxing?
| oldjavacoder wrote:
| I have no interest in snaps, flatpak or appimage. I can't
| stop my phone's apps from updating whenever they feel
| like it without breaking many of them. I can and do
| control software installations on my machines.
| Normille wrote:
| >I can't stop my phone's apps from updating whenever they
| feel like it
|
| If you're on Android
|
| Play Store > Settings > Network Preferences > Auto Update
| Apps...
|
| You can also set the option to not update automatically
| on individual apps. When they show up in the Updates
| Available tab, click the hamburger menu next to one and
| there's an option to turn off auto-updates. Handy to stop
| YouTube automatically updating and wiping YouTube Vanced!
| nijave wrote:
| Flatpak seems a little less finicky but slightly less
| user friendly (you manage your own repos/sources)
| jeroenhd wrote:
| They should, that's why Flatpak is excellent for wide-
| spread, cross-distro software support.
|
| Snap is a slightly worse, proprietary sandboxing
| mechanism pushed by Canonical, the people making money
| off it. It has some fundamental problems (boot being
| slowed down by all the snaps being mounted, for example,
| Firefox acting weird and sometimes not even launching
| until I reboot since 22.04) and some ideological problems
| (the fact you can't host your own snap store without
| paying Canonical, the fact Snap blatantly refuses to
| follow standards like XDG or even just folder naming in
| the home directories, forcing a lowercase "snap" folder
| on everyone).
|
| Some people are against the appification that's taking a
| toll on user freedom. Some people are in favour of the
| excellent permission monitoring and dependency conflict
| resolution it allows. Both sides seem to conclude that
| snap isn't the right answer.
| rnk wrote:
| This thread is a perfect example of why we don't have
| clarity on what kind of distribution management we should
| have. We had:
|
| 1. Tar files of compressed binaries 2. No use your
| release's package manager 3. No, snaps 4. No you fool,
| flatpak is the superior solution. 5. I'll just finish
| this off by saying distributing source code is the
| obviously best way, you posers.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| Nobody knows what kind of management we should have. Some
| people prefer directly distributing executables
| (AppImage). Some people prefer packages like Android/iOS
| (Flatpak). Some people prefer compressed files with
| installer scripts, like Microsoft's MSI files
| (.deb/.rpm). Some people prefer just a flat folder with
| binaries they can plonk down anywhere.
|
| I personally prefer the distro-based approach, but for
| tools that need to be kept up to date independently of
| the rest of the system I'm a Flatpak fan.
|
| People, collectives, and companies have preferences.
| There is no one single way.
|
| In a similar vein, how do I distribute Windows software?
| Do I put it up on the Microsoft store, do I provide a
| download with instructions for my msix file or is appx
| more suitable for my use case? Do I add a compatibility
| layer for .exe to sacrifice the security sandboxing
| brings to make the file nice and clickable? Or do I use
| .msi to use the system UI that's easy to set up (but
| impossible to navigate for computer illiterate people).
| Or wait, maybe Steam and Epic Launcher are a better fit?
| Hell, maybe I can get away with uploading the APK to the
| Amazon App Store so I can target Android and Windows 11
| in one go!
|
| What about macOS? Mac Store, .dmg disk image, simple .zip
| file, or maybe a self-extracting installer? Do I need to
| include one of those weird screens that tells the user to
| drag an icon into a picture of a folder? That's what a
| lot of third party software had me do when I first tried
| it, though it took me a while to understand what it was
| asking of me!
|
| Or is it better to use Brew/WinGet? It doesn't have the
| GUI, but it allows serious people to set up my software
| exactly how they like it.
| Tainnor wrote:
| The problems with snaps are in the execution.
|
| The startup times are ridiculously slow (multiple seconds
| or even worse) at least on some machines (I've only ever
| experienced them to be sluggish, but some people say the
| opposite, so...) and this is particularly egregious for
| e.g. firefox or a password manager (bitwarden).
|
| Because I just couldn't bear it anymore I uninstalled the
| firefox snap and installed the flatpak instead. Flatpak
| solves similar problems, but doesn't seem to be as
| sluggish, at least for the applications I've used.
| oldjavacoder wrote:
| Also multiple gigabytes of space in /snap and not knowing
| when or why an app is updating or what it will do to the
| machine.
| quotemstr wrote:
| > The startup times are ridiculously slow (multiple
| seconds or even worse) at least on some machines
|
| I agree that the implementation could be much improved.
| In particular, I'd like to see a switch to EROFS images.
| iggldiggl wrote:
| > That's the world that exists on mobile, and it's pretty
| great.
|
| No, it's not. Unless you do some weird hacks that aren't
| officially guaranteed to work (and now that the old
| READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE permission has been fully
| deprecated, don't result in the most natural UX flow,
| either), Google's sandboxing on Android has e.g. broken
| the scenario of using a file manager to open a locally
| stored HTML file in a browser, because following the
| official API, the browser won't be able to resolve any
| relative links to other HTML documents or subresources
| like images/stylesheets/scripts.
|
| Other multi-file file formats are similarly broken, and
| this more or less applies to _all_ the sandboxing
| solutions I 'm aware of, no matter whether Android, iOS,
| Windows, Mac or Linux. The only exception I'm aware of is
| that the macOS desktop sandboxing has _some_ provisions
| for handling "related" files that only differ in the
| file extension, but even that of course doesn't handle
| all scenarios - the aforementioned HTML file example
| still wouldn't work for example.
| pleb_nz wrote:
| As per other commenters, it's the execution and
| implementatiin of snaps that i'm not a fan of, not the
| idea.
| ryukafalz wrote:
| This is at least partly on Thunderbird's end. The more user
| friendly thing to do these days would be to distribute packages
| for each distro, which would behave a lot more like you're
| expecting.
|
| But "desktop Linux" is not an entity that can solve anything.
| It's a loose collection of people and organizations all doing
| their own thing. If Thunderbird gives you an installer on
| Windows and an archive full of files rather than an installer
| on Linux, well...
| bravetraveler wrote:
| They surely have their own technical problems, but AppImages
| that maintain themselves are particularly friendly as well.
|
| It's about as similar to the 'download untrusted software,
| double click to run it, and hope/pray/assume it handles
| updates itself' workflow found elsewhere as you can get.
|
| I have several non-technical family members using Linux. They
| don't struggle getting software at all, regardless of it not
| being just-like-others.
|
| There's software portals just like the stores on other
| platforms and they generally bridge the gap between
| packages/containers well.
|
| Nobody installs from archives like Slackware anymore, or they
| shouldn't.
| usrn wrote:
| AppImages still dynamically link to libc. They don't work
| on Alpine and Android. They'll probably break on distros
| that are built years apart from when the AppImage is too.
|
| Just stop distributing binaries, it's unprofessional.
| esclerofilo wrote:
| My guess is that parent's family members aren't using
| Alpine, so they don't have this problem.
| usrn wrote:
| If your family members need binaries of bleeding edge
| software and you're worried about their ability to use
| their computer you should be building them. In that case
| you'll be able to ensure compatibility. I don't think
| encouraging novice users to download random binaries from
| the web is any better than them not being able to use the
| absolute latest version of an email client.
| smaudet wrote:
| Exactly, figuring out how to make an exe on Linux is a
| step backwards, not forward...
|
| You need to then secure the source, handle security
| concerns, install AV, you might as well use windows or
| OSX which have extensive controls for these things
| already inplace...
|
| It's convenient, but unwise.
| [deleted]
| bravetraveler wrote:
| Aye, but it's still a valid concern in a technical sense.
| They're not great for things outside of certain bounds of
| LSB
|
| With that said/considered, I don't think it's a big deal
| - anyone non-technical should be happy with whatever
| their distribution maintainers provide.
|
| They won't be watching mailing lists hoping to grab the
| latest _$thing_ :)
| Gigachad wrote:
| This problem is largely solved via flatpak. The link can
| download a small config file that tells your software
| installer gui where to grab the package. It then installs and
| updates like you'd expect any app.
|
| Software does need to stop linking to these tar files.
| badsectoracula wrote:
| Personally i'd rather download a tarball with the binaries,
| put the program in a directory of my choice and if needed
| install the necessary libraries from my distro's package
| manager. So i wouldn't like it if programs stopped
| distributing those.
| sph wrote:
| Especially since there already is an unofficial Thunderbird
| flatpak that works pretty well.
| maccolgan wrote:
| I really hope this doesn't become the standard for new Linux
| desktop users.
| ghostly_s wrote:
| This is mostly a solved problem on distros that support the OCS
| URL standard (all the major ones, I believe):
|
| https://www.opencode.net/dfn2/ocs-url/-/blob/master/docs/OCS...
| ajross wrote:
| "Download this blob and run it to install software systemwide"
| isn't something that works well on any platform anymore, FWIW,
| and you shouldn't do it even (especially) if it's cleanly
| package in a self-executing installer.
|
| Ubuntu provides thunderbird both as a stable release and as a
| containerized snap with rolling release semantics. Snap
| downloads are authenticated and secure. Get it from here if you
| want the latest and greatest, though they haven't blessed 102
| as stable yet (it's still "latest/candidate" as of right now):
| https://snapcraft.io/thunderbird
|
| In this case, though, I think you're complaining overmuch. What
| you got was a tarball intended for install from the command
| line, which is a distribution format well-understood by Linux
| hackers since before most of the commenters here were born.
| It's certainly not a "basic usability problem" to provide
| software in a consistent format for 30 years!
| II2II wrote:
| On the user error bit, all I can say is that it is a trade-off.
| If you wait until your distribution does the hard work for you,
| by releasing the updated package, your experience will be far
| less painful than it is under competing operating systems. Of
| course, that does mean waiting.
|
| If you think that those competing operating systems don't have
| usability problems, well, all I can say is that is far from the
| truth. I went through the process of setting up Windows the
| other day and found the software installation mind-bogglingly
| frustrating. In every case, I was scavenging websites for
| software. Some of those websites felt dubious. In the case of a
| couple of drivers, I was dealing with the equivalent of that
| .tar.bz2 file.
|
| I'm not going to claim that the Linux world is perfect. I am
| going to claim that the grass isn't greener on the other side
| of the fence.
| rvz wrote:
| Thank you for explaining why the Linux Desktop is a giant
| usability failure and how 'defining' Linux support is an
| impossibility.
|
| Rather than be able to support ONE operating system 100% of
| the time like what you get with Windows and macOS, Desktop
| Linux support is an unnecessary M * N support matrix of
| distros, packages and desktop environments and you always end
| up having to select a chosen few; meaning you always anger a
| bunch of Linux users using exotic distros (even though they
| run Desktop 'Linux').
|
| Linux packaging is beyond a dreadful disaster of in-fighting
| and a malestrom of frustration and confusion for the user who
| dares to bother. Majority of the software on Linux is _still_
| shockingly distributed via ridiculous .tar.bz2 files or
| requires opening a terminal to . / execute it, if not then it
| is either the alternatives of AppImage, Snap, FlatPak, etc,
| etc which don't work on all systems out of the box. They are
| still solutions looking for a problem.
|
| With Windows, and macOS packaging for them is already built
| into the OS and works consistently and natively as expected.
| A problem long solved by them but on Desktop Linux it is
| still an issue for a quarter of a century.
| II2II wrote:
| You're welcome to look at the Linux situation that way if
| you choose to, but claiming that Windows and macOS
| packaging works consistently and natively is a huge stretch
| of the imagination.
|
| I had to install a Windows system the other day, and it was
| frustrating. For the most part, software had to be
| scavenged from various websites. Some of those sites felt
| less than reputable while others were avoided because they
| were less than reputable. Once I managed to download the
| installer from the developer, I found that they were rarely
| consistent. While most appeared to be some sort of wrapper
| for MSI, many were not. The user interfaces and procedures
| varied wildly, even with software from Microsoft
| themselves. On top of that, I had two drivers that were
| shipped as a zipped collection of files. In the case of my
| printer drivers, I had to run an executable file buried in
| one of the subfolders. In the case of the USB-RS232 bridge
| drivers, I had to call up the properties dialog in the
| device manager to update the drivers.
|
| I am not going to deny the kernel truth in your claims
| about Linux. Installing software can be a mess. On the
| other hand, I rarely have to face that truth. Almost
| everything is handled by the package manager. In the case
| of hardware, the drivers are usually built into the kernel.
| The end result is that software tends to be faster and
| easier to install and update on Linux. At least from my
| experience.
| lazyier wrote:
| > Will desktop Linux ever solve these basic usability problems?
|
| If the Windows downloaded contained nothing but a zip file with
| a binary then you'd have the same issue on Windows.
|
| > Will desktop Linux ever solve these basic usability problems?
|
| No, because it would require everybody to agree to use Flatpak
| to distribute working desktop applications.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| ...And that's why Linux still languishes on the desktop, QED.
|
| Google proved the point with Android and thus fixed Linux
| with APK files and then it was a runaway success.
|
| The need to fix this problem with Linux is so obvious and
| that it hasn't you'd have to reckon Microsoft must have found
| a way to divide and rule over any agreement process.
|
| More to the point it shows the inherent weakness in open
| software - that is better open products have difficulty in
| competing against commercial ones because of stupid squabbles
| amongst the Open community - disagreements over minor
| technicalities and useability issues+ means the greater
| objective has been lost.
|
| This is all very annoying for average users, especially so
| when we've huge monopolies such as Microsoft and Google
| running the show. With little effective choice users
| capitulate to the inevitable.
|
| Anyone who'd argue with this assessment, don't bother arguing
| with me, read the stats instead. Comparing the numbers of
| Thunderbird versus Gmail users would be a good place to
| start.
|
| _+ For instance, when considering to use Linux the average
| user is horrified at having to choose from hundreds of
| different distros so it 's no wonder he/she gives up. The
| sheer number of distros is madness, it's such a fractured
| effort. I can't think of another comparable instance in the
| tech world where things have gotten so out of control._
| CogitoCogito wrote:
| > More to the point it shows the inherent weakness in open
| software - that is better open products have difficulty in
| competing against commercial ones because of stupid
| squabbles amongst the Open community - disagreements over
| minor technicalities and useability issues+ means the
| greater objective has been lost.
|
| What "greater objective" do you refer to? My objective is
| to have an OS that I have control over and can reasonably
| understand. For me that tends to be debian. So I guess for
| me the greater objective is satisfied.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| The greater objective is for everyone - normal users - to
| have a choice to select from a reasonable number of
| comparable competing products as they do with other
| products they're familiar with. This situation _does not_
| exist at present despite the fact that the computing
| industry has existed for over 75 years.
|
| For starters, this is a serious social problem as
| computing has become ubiquitous and is now essential for
| almost all of the population worldwide. Unfortunately the
| only really practical solution to suit the needs of
| typical average users is for them to go to monopolies
| such as Microsoft, Google, etc.
|
| It's a serious social problem for at least two reasons:
| first, many people cannot afford costly software from
| these price-gouging monopolies; second, in more recent
| times these monopolies now sap users of all vestiges of
| their privacy as a condition of use of their products and
| users have no way of stopping the leakage.
|
| The fact that governments haven't acted to break up these
| monopolistic practices and to stop the privacy violations
| is a disgrace. It's also a testament to the power of
| these mega corporations not to mention the sorry state of
| our democracies (in that corporations hold the ear of
| government better than does the populous).
|
| OK, I've stated the bloody obvious that just about every
| thinking person in the open software movement is aware of
| so where does that leave us?
|
| As there's no middle ground - that being either a choice
| of choosing from competing like products or software
| supplied by revenue-neutral cooperatives that would pay
| software programmers and then charge users a modest fee
| for their software, or both - then we're only left with
| two alternatives - the monopolies and open source
| software. (Here perhaps I should point out that I'm
| principally referring to key software that's universally
| used by all users, operating systems and such, Windows,
| MS Office, Gmail, etc.)
|
| Before going further I must say I'm strongly in favor of
| open source software and use it where ever possible. So
| what's wrong with it? Nothing really except the situation
| above and, unfortunately, that is a big problem.
|
| The principal driving force for the developers of open
| software is that it interests them or otherwise they
| wouldn't develop it. Moreover, for most, this self-
| interest overrides any magnanimous feeling or desire to
| improve the software lot for the multitudes (note, I'm
| not saying develops don't have a magnanimous streak I'm
| sure many do, it's just that self-interest always comes
| first, especially so in the absence of money/payment for
| their efforts).
|
| To say this isn't the case simply denies or belies the
| facts, we wouldn't have so many versions of Linux if this
| weren't so. Similarly, software like Thunderbird,
| Firefox, LibreOffice and such would be much more user-
| friendly, instead, we see a never-ending stream of new
| features rather than sorting out issues with boring
| utilitarian features the lack of which drives both users
| and help desk people alike to utter distraction.
|
| If you want an example of this then there's hardly a
| better instance than Thunderbird, I've been rialling
| against its problems and issues for years both here on HN
| and elsewhere, even with this latest release Thunderbird
| still lacks sensible ergonomic features that Eudora Mail
| had from the outset quite some decades ago!
|
| Right, both your objectives and those of other open
| software users have been satisfied and that's fine - and
| you are _not_ to blame, as everyone on the planet has
| self-interest at heart and that comes first.
|
| The trouble is that the greater unwashed isn't often
| listened to - not at least until there's been an outcry
| for years. Moreover, this situation is more likely to
| prevail with open software as commercial operations have
| a financial incentive to fix problems (at least they
| usually do so for the most glaring and egregious of
| issues).
|
| On the matter of having control over one's software I can
| only concur with you to the fullest extent. Over the many
| years I've been using software both professionally and
| for personal use the single biggest problem I've had is
| the lack of control that I've been able to exercise over
| the software.
|
| Some would say that to solve these problems users should
| either write new programs from scratch and or recompile
| open software with suitable changes. Yes, it's one
| solution but hardly viable in many situations. As someone
| who programs, I'm only too well aware of the fact.
|
| All that said, as I see it we are no nearer any realistic
| solution.
| umanwizard wrote:
| You are complaining about something that would cost huge
| amounts of money to develop not existing for free, but
| not proposing any way to raise that money or provide an
| alternative incentive structure causing it to exist.
|
| > The greater objective is for everyone - normal users -
| to have a choice to select from a reasonable number of
| comparable competing products as they do with other
| products they're familiar with. This situation does not
| exist at present despite the fact that the computing
| industry has existed for over 75 years.
|
| Sure it does: iOS, Android, Window, macOS, Linux. You're
| not complaining that there isn't a choice, you're
| complaining that the _free_ choice isn 't _highly
| polished_. Yes, it 'd be nice if it were, but the fact
| that it isn't is just a logical consequence of the forces
| involved; it's like ranting that the sun rises in the
| east.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" You are complaining about something that would cost
| huge amounts of money to develop not existing for
| free..."_
|
| I was not implying that such a project be started at this
| late juncture as clearly what you said would be correct
| if it did.
|
| Perhaps it's best to illustrate what I meant with an
| example (there are of course many variations on this
| theme). Had the seemingly dead-in-the-water project
| _ReactOS_ had at its outset decades ago in 1996 charged a
| small sum of say $10 to $20 for its Windows-like
| compatible operating system sufficient to cover costs
| then by now we 'd have a viable clone of Windows that
| Windows users would be very familiar with and actually
| use.
|
| Right, in the broad sense Linux is also an alterative to
| Windows but even with Wine installed it's still a very
| difficult call for many Windows users - the proof thereof
| is in Linux's take up numbers - even after decades,
| Windows users haven't moved to it in sufficient numbers
| to bother speaking about.
|
| If the ReactOS project had paid its developers a living
| wage from the outset then it's hard to believe that by
| now - over a quarter century on - that ReactOS wouldn't
| be a viable alterative to MS Windows.
|
| Given the longstanding and continuing angst many users
| have with both Windows and Microsoft's profiteering
| monopoly, it stands to reason they would readily jump to
| a viable alterative if it were available, especially so
| if its price was cheap in comparison to Windows.
| Similarly, there'd be precious little difficulty in
| getting large numbers of talented developers - and many
| developers means a quick finish to the project (er well,
| at least a much quicker finish than the current haphazard
| arrangement has produced, as the project stands now it
| could be strongly argued that it's not much further ahead
| than when it first started).
|
| Perhaps this is a bad example due to possible controversy
| but I think not, specifically because there are many,
| many users who are disgruntled with both Windows and MS.
| Furthermore, as much of ReactOS's development has taken
| place in Russia, I doubt that any potential cries of
| plagiarism and or of copyright breaches from Microsoft
| would hold water, as we're all tragically witnessing,
| Russia isn't too enamored with the US or helping its
| corperations not to mention the way it's protected
| Snowdon. Any objections from Microsoft would be further
| weakened if the project were to demonstrate openly that
| it enforced clean room code development.
|
| There's a lot more I could mention about this matter but
| I'll leave it here for the moment.
| CogitoCogito wrote:
| > The greater objective is for everyone - normal users -
| to have a choice to select from a reasonable number of
| comparable competing products as they do with other
| products they're familiar with.
|
| Well that's not my objective. If it's yours, then good
| luck with that battle. I'm okay ignoring users who don't
| want to put in the time necessary to become proficient in
| GNU/Linux. I mean sure it would be nice if there were
| some unified simple way to do things, but I personally
| wouldn't use a Linux-based OS that I don't like simply to
| decrease fragmentation. Basically the whole point of free
| software is that you _don't_ have to do that if you don't
| want to.
|
| Regardless I wish you luck in all the
| development/community work you put into turning your
| vision into a reality.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| Essentially agree.
|
| _C 'est la vie._
| Aeolun wrote:
| I mean, if you are on windows and you start downloading .dmg
| files that's user error.
|
| If you are on Debian'ish and you download anything other than
| .deb files I don't know what you expect.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| > you're doing it wrong!
|
| You... kind of _are_ though, to the extent that what you tried
| wouldn 't work on Windows either (equivalent to trying to run a
| program in a zip without extracting it). Extract the directory
| and run the thing called thunderbird in it.
| MikusR wrote:
| I am on Windows. Pressing the big green button downloads a
| file that i double-click and it installs Thunderbird.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| And Thunderbird could just as well give you a .deb file if
| you're browsing from Ubuntu or a link to whatever software
| library your distro uses.
|
| It's not really a Linux thing, it's a Thunderbird thing.
|
| The equivalent would be for Thunderbird to link a .xapp
| file for Windows users. Good luck installing those by
| yourself, same with random tar.bz2s.
|
| Of course, downloading random executables is not The Linux
| Way. I understand the pattern as a holdover from Windows,
| but it really shouldn't be the way people get taught to
| install software. Your distro either has a graphical
| package manager built in that's in control of this type of
| software (through their native packages or through
| Flatpak/AppImage/Snap/whatever) that will also keep your
| software updated.
|
| IMO, distros should come with a "quick start" to explain
| the concepts of the software store and Thunderbird.net
| should default to .deb files so most people can just
| install it the normal way.
| gpm wrote:
| The equivalent would be for Thunderbird to link a .zip
| file for windows users, which is actually a pretty damn
| common way to distribute software (or at least it use to
| be) so that you don't need to be an admin to use it, and
| would have the exact same feature of having random
| dynamic libraries and stuff like that sitting in the
| folder.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| Okay, then we're back to Thunderbird not distributing .deb
| files, which work just like that (ex. Chrome does this).
| umanwizard wrote:
| Is it Ubuntu's fault that Thunderbird packaged their
| software in a normal way for Windows and a weird way for
| Ubuntu?
| jhasse wrote:
| Yes. They push snap.
| inferiorhuman wrote:
| Except most folks distribute self-extracting archives or an
| MSI for Windows.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| And most people distribute .deb files for Linux.
| inferiorhuman wrote:
| My experience is that tarballs and RPMs are most common.
| Regardless there's a _lot_ more diversity in how things
| are packaged on Linux than on Windows or OSX.
|
| Even if I get a tarball on OSX I can double click on it
| and then drag the application into the "Applications"
| directory or run the installer. I'm not sure why this is
| so challenging on Linux.
| Gigachad wrote:
| Both macOS and windows made the choice to make programs
| mostly self contained things that can be just dragged in.
|
| Linux distros have a complex network of dependancies,
| config files, and general crap that requires
| sophisticated tooling to manage which is different on
| different distros. All to save a few kb of storage space.
| bogwog wrote:
| When you download a tarball from the internet containing
| an application, usually (unless they messed up/don't know
| what they're doing) that means most if not all
| dependencies are fully contained in that archive, except
| for things you can't really do that for, like libc. The
| point of a tarball is to avoid the system package
| manager, which makes it easier to reach more distros at
| the cost of an increased risk it simply won't work on
| some systems (due to missing system libraries or
| different versions).
|
| The real reason macOS and Windows are easier to
| distribute software on is because there's only one
| Windows and only one macOS. "Linux" is not an operating
| system, Ubuntu, Arch, Fedora, RHEL, etc. are all
| different operating systems that just so happen to share
| a kernel and a _similar_ ecosystem of open source
| software. So compatibility between them is more of a
| coincidence than anything else.
|
| Luckily nowadays we have Flatpaks and AppImages, which
| both solve the problem of simplifying app distribution
| and installation universally for all distros. Although
| devs will probably get a lot of hate if they only
| distribute their app as a Flatpak or AppImage and don't
| _also_ offer tarballs /debs/rpms...so app distribution is
| likely to remain complicated for a while.
| rvz wrote:
| > Even if I get a tarball on OSX I can double click on it
| and then drag the application into the "Applications"
| directory or run the installer.
|
| All without opening or requiring the user to open a
| hideous terminal just to run the app.
|
| > I'm not sure why this is so challenging on Linux.
|
| Desktop Linux fundamentally can never solve this problem.
| All of the packaging alternatives of alternatives have
| created a mess and confusion around which distro can open
| what and not only these alternatives even work out of the
| box, there is no guarantee that all Linux distros will be
| supported for that.
|
| At most it is a 'solution' creating a new problem; whist
| still looking for a problem to solve.
| rvz wrote:
| > Will desktop Linux ever solve these basic usability problems?
| Never.
|
| Desktop Linux will never solve these simple usability issues
| since the developers are too busy fighting for who is the
| smartest one of them all.
|
| As with that, little to no-one cared about Thunderbird. I
| should not expect the world to care either, especially on
| Desktop Linux, which both are complete failures after years and
| years of issues.
| soulofmischief wrote:
| The problem exists between chair and keyboard.
|
| You don't understand how archives work and are trying to run a
| program with many files from an archive before first extracting
| it to a folder in your filesystem.
|
| You could have taken this time spent blaming Linux and used it
| to google around a little bit and learn something new. I
| recommend learning a bit about how your filesystem works and
| why it can't find linked files from within an archive. This is
| essential computing knowledge.
|
| The fact that you are not aware that Ubuntu comes with a
| software package manager means you are still inexperienced and
| should not blame the system until you have spent more time with
| it.
|
| You similarly shouldn't blame a car for bad UX because you have
| to take a class and multiple exams before understanding how to
| use it?
| FinalBriefing wrote:
| This mindset is why Linux will always have basic usability
| problems.
|
| > I recommend learning a bit about how your filesystem works
| and why it can't find linked files from within an archive.
| This is essential computing knowledge.
|
| Really? Is that _really_ essential computing knowledge?
|
| On macOS, you download a disk image, then drag the icon into
| the application directory. Many publishers include a shortcut
| to the application directory and a background image with an
| arrow and instructions. It's primitive, but it works, and
| hasn't needed to change in like, 20 years. It requires no
| knowledge of linked files, or even what a disk image is. Drag
| and drop. Done.
|
| If you can't install an app like that on most Linux distros
| (I don't think I've ever seen that), then Thunderbird
| probably shouldn't suggest that as an option. I've moved away
| from using Linux as an everyday OS because all these little
| usability things add up and suck too much of my time.
| absove wrote:
| On ubuntu you open Software, search thunderbird, and click
| the install button. Or you open the terminal and type sudo
| apt-get install thunderbird.
|
| How come you were able to learn how to do it by drag-and-
| drop on macOS, even though installing an application by D&D
| is completely unintuitive and unique to apple, but learning
| how to do it the linux way is an insurmontable task that
| you can't expect normal people to figure out?
| hypertele-Xii wrote:
| Imagine if the web worked like that: You couldn't click a
| link that takes you where you wanna go, instead it's
| "essential computing knowledge" that you must open a
| separate tab, type the name of the other page you wanted
| into a search box and find the page you were looking for
| on the results page.
|
| Why is it so hard to have a button that installs
| Thunderbird?
| Tainnor wrote:
| If you expect Linux to be like macOS, you can only be
| disappointed.
|
| It is a different operating system with completely
| different trade-offs. People are trying to improve
| usability on Linux (and things have changed substantially
| for the better since I first used Linux in 2006), but
| generally, the OS and software will hold your hand less
| than macOS. Actually, even Windows probably holds your hand
| less, macOS is clearly an outlier here.
|
| People who like using Linux generally put up with the
| occasional nuisance or the necessity to sometimes dig a bit
| deeper when there's a problem for the increased flexibility
| and independence.
| umanwizard wrote:
| > This mindset is why Linux will always have basic
| usability problems.
|
| It works fine for me!
|
| People who want to run macOS can do so. Why does everyone
| act like a free product not being everything for everyone
| is some kind of moral failing?
| hypertele-Xii wrote:
| > Why does everyone act like a free product not being
| everything for everyone is some kind of moral failing?
|
| Probably because the free software movement is making
| (very vocally) it a moral failing that all software
| should be free. If all software must be free, then all
| free software must be everything for everyone.
| umanwizard wrote:
| This RMS-style ideological "free software movement" is a
| tiny minority of the people who actually use, work on, or
| care about software like Linux. It's best to just ignore
| them.
| [deleted]
| breadloaf wrote:
| User has no business in learning anything about file systems.
| This is basic UX error and one of many cuts, which are
| keeping Desktop Linux on its 1% market share.
| VWWHFSfQ wrote:
| So do I wget the big green Free Download link instead of
| click on it? Do I then cd to my Downloads folder and tar xf
| on the file? And then I cd into the extracted directory and
| ./thunderbird?
|
| ...
|
| We see the usability problems here.
| awill wrote:
| I sort of read the OPs message ironically. The OPs point is
| that this stuff is broken compared to how a Windows or Mac
| user would do things. Windows/Mac users just click download,
| and double click. Linux could get to the same spot (more or
| less) by using Flatpak. I think that has to be the answer
| here. It's absurd to expect a developer to build their app
| for a dozen different distros.
| quotemstr wrote:
| > I recommend learning a bit about how your filesystem works
| and why it can't find linked files from within an archive.
| This is essential computing knowledge
|
| Billions of people use computers (most of which are, for
| historical reasons, called "phones") that require none of
| this "essential" knowledge, and they do just fine. Don't you
| think humanity is better off for freeing all these people
| from having to spend their brief time on Earth from having to
| learn about archives and filesystems? Sometimes difficulty
| isn't a mark of virtue but instead just pointless pain.
| SkyMarshal wrote:
| Linux really just needs to adopt AppImage as the default manual
| install package. A single download that runs the actual
| application when you click it, no installation necessary. It
| may have a larger file size due to bundling dependencies that
| are already on the machine, but people who are bandwidth or
| diskpace limited can use their repo or tarballs instead. Just
| make the default option the simplest for non-techies to deal
| with.
| umanwizard wrote:
| > Linux really just needs to adopt AppImage
|
| Do you understand that there isn't some unitary organization
| called "Linux" putting out all these different OSes like
| Ubuntu, Fedora, etc.?
| SkyMarshal wrote:
| Of course, Linux community consensus was obviously implied
| there, didn't think I needed to spell it out for the HN
| crowd.
| umanwizard wrote:
| Okay. Why should the Linux community care about this? It
| is not a business trying to sell something to as many
| people as possible. It's a diverse set of people and
| companies each working on whatever is important to them.
|
| If consumers want consumer-level support, they can buy a
| Mac. What's the problem?
| jacooper wrote:
| Yes, flatpak exists, and its a better system than all the other
| desktop OSs.
| weberer wrote:
| Generally you install software from the app store, which is
| called "Discover" in Ubuntu. However, the newest version of
| Thunderbird hasn't been shipped out there yet, so you might
| have to wait a day or two. It is available as a candidate
| release though, so if you want to try out Thunderbird 102 right
| now, you can open a terminal and type:
|
| sudo snap install thunderbird --candidate
|
| And yeah, I think it is a mistake for the Thunderbird website
| to not guide people to the software center.
| usrn wrote:
| TBH that's a feature not a bug. If you don't know what to do
| here you probably don't know enough to evaluate the safety of
| the software you just downloaded. Your distro maintainers will
| pick it up soon and it will show up on your machine the next
| time you run apt upgrade.
|
| Note that no one is _stopping_ you from running thunderbird. It
| sounds like you downloaded a dynamically linked binary
| distribution and there 's probably just an elf file you need to
| run. Otherwise if the binary is incompatible you can build it
| from the source (I've never tried thunderbird, Firefox is a bit
| much but it's doable and there are of course ways to automate
| it such as running a Gentoo prefix or using the spec files from
| your distribution itself.)
|
| EDIT: Linux is fine for everyone. Installing bleeding edge
| software from web sites is not for everyone.
| moralestapia wrote:
| Yeah sure, just don't complain when Linux falls below 1% in
| market share.
| umanwizard wrote:
| Who is complaining? I don't often see Linux users
| complaining that its market share is low, outside of free
| software ideologues. This seems to be 99% a strawman.
|
| I don't care if Linux has 0.00000001% market share as long
| as it still does what I want.
| alexb_ wrote:
| > Note that no one is stopping you from running thunderbird.
| It sounds like you downloaded a dynamically linked binary
| distribution and there's probably just an elf file you need
| to run. Otherwise if the binary is incompatible you can build
| it from the source (I've never tried thunderbird, Firefox is
| a bit much but it's doable and there are of course ways to
| automate it such as running a Gentoo prefix or using the spec
| files from your distribution itself.)
|
| You should put yourself in the mind of someone who doesn't
| work with computers for a living. Then, read that to yourself
| again and see how much of it is complete nonsense. You should
| not have to know what any of those words mean to use an
| operating system, and if you do that is either the fault of
| the OS or the software, not the fault of the user.
| umanwizard wrote:
| > You should not have to know what any of those words mean
| to use an operating system
|
| Why not? Different OSes can serve people in different
| niches. This is like saying "you don't need special
| training to ride a tricycle, therefore the fact that you
| need it to drive a car is the fault of the car". If people
| don't want to use Ubuntu, they are free to use macOS. I
| will continue using Ubuntu because I know how to use it and
| it works for me. What's the problem?
| usrn wrote:
| Ok, so I'll go to software center and click a button to
| install Thunderbird. It won't be the absolute latest
| version but I don't really care since computers aren't that
| interesting to me.
| jjj123 wrote:
| Sounds like you and the OP agree, that Linux isn't for
| everyone?
| eointierney wrote:
| Yes, Linux has (partially) done this already, albeit with some
| user interface incongruities, check out nixos and guix
|
| Hey NixOS and Guix communities! Your theory is awesome, your
| practice is great, we just need to work on making this trivial
| for children.
|
| Always think of the children
| OJFord wrote:
| > Or will this always just be user error! you're doing it
| wrong!
|
| I suppose this is what my reply will boil down to, but also
| isn't that fine? You could do something unusual on macOS or
| Windows and there too throw your hands up in mock shock that it
| was to be labelled 'user error'.
|
| Anyway, when I want to install software on Linux I type `yay
| -Ss software` (on my work/personal machines) or `apt search
| software` (on a Debian derivative image) etc., and then install
| what I've found similarly.
|
| Thunderbird could do better here - greenfield software today
| might offer a Snap or Flatpak package there for example - but I
| don't think download via vendor website is the norm on any
| distribution; it tends to work on macOS & Windows, but is
| decreasingly primary even there; it probably _could_ launch
| Ubuntu Software Center (or whatever it is) as it does App
| Store.app on macOS - but who wants to look up what to do and
| maintain everything like that for N top Linux distros?
|
| If it were me I think I'd just have a dummy button, conveying
| somehow that it 'works on Linux, you should refer to your
| package manager'.
| diffeomorphism wrote:
| > I'm on an Ubuntu 22.04 Desktop computer. I click on the big
| green Free Download button.
|
| WHY? Why would you ever do that? It is not "you are doing it
| wrong" it is "you are wrong for doing it at all". Even Windows
| got the memo and got win-get now....
| alexb_ wrote:
| Come the fuck on, really? Are you really asking someone why
| they would click the button that says download and is
| prominently displayed and then acting like they are stupid
| for expecting it to download?
|
| 99.9% of Windows users do not use win-get, and you know this.
| Stop pretending that bad UX is just the user being stupid.
| pmontra wrote:
| You are on Ubuntu so shouldn't you have to install software
| from the Software app (or whatever it is called now), which is
| a GUI over apt and snap? I get my Thunderbird updates through
| the system update tool. Same for Firefox, BTW.
| 3np wrote:
| I think the prudent thing to do would be to replace the
| "Download Thunderbird" button with a "Get Thunderbird" one
| which has instructions for how to get it via distro repos at
| least for Ubuntu/Fedora (and maybe flatpak/snap if they endorse
| them?), alongside a "Download for manual installation" which
| replicates the current behavior.
| vonwoodson wrote:
| You might be right. Here's some help on how to install
| Thunderbird on GNU/Linux: https://support.mozilla.org/en-
| US/kb/installing-thunderbird-...
| moxvallix wrote:
| It has. AppImages work exactly as a user would expect them to.
| Even if the AppImage is not marked as executable, one of the
| problems I can imagine a new user encountering, Dolphin (KDE
| file manager) asks if I want to trust and run the file anyways.
|
| It is on Thunderbird for just distributing a weird tar file.
| Preferably, their download button would take you to an
| installation instructions page.
| geokon wrote:
| And idea how to get Dolphin to "register" the AppImage as an
| application? (so it shows up in menus). Manually making
| AppImage .desktop files is always a bit clunk and you don't
| get the proper icons. I know there is some thrid party tool
| that does it more properly, but I wonder if there is an
| integrated way
|
| I swear this used to work automatically and at some point it
| was removed.. or maybe I'm misremembering
| [deleted]
| rtpg wrote:
| Don't blame Linux as a whole for Thunderbird not packaging a
| .deb file. (EDIT: or an AppImage file. I get everyone is not on
| Ubuntu/Debian)
| NavinF wrote:
| I'll blame Linux as a whole for every app needing several deb
| files (one per distro Ubuntu/Debian/etc and one per LTS),
| several rpm files (one per distro RH/Fedora/etc and one per
| LTS), and several <100+ chars omitted for brevity).
|
| On other platforms (Windows, macOS, Android, iOS) it's fairly
| common to distribute GUI apps as a single binary so you don't
| need an army of package maintainers. Perks of having many
| years of ABI stability.
| rtpg wrote:
| I believe most projects that serve debs from their own
| download page do not try to package for each distro
| separately, and instead opt to package up requirements as
| needed.
|
| I can't comment deeply on deb vs rpm, it is kinda
| disappointing that we have this split, and I don't know if
| there's a great way to merge it back.
|
| Mac does have a good distribution story. This also exists
| on Linux in the form of app images. The one missing piece
| is that Mac has the Applications convention.
| AppImageLauncher[0] solves this, but really it would be
| good for Gnome/KDE to just integrate this concept. That
| gives the (important!) "have the application show up in the
| application launcher" option.
|
| I do not believe one could qualify Windows programs as
| being distributed as a single binary. A single installer,
| perhaps! But many Windows programs dump files all over your
| file tree to do things, and then goes to touch stuff in
| your registry. There's a reason we have "portable
| executables" for windows as its own download option!
|
| [0]: https://github.com/TheAssassin/AppImageLauncher
| Aeolun wrote:
| I'd be perfectly fine with everyone switching over to .deb
| files. Sadly it seems AppImage is more popular these days.
| oldjavacoder wrote:
| From what I've seen, .deb is still king over rpm,
| appimage, flatpak and snap.
| NavinF wrote:
| Sure, I'd be fine with any standard. It's just insane how
| just about every distro has its own sporadically updated
| repo instead of sharing common packages. Projects that
| need to be patched and rebuilt should be the exception,
| not the rule.
|
| Scroll down and you'll see people arguing about supported
| features because they're running an ancient version of
| Thunderbird supplied by their distro.
| OJFord wrote:
| 'Linux as a whole' has nothing to do with .deb files.
| NavinF wrote:
| That's kinda my point.
| OJFord wrote:
| Sorry yes I overreacted to the first sentence without
| understanding the tone.
|
| I think it's unfortunate anyone offers .deb (or similar)
| downloads really - the many Linux distros don't have a
| single packaging mechanism, so why pretend they do, or
| that your app's not going to work on the ones you don't
| provide?
|
| Just say it's built for Linux, perhaps here's a binary,
| here's the source if available, this is the preferred
| name, go and check your package manager.
| umanwizard wrote:
| Who are you blaming, exactly? There's no project or
| organization called "Linux as a whole".
| notriddle wrote:
| That's exactly what the problem is. The diffusion of
| responsibility makes it a decades-long problem and nobody
| has the responsibility or the power to fix it.
| umanwizard wrote:
| OK, so, why bother complaining about it? Use Linux if it
| does what you want, otherwise use macOS or Windows.
| notriddle wrote:
| Because I don't think it's unreasonable to want:
|
| * A desktop package that isn't a vehicle for ads (like
| Windows and ChromeOS).
|
| * A desktop package that doesn't require you to write
| your own one-off scripts to work around stupid
| deficiencies (like GNU/Linux).
|
| * A desktop package that doesn't constantly throw away
| all its "legacy" and break a bunch of stuff (like Mac).
| umanwizard wrote:
| It's indeed not unreasonable to want that, but there does
| not exist any incentive structure that would cause it to
| exist. It's not the fault of some person or group of
| people doing something wrong; it's simply a logical
| consequence of what Linux is.
| jjj123 wrote:
| A problem can't be blamed on a single entity is still a
| problem, right? I think OP was just explaining the issue.
| yellowapple wrote:
| > On other platforms (Windows, macOS, Android, iOS) it's
| fairly common to distribute GUI apps as a single binary so
| you don't need an army of package maintainers.
|
| You can do this on Linux, too, be it by compiling a static
| binary or bundling everything as an AppImage or what have
| you.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| So why isn't it do more widely when it would convenience
| many users?
|
| Frankly, I find it annoying that it isn't done as a
| matter of course.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _Typo sorry, it 's 'done' not 'do'._
| yellowapple wrote:
| I agree. Thankfully, enough others agree that there are
| AppImages and other single-file executables for all sorts
| of Linux software.
| WatchDog wrote:
| You can blame Linux distros as a whole, for being obsessed
| with dynamic linking shared libraries.
|
| The Linux kernel itself has a well publicized policy of not
| breaking user space and binary compatibility, but pretty much
| all distros regularly break binary compatibility, they
| require software to dynamically link to os provided shared
| libraries, and they don't allow statically linked programs to
| be distributed using their package managers.
|
| Packaging and distributing software for windows or macOS is
| really easy. Doing the same for Linux, particularly desktop
| applications, is a huge pain.
|
| It's a point that Linus Torvalds has often bemoaned[0][1].
|
| [0]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=whs8QZf3YnifdLv57+FhB
| i5_W...
|
| [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8379139
| usrn wrote:
| You can statically link your apps just fine as long as you
| follow the license for the libraries you're linking (in the
| case of libc, the LGPL.) Before you get upset about this
| Windows does _the same thing_ with their C runtime
| (although the license terms are different.) Ever seen the
| installer for it when you install another app? That 's
| exactly what's going on.
|
| Go nearly always does this for example (although in some
| version they switched to dynamically linking to glibc for
| the stub resolver) and you can take statically linked go
| binaries and copy them to totally different OSes as long as
| the architecture is compatible. I remember taking a copy of
| syncthing and copying it between my Android and a Raspberry
| pi at one point (or maybe it was a kindle and a raspberry
| pi) which run totally different OSes and it worked just
| fine (ignoring the Android stupidity of course.)
| rtpg wrote:
| I mean you can put up a `.deb` with a statically linked
| binary on your download page right? You can also use stuff
| like App Image right? It's not like nobody has ever put a
| go binary into a .deb before.
|
| I don't think comparing "state of packages got off of apt"
| to "state of downloaded installers for Mac/Windows" is an
| apples to apples comparison.
| WatchDog wrote:
| The ancestor comment was complaining about the poor
| experience of installing a downloaded Linux desktop
| application.
|
| Yes, the reasons for why it's more complicated on Linux
| are varied, the fragmentation of the desktop Linux
| ecosystem might be the other main factor.
|
| However I think comparing the status quo between each OS
| is fair.
|
| Appimage seems cool, I don't have experience with it, so
| I can't speak to how well it works.
| rtpg wrote:
| Yep, several projects I know are leaning into AppImage to
| get around dealing with installers. The biggest problem
| with AppImage is that it _is_ just a binary, so things
| like desktop shortcuts don't come with it.
| AppImageLauncher does solve this issue (and create a
| "canonical place" to place your programs, like
| /Applications/ on mac).
|
| I do agree it's fragmented and frustrating where we've
| ended up for installers. My main critique is more that
| the state of linux packaging _isn't_ what thunderbird is
| doing here.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| Packaging software for Windows is clearly a pain, because
| every time I install a game I get a download, followed by a
| launcher, followed by one or several MSVC++ runtimes, then
| another download, then some kind of extraction phase, a
| restart and then a menu. Unless I'm one of the first people
| to download the game, of course, because then I get a popup
| stating that the file I downloaded can't be trusted and
| that I should delete it.
|
| It's an automated Rube Goldberg machine. Linux used to have
| these as well! I remember clearly the hacky automated Java
| 6 install script and the VirtualBox drivers that came as a
| several executable hundred megabytes in size.
|
| You can static link if you want. You need to watch out for
| core system libraries like glibc (just like you need to
| watch out for Win7/8.1/10/11 on Windows) but that's about
| it.
|
| Packaging for Linux is easy. You can even automatically
| test if your packages work on different distributions! You
| can read about it here: https://appimage-
| builder.readthedocs.io/en/latest/intro/tuto...
| roomey wrote:
| There is of course a flood of negative comments...
|
| So in the interest of balance I have to say thunderbird is a
| excellent program. I use it as my daily driver in work and for
| personal use.
|
| It has so many features that puts me, the user, in control that I
| totally take them for granted until I have to use outlook for
| something.
|
| I use it in a multinational, I used it with exchange and now with
| office 365. People can complain away but there are many like me
| who rely on it every single day and it has a real, positive
| impact on our work lives every single day.
|
| Some days are just email client and Web browser, and without
| thunderbird and Firefox working for me as the user...... I dunno,
| work would be a lot more frustrating I guess. MASSIVE thanks to
| all the contributors to thunderbird!
| knadh wrote:
| Thunderbird has been my primary mail client since ~2006. It has
| been rock solid and fast. Way faster than popular web mail UIs
| today.
| agumonkey wrote:
| TB has some strange UX decisions IMO, but overall it's pretty
| nice and I wish Mozillians to keep hacking on it for a long
| time.
| LinuxBender wrote:
| I too have enjoyed Thunderbird for a long time. It's
| lightweight and fast which is a big plus for me. It makes
| showing people how to encrypt their emails very easy. The only
| thing missing and there is probably an addon for this is a sync
| with Fastmail's aliases and sending identities to give it the
| same composing pull-down as their web interface. I sometimes
| forget to manually set the "From:" to the correct alias.
| littlestymaar wrote:
| I've been using Thunderbird since 2009 and while I really
| like it, I wouldn't call it lightweight and fast: it's pretty
| slow to start, takes quite a lot of memory and the search
| feature is really slow.
|
| It's an excellent piece of software no matter what and I'm
| not sure you can do a much faster and lightweight email
| client anyway, because it basically needs to be a web browser
| to render HTML emails properly (but I'm pretty sure the
| search feature could be an order of magnitude faster)
| bayindirh wrote:
| After dropping all caches on my system, Thunderbird 102
| starts in 3 seconds flat. Yes it's not lightning fast, but
| it's loading my office e-mails which contains 15 years of
| e-mails at this point.
|
| Search is generally instantaneous on my system, including
| my work mails. Maybe you need to repair your index or
| something?
|
| On the RAM department it's using ~750MB of memory, which is
| not low in any means, but considering the mail volume it's
| handling, it's acceptable for me.
| roomey wrote:
| Could I make a recommendation (feel free to ignore it).
|
| There is a way to delete your search dB (its an sqlite file
| in your profile (but google first for instructions), and
| leave it rebuild (depending in your mailbox size it can
| take a day or two).
|
| I had to do it once when I moved a bunch of folders.
|
| The search should be instant.
|
| It does take a few secs to start but a while back I created
| a new profile and imported my old rules etc and it's much
| quicker to start now.
| oth001 wrote:
| How do you encrypt with Thunderbird?
| Faaak wrote:
| It has native support with gpg's backend
| kaiengert wrote:
| Your statement needs some clarification.
|
| Yes, Thunderbird supports OpenPGP, with a fully
| integrated solution.
|
| However, Thunderbird doesn't use gpg by default, because
| of license incompatibility Thunderbird cannot bundle
| GnuPG software.
|
| That's why Thunderbird uses the RNP library as its
| default OpenPGP backend.
|
| You may optionally configure externally installed GnuPG
| for secret key operations, as described at
| https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:OpenPGP:Smartcards
| kaiengert wrote:
| Thunderbird supports OpenPGP and S/MIME for email
| encryption.
|
| For how to set it up, see here:
| https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/thunderbird-help-
| setup-...
| godelski wrote:
| I've tried thunderbird multiple times and the upgrades look
| good so I'm going to try it again. But there's an issue I
| haven't ever clearly figured out. How do I integrate gmail
| properly? I love how much easier it was to setup this time, but
| how do I get the folders integrated? (Primary, social,
| promotions, updates, forums) Gmail is already sorting this for
| me but it is way too much to just view everything all at once.
| Forums and social are showing up automatically but not the
| others.
|
| Also, I know people use a lot of addons. Are there any that I
| should look into?
| SkyMarshal wrote:
| Are you using Thunderbird IMAP to synchronize with Gmail?
| IMAP lets you select which remote folders you want
| synchronized on the client. Maybe check your Gmail account in
| Thunderbird settings, find the IMAP section, and make sure
| all the Gmail folders you want to sync are enabled.
| godelski wrote:
| I am using IMAP. I don't see this option that you're
| talking about. FWIW, all my custom folders loaded
| correctly. It is just that don't see that top bar[0],
| except for social and forums (my least used ones).
|
| I also noticed something odd. I closed it and reopened and
| lost all the info. I didn't install from snap or apt
| because apt was providing version 92 so I installed
| manually. I do see ~/.thunderbird (no ~/.config) but seems
| odd that the info wasn't stored there. This is a big red
| flag. ~~I also can't find in the settings where to specify
| the storage location.~~ (found)
|
| [0] https://i.imgur.com/AbCEZSm.png
| smaudet wrote:
| The idea to use special filter is a good one, but as
| others stated the 'top bar' isn't a real thing in email.
| Maybe some sort of IMAP extension, but it's a bit like
| asking how to put onenote into a Google doc - you might
| find some workaround but you are looking at two different
| things.
|
| I don't use those folders, I also don't use a local email
| client these days...
| arvindamirtaa wrote:
| Not sure about the weird settings disappearing bit.
|
| But regarding the categories, Gmail doesn't automatically
| expose these to IMAP. But there is something you can do even
| if a bit hacky.
|
| Create 5 labels named after the 5 Categories. Then create 5
| filters each of which look something like this.
|
| Search criteria: "category:primary" -> Apply label "primary".
|
| Repeat the above step for all the categories. Et Voila. Your
| categories will appear in IMAP as folders of the same name.
| ketralnis wrote:
| I host my own email and Thunderbird is my daily driver client.
| It's great.
| KronisLV wrote:
| Hah, same, but it's also excellent for integrating with any
| of the popular e-mail platforms out there (weird custom non-
| standard folders on some aside) and even acting as a calendar
| or an RSS reader.
|
| My only problem with it is that the UI seems to slow down
| while all of the e-mails are being fetched, if you have 10-20
| accounts or so connected.
| raffraffraff wrote:
| My wife actually hates gmail and has used Thunderbird as her
| email UI for years. Recently we ditched Google for her work
| domain and moved email hosting to another provider. Thunderbird
| has protected her from that change - she basically didn't
| notice. The only difference to her is that she's using K-9 on
| her phone instead of the Gmail app.
| pja wrote:
| And now K9 is going to become the mobile Thunderbird App, so
| things will be even more seamless!
| cutler wrote:
| How so?
| leejoramo wrote:
| Here is the official announcement:
| https://blog.thunderbird.net/2022/06/revealed-
| thunderbird-on...
| SauciestGNU wrote:
| Oh wow that's awesome! K9 is the best mobile email client
| I've used! Congrats to the team!
| Bellamy wrote:
| Happy user here since beginning 2000.
| zeruch wrote:
| I'm in the same boat. I have to use Outlook for work, but I use
| TB for pretty much everything else (and still import my work
| cal to make sure I have a 'master' view of all my time since I
| work from home mostly anyway).
|
| It's punchy, has decent (not awesome) UX, is easy to set up,
| and doesn't act like a memory leak with a UI.
| thesuitonym wrote:
| Check out the Owl plugin. It costs 10 euro per year, but it's
| great.
| tommica wrote:
| Yep, TB is amazing
| quasarj wrote:
| You use it with Exchange and Office 365? Does it have built in
| support now? or are you using a plugin? if so, would you share
| which one?
| djbusby wrote:
| Works with plain IMAP, right? I do it this way (that is,
| access those mail services)
| quasarj wrote:
| I just looked into that; it does, but only if my mail admin
| has enabled it :(
| Zardoz84 wrote:
| ask it
| andrem wrote:
| You can bypass that with running a local instance of
| davmail - https://github.com/mguessan/davmail
|
| It works really well if you are comfortable on the
| command line to get it running.
| roomey wrote:
| I have been in the company 10 years... so its changed a few
| times.
|
| For about 3 years I used a plug in I paid $20 for (after a
| trial) that was money well spent for me.
|
| Then I think thunderbird and lightening (for calendar)
| started everything better natively than the plug in sp I went
| to just native setup.
|
| There is a group of Linux users who kinda support each other
| also so I wrote up a post on how to get it all working.
|
| Then I'll be honest about 2 or three years ago we moved to
| office 365, and when I configured it I think everything just
| magically started working.
|
| And by working I mean getting better at each release.
|
| It now allows native OAuth2 over imap which I think was a
| huge step in making it play nice.
|
| I use plugins: lookout (not sure what this does), tbsync with
| provider for Exchange and provider for Google Calendar (this
| syncs across all my devices).
|
| I just had a look there so I can give people an idea...
|
| Got well over 100k emails in the work account (office365).
|
| Bout 15k In my shammy gmail
|
| Use proton mail bridge also which is another nice program.
|
| I'm on Ubuntu.
|
| I'm trying not to dox myself here lol
| quasarj wrote:
| Heh thanks for the info. I was just trying the Office 365
| IMAP directly, and for my organization Thunderbird is
| blocked. I looked around to see if I could easily modify
| it's Application Id (I mean, it's just telling the server
| what it is...) but could only find instructions for
| Evolution. Maybe that's something they will add at some
| point...
| zorr wrote:
| IMAP works out of the box with O365/Exchange and it supports
| oauth login which MS requires for most new accounts I
| believe. Calendar sync needs a plugin as far as I know.
| amaccuish wrote:
| ActiveSync for contacts and calendar and Cal/Card DAV are now
| supported for free by the TbSync plugin.
|
| https://addons.thunderbird.net/de/thunderbird/addon/tbsync/?.
| ..
|
| Sadly no sign of support for EWS, but Evolution supports
| that.
| linker3000 wrote:
| Shame, it's not compatible with Thunderbird 102 (yet!?).
| Looks like a useful plugin.
|
| Edit: From the github issues page: "I am working on an
| upgrade, ETA 2 weeks."
| weberer wrote:
| I had to install TBSync and its Exchange provider. After
| that, everything worked perfectly, including calendar
| syncing.
|
| https://addons.thunderbird.net/en-
| US/thunderbird/addon/tbsyn...
|
| https://addons.thunderbird.net/en-
| US/thunderbird/addon/eas-4...
| danmur wrote:
| I use this one and can definitely recommend it:
| https://www.beonex.com/owl/
|
| Works very well, calendar too
| zelphirkalt wrote:
| The plugin worked well for some time for me, but support is
| really bad. I once had an issue, where the OWA page would
| require me to log in again, but of course they f'ed up
| their login to require JS and that JS did not run in
| Thunderbird (does any?). The plugin then only showed me the
| login page. When I contacted them, I basically got a
| shoulder shrugg as an answer, close to "Ah that's bad for
| you.". Then a while ago my e-mail account in Thunderbird
| simply disappeared and I still have no idea why and am
| assuming the plugin had a bug, which deleted the account
| from my Thunderbird. Haven't put any effort in yet to get
| it back working and am using IMAP, unable to confirm
| calendar events and such, because Outlook also wont load in
| Firefox for me. Good job ...
| [deleted]
| smsm42 wrote:
| I've been using TB for many years. It's not ideal, but when
| I've been looking to replace it - I returned to it every time.
| Much better UX than Outlook.
|
| I don't need chats and other stuff though. Maybe better
| Exchange support (because the corporate world loves it, sigh).
| digisign wrote:
| Yer darn tootin'! That's why we don't want it broken.
| Dan_Sylveste wrote:
| Yes, precisely. I rely on Thunderbird every single day, which
| is why I froze it at version 60-something (rolling back about
| four years) after the upgrades kept breaking it and mangling
| the appearance for me and the other people in my company.
|
| It was a lovely mail client. It seems they're repeating all
| the mistakes that firefox made. Firefox added pocket,
| everyone disabled it and eventually the feature was removed.
| Firefox added chat, everybody disabled it and eventually the
| feature was removed.
|
| Now Thunderbird has added chat, that's great. What does it
| support, Slack? no. Discord? no. Oh. That's not great, then,
| that's useless. They're intending to jumpstart a chat
| protocol with a client that's used by like 0.8% of users?
| Sure.
|
| The last update made the context-menus and dropdown-menus
| white backgrounded menus with _literally no border,_ so you
| had no way to determine where the menu background ended and
| the email background started. That was the update that pushed
| me over the edge and prompted the rollback and push of
| whatever 60-ish version I chose. My staff need imap and
| calendaring and consistency. That version delivers.
|
| I have absolutely zero interest in playing the 'what spurious
| UI change will throw my staff into confusion today' game with
| a basic productivity tool.
| stryan wrote:
| >Now Thunderbird has added chat, that's great. What does it
| support, Slack? no. Discord? no. Oh. That's not great,
| then, that's useless. They're intending to jumpstart a chat
| protocol with a client that's used by like 0.8% of users?
| Sure.
|
| Thunderbird has had XMPP and other chat for many, many
| years now.
| Dan_Sylveste wrote:
| Like I said, 0.8% of users. Slack and discord and maybe
| the MS product are what matter in the chat space. If
| you're not offering that then the dev resources would
| probably be better funnelled into bug chasing and UI
| consistency.
|
| 'It supports XMPP' that's great. ICQ support would
| arguably be more useful.
| hprotagonist wrote:
| you realize discord bans people who use third party
| clients, right?
| abnercoimbre wrote:
| One should note that doesn't really happen with Ripcord
| [0] though.
|
| [0] https://cancel.fm/ripcord/
| 2pEXgD0fZ5cF wrote:
| > doesn't really happen
|
| Does that mean 0 cases (timeframe?) and official
| confirmation from the discord team that ripcord is
| allowed?
|
| If not it can and will happen (as before). Why would it
| be inherently different with ripcord?
| mid-kid wrote:
| I've seen multiple people be banned from using this
| client. It does everything in its power to remain
| unnoticed but you only need to come across the wrong
| server-side detection update once to get the hammer.
| glenstein wrote:
| Good to know and unfortunate although not terribly
| surprising. I guess this is the recommended user
| experience that the commenter up the thread is suggesting
| be integrated into thunderbird?
| Dan_Sylveste wrote:
| Headless chrome isn't a third party client.
| Shared404 wrote:
| That's the last thing I want in my Mozilla made email
| client.
|
| I'm pretty happy with added Matrix support though, may
| make me take a look at Thunderbird again in addition to
| aerc.
| NoraCodes wrote:
| Yes. It is. It's been confirmed multiple times that even
| using browser plugins that interact with the Discord
| client code in any way counts, in their opinion, as a
| "third party client".
| smaudet wrote:
| Yeesh. I mean kind of makes sense but it doesn't make
| want to use them more...
| ajdude wrote:
| I don't know about Slack, but discord's terms of service
| explicitly forbid external chat clients. It's also
| proprietary, like Slack I believe. Maybe we should try
| and encourage more use of open protocols over things like
| Discord or Slack.
| agiacalone wrote:
| This. For the parent, please don't hold Thunderbird
| accountable for services like Discord being hostile
| towards users.
| lproven wrote:
| Discord works in Franz.
|
| I don't like it and barely use it, but a couple of times
| a year I need to monitor certain groups, so I have a
| Franz tab which frames the webapp.
| pkulak wrote:
| And what percent of users use iCal, carddav and imap?
| Matrix is the most popular open chat protocol. Seems like
| your angling for Exchange and Slack support. Yeah, no
| thanks.
| Zash wrote:
| > Matrix is the most popular open chat protocol
|
| [citation needed]
| ajdude wrote:
| Maybe I'm in living in the past but I would've thought it
| was IRC
| pkulak wrote:
| I just looked up Matrix and IRC in Wikipedia. One was 28
| million (and those are only the servers that opt in to
| reporting), and one was 371,000.
|
| Maybe Jabber has more? But I doubt it.
| Dan_Sylveste wrote:
| IRC was 28 million, I take it?
| feanaro wrote:
| Nope, it's Matrix. IRC is dying.
| rrix2 wrote:
| I'd guess that many of those irc users connect through a
| matrix service these days
| zaik wrote:
| I wouldn't be so sure. If you create a Matrix account and
| join an IRC channel, your username[m] will never leave
| the channel, even if you never use Matrix again. I made a
| few test accounts and it was rather difficult to figure
| out how leave IRC channels properly if you decide not to
| use Matrix anymore.
| Arathorn wrote:
| If you part the matrix room, you'll part the IRC channel.
|
| You can also disconnect from IRC entirely from the bridge
| admin room.
|
| Finally, if someone joins a channel via Matrix and then
| disappears without parting or disconnecting, then after
| 30d we'll boot them off IRC anyway.
| solar-ice wrote:
| Matrix doesn't report daily active users. IRC only
| reports people who are connected right this moment. Those
| are two entirely different numbers.
| feanaro wrote:
| > Matrix doesn't report daily active users
|
| It does, if you opt in.
| solar-ice wrote:
| Can you show me where to opt in, and where this is
| documented? The only stats I can find that are close to
| the number provided are for total registered users.
| Dan_Sylveste wrote:
| >And what percent of users use iCal, carddav and imap?
|
| Thunderbird users? I'd say ~100% of them use imap,
| probably ~75% of them use calendaring. I don't know
| whether Thunderbird uses ical or imap-type calendars
| behind the scenes but it works with gmail, zimbra and
| apple type shared/hosted calendars which account for
| basically ~100% of the non-exchange type calendars in
| common use. It probably supports exchange-type calendars
| too though I've never tried that.
|
| I'd wager less than ~2% of TB users use a non-slack non-
| discord non-irc chat.
| pmontra wrote:
| I use only SMTP and POP3, no calendar. Chat: Slack (work)
| and WhatsApp plus Telegram.
|
| I think that TLS is the only new protocol level feature
| I'm using compared to 30 years ago. Anything else is in
| the UI and keeping the software compatible with new
| versions of the OS.
|
| What was I using back then? Some emacs mail client with
| filters I wrote in elisp. I got my current folder
| structure started in emacs (roughly one folder per person
| and customer) and kept it through all the moves to
| Eudora, Netscape's mail client and Exchange Express until
| I landed to Thunderbird (desktop) and K9 (phone, much
| later on.) Work email was on Exchange when I was an
| employee, always separated from personal email.
| Dan_Sylveste wrote:
| >POP3
|
| Which works so well across multiple devices, which is a
| very very common use-case for email. Either you have some
| homebrew sync going on or you have a very simple email
| use-case.
| pmontra wrote:
| I check mail on my phone with K9 (configured to leave
| messages on server,) possibly answer BCCing myself and
| eventually download mail forever on my laptop and remove
| from server.
|
| My 35 years experience with email: I don't need to read
| old messages when I'm not at my computer. I never did
| before 2011 (first Android phone) and nothing changed
| after then. I can easily figure jobs that need constant
| access to the complete email archive. Not my one.
|
| And I don't need mail on tablets and my old phone. I've
| got my main phone always with me, but the setup would be
| the same.
|
| One reason it works for me could be that communication
| moved increasingly from email to messaging platforms and
| those are on my phone, except Slack which is confined to
| work boundaries. However I feel like I can lose all of
| WhatsApp and Telegram messages with no harm. I already
| lost a few years of WhatsApp and nothing happened. Who
| cares about conversations of 3 years or 3 days ago. It's
| mostly nearly unsearchable trash. And everybody else and
| I never had a verbatim trace of any IRL conversations for
| million of years, so they could be nice to have feature
| but not an important one.
|
| But I'm doing my best not to lose mail. The long term
| important messages are in there.
| ungamedplayer wrote:
| I dont want my mail client eating 4GB of ram just to get
| chat notifications.. Thank you thunderbird!
| lproven wrote:
| > Matrix is the most popular open chat protocol.
|
| [[Citation needed]]
| saberience wrote:
| Why do we even need chat in an email app? It just adds
| bloat and slowness for not discernible reason. This is
| why I WONT be using apps like Thunderbird any time soon.
| [deleted]
| rambambram wrote:
| Nice, I like Thunderbird! Can't wait to use the import/export
| wizard. I always thought it a little strange to install add-ons
| for this functionality.
|
| I'm also very curious to their Matrix support. I've heard about
| it, and maybe this move from Thunderbird makes it more
| accessible.
|
| Also, a reminder to self: donate some money to the Thunderbird
| development team.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-06-29 23:02 UTC)