On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:38:22 -0700, Ken Rudolph wrote: > All well and good; but the question is why is Seamonkey 1.1.17 so > much less robust than Firefox? And furthermore, why is the "broken > site" window so useless? Will SM 2.0 be more Foxy, at least?
You have to compare apples to apples: SeaMonkey 1.1.17 <==> Firefox 2.0.0.? SeaMonkey 2.0b1pre <==> Firefox 3.5.0 (I think I am one of the only two people using SeaMonkey 1.5a ~~ Firefox 3.0) Phil -- Philip Chee <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief, oh Night, and so be good for us to pass. [ ]ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI! * TagZilla 0.066.6 _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
