We have concluded that we should find a new, separate organizational setting for Thunderbird; one that allows the Thunderbird community to determine its own destiny.In the 131+ comments to Mitchell's post and in lots and lots of other places, people are speculating about why MoCo decided to do this. My first thought was that this was about money because MoCo is a for-profit entity and Thunderbird does not bring in much, if any, revenue, especially compared to the millions of dollars that Firefox brings in. But, after thinking about it more and reading Mitchell's 5+ followup posts in her blog, I think that the main reason is that Thunderbird and traditional email clients in general are dying. I even posted about this myself in comp.mail.imap on July 24 and 25, before I knew anything about this letting-Thunderbird-fly plan. Here is an excerpt of my July 24 post:
. . . my guess is that [Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft] will not [support IMAP]. My prediction is that they will support annotating messages and that will be another step towards the death ofAnd here is an excerpt of my July 25 post:
IMAP . . .
> What would replace [IMAP] ?My subconscious has known that traditional email was dying for awhile, as you can see in these 2006 blog posts and this 2005 blog post (where I said that the Web 2.0 messaging "world doesn't really care about IMAP or SMTP"), but it was only during the last few days that I realized that the old SMTP+POP+IMAP way of doing email is truly dead. And that explains why there exists no good SMTP+POP+IMAP client and why no one is working on producing one [*].
Maybe something proprietary but with an "open API", or maybe APP (Atom Publishing Protocol),
or . . .
Hashtag: #dying-thunde [?]
Post & Read Comments (located elsewhere)
Post & Read Comments (located here)
Links to this page
Each item © Nancy McGough
Each comment © the author of the comment
Deflexion.com web site hosted by DreamHost.com
← More deflexions & reflexions, & feeds available via the sidebar top &
For bookmarks & links, please use