"Betterbird is better than Thunderbird in three ways: It contains new
features exclusive to Betterbird, it contains bug fixes exclusive to
Betterbird and it contains fixes that Thunderbird may ship at a later stage.

You can install Betterbird at the same time as Thunderbird and run them
on the same profile. That means that you can try out Betterbird with
zero hassle, and go back to Thunderbird if you don't like it - which is
unlikely."
Portable Version available

Home Page
https://www.betterbird.eu/

Release Notes
https://www.betterbird.eu/releasenotes/index.html

On 07/11/2023 at 08:29, AllanH wrote:
> "Betterbird is better than Thunderbird in three ways: It contains new
> features exclusive to Betterbird, it contains bug fixes exclusive to
> Betterbird and it contains fixes that Thunderbird may ship at a later stage.
>
> You can install Betterbird at the same time as Thunderbird and run them
> on the same profile. That means that you can try out Betterbird with
> zero hassle, and go back to Thunderbird if you don't like it - which is
> unlikely."
>
> Portable Version available
>
> Home Page
> https://www.betterbird.eu/
>
> Release Notes
> https://www.betterbird.eu/releasenotes/index.html

Norton complains about Betterbird. Not sure why?

--
Wilf

On 11/7/2023 5:02 AM, Wilf wrote:
> On 07/11/2023 at 08:29, AllanH wrote:
>> "Betterbird is better than Thunderbird in three ways: It contains new
>> features exclusive to Betterbird, it contains bug fixes exclusive to
>> Betterbird and it contains fixes that Thunderbird may ship at a later
>> stage.
>>
>> You can install Betterbird at the same time as Thunderbird and run them
>> on the same profile. That means that you can try out Betterbird with
>> zero hassle, and go back to Thunderbird if you don't like it - which is
>> unlikely."
>>
>> Portable Version available
>>
>> Home Page
>> https://www.betterbird.eu/
>>
>> Release Notes
>> https://www.betterbird.eu/releasenotes/index.html
>
>
> Norton complains about Betterbird.  Not sure why?
>
>

False Positive. Kaspersky never complains.

Am 07.11.23 um 12:02 schrieb Wilf:
> On 07/11/2023 at 08:29, AllanH wrote:
>> "Betterbird is better than Thunderbird in three ways: It contains new
>> features exclusive to Betterbird, it contains bug fixes exclusive to
>> Betterbird and it contains fixes that Thunderbird may ship at a later stage.
>>
>> You can install Betterbird at the same time as Thunderbird and run them
>> on the same profile. That means that you can try out Betterbird with
>> zero hassle, and go back to Thunderbird if you don't like it - which is
>> unlikely."
>>
>> Portable Version available
>>
>> Home Page
>> https://www.betterbird.eu/
>>
>> Release Notes
>> https://www.betterbird.eu/releasenotes/index.html
>
>
> Norton complains about Betterbird. Not sure why?
^^^^^^^^^

Snake Oil! Throw it away!
Why are you using such crap?

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

Am 07.11.23 um 12:15 schrieb AllanH:
> On 11/7/2023 5:02 AM, Wilf wrote:
>> On 07/11/2023 at 08:29, AllanH wrote:
>>> "Betterbird is better than Thunderbird in three ways: It contains new
>>> features exclusive to Betterbird, it contains bug fixes exclusive to
>>> Betterbird and it contains fixes that Thunderbird may ship at a later
>>> stage.
>>>
>>> You can install Betterbird at the same time as Thunderbird and run them
>>> on the same profile. That means that you can try out Betterbird with
>>> zero hassle, and go back to Thunderbird if you don't like it - which is
>>> unlikely."
>>>
>>> Portable Version available
>>>
>>> Home Page
>>> https://www.betterbird.eu/
>>>
>>> Release Notes
>>> https://www.betterbird.eu/releasenotes/index.html
>>
>>
>> Norton complains about Betterbird.  Not sure why?
>>
>>
>
> False Positive. Kaspersky never complains.
^^^^^^^^^
Oh Lord! Even more Snake Oil!
Is braking your system to the speed of of your PC to the one a
generation before or even two.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

On 11/7/2023 5:49 AM, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 07.11.23 um 12:15 schrieb AllanH:
>> On 11/7/2023 5:02 AM, Wilf wrote:
>>> On 07/11/2023 at 08:29, AllanH wrote:
>>>> "Betterbird is better than Thunderbird in three ways: It contains new
>>>> features exclusive to Betterbird, it contains bug fixes exclusive to
>>>> Betterbird and it contains fixes that Thunderbird may ship at a later
>>>> stage.
>>>>
>>>> You can install Betterbird at the same time as Thunderbird and run them
>>>> on the same profile. That means that you can try out Betterbird with
>>>> zero hassle, and go back to Thunderbird if you don't like it - which is
>>>> unlikely."
>>>>
>>>> Portable Version available
>>>>
>>>> Home Page
>>>> https://www.betterbird.eu/
>>>>
>>>> Release Notes
>>>> https://www.betterbird.eu/releasenotes/index.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Norton complains about Betterbird.  Not sure why?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> False Positive. Kaspersky never complains.
>                   ^^^^^^^^^
> Oh Lord! Even more Snake Oil!
> Is braking your system to the speed of of your PC to the one a
> generation before or even two.
>

Please calm down.
I only use the Kaspersky Virus Removal Tool, an On-Demand Scanner.
I haven't had any need for an installed AV in many years.

On 11/7/2023 6:46 AM, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 07.11.23 um 12:02 schrieb Wilf:
>> On 07/11/2023 at 08:29, AllanH wrote:
>>> "Betterbird is better than Thunderbird in three ways: It contains new
>>> features exclusive to Betterbird, it contains bug fixes exclusive to
>>> Betterbird and it contains fixes that Thunderbird may ship at a later stage.
>>>
>>> You can install Betterbird at the same time as Thunderbird and run them
>>> on the same profile. That means that you can try out Betterbird with
>>> zero hassle, and go back to Thunderbird if you don't like it - which is
>>> unlikely."
>>>     
>>> Portable Version available
>>>
>>> Home Page
>>> https://www.betterbird.eu/
>>>
>>> Release Notes
>>> https://www.betterbird.eu/releasenotes/index.html
>>
>>
>> Norton complains about Betterbird.  Not sure why?
> ^^^^^^^^^
>
> Snake Oil! Throw it away!
> Why are you using such crap?
>

Sometimes the ISP provides stuff like Norton. That's how it gets on machines.

*******

Preliminary scan looks good.

Yet, scanners I expected to "complete the scan", did not.

https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/f3a1d195986f866f7f3b3d45d8abd2ecf529c19e89b52868ce040037527291e5

There is nothing about the file in question, which is "taxing".
This is easy to unpack. More of the scanners should have finished
their scan. Some executables are protected by two packers, and
those can be nasty. Many AVs have full and complete unpacker sets
(more than 30 of them), and they are ready for anything. Only the
inferior scanners, can't even get the file open. If you can't get *this*
file open, you should close your AV business.

Name: betterbird-115.4.2-bb17.en-US.win64.installer.exe
Size: 58,051,765 bytes (55 MiB)
SHA256: F3A1D195986F866F7F3B3D45D8ABD2ECF529C19E89B52868CE040037527291E5

Paul

On 07/11/2023 at 11:46, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 07.11.23 um 12:02 schrieb Wilf:
>> On 07/11/2023 at 08:29, AllanH wrote:
>>> "Betterbird is better than Thunderbird in three ways: It contains new
>>> features exclusive to Betterbird, it contains bug fixes exclusive to
>>> Betterbird and it contains fixes that Thunderbird may ship at a later stage.
>>>
>>> You can install Betterbird at the same time as Thunderbird and run them
>>> on the same profile. That means that you can try out Betterbird with
>>> zero hassle, and go back to Thunderbird if you don't like it - which is
>>> unlikely."
>>>
>>> Portable Version available
>>>
>>> Home Page
>>> https://www.betterbird.eu/
>>>
>>> Release Notes
>>> https://www.betterbird.eu/releasenotes/index.html
>>
>>
>> Norton complains about Betterbird. Not sure why?
> ^^^^^^^^^
>
> Snake Oil! Throw it away!
> Why are you using such crap?
>

It's offered free with my ISP. Would I be better off with Windows
Defender?

--
Wilf

Am 07.11.23 um 16:29 schrieb Paul:
> On 11/7/2023 6:46 AM, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>> Am 07.11.23 um 12:02 schrieb Wilf:
>>> Norton complains about Betterbird.  Not sure why?
>> ^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> Snake Oil! Throw it away!
>> Why are you using such crap?
>>
>
> Sometimes the ISP provides stuff like Norton. That's how it gets on machines.

But it has to be installed by the user.

--
Ave! Morituri te salutant!

Am 07.11.23 um 17:21 schrieb Wilf:
> On 07/11/2023 at 11:46, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>> Am 07.11.23 um 12:02 schrieb Wilf:
>>> Norton complains about Betterbird. Not sure why?
>> ^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> Snake Oil! Throw it away!
>> Why are you using such crap?
>>
>
> It's offered free with my ISP. Would I be better off with Windows
> Defender?

Yes, if you think you need an AV. What do you think who knows best your
Windows?

--
Ave! Morituri te salutant!

On 11/7/2023 11:21 AM, Wilf wrote:
> On 07/11/2023 at 11:46, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

>>> Norton complains about Betterbird.  Not sure why?
>> ^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> Snake Oil! Throw it away!
>> Why are you using such crap?
>>
>
> It's offered free with my ISP.   Would I be better off with Windows Defender?

One of the problems with tests like this, is ascertaining exactly what
AV product was tested.

But at least, AV-comparatives is an attempt at comparing AV products, head to head.

https://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/avc_per_2023_10.pdf

This is real-time protection.

https://www.av-comparatives.org/tests/real-world-protection-test-february-may-2023/

Avast, AVG, Avira, Microsoft, 519 – 1 99.8% 1
F-Secure, G Data, TotalDefense

Norton 518 – 2 99.6% 1

Norton isn't as bad as ClamAV :-)

*******

The other aspect is the UI and behavior of the product.
You could look for a review from PCMag or similar, and
see what it says about whether they handle the interface
well or not. The AV-Comparatives is mainly interested in
the engine. For example, if a product flags a new EXE based
on Reputation, it should say that, in plain English, so the
operator of the computer knows what the risk is.

*******

Microsoft allowed me to visit this site, but it reacted when
I tried to copy the string into Notepad and save the string as "test.txt".
It's possibly MalwareBytes, that does not flag this one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EICAR_test_file

Paul

Am 07.11.23 um 18:09 schrieb Paul:
> It's possibly MalwareBytes, that does not flag this one.

LOL. Worse than all AVs together!

--
Ave! Morituri te salutant!

On 11/7/2023 12:45 PM, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 07.11.23 um 18:09 schrieb Paul:
>> It's possibly MalwareBytes, that does not flag this one.
>
> LOL. Worse than all AVs together!
>

For EICAR, it's a design decision by them.

I like using EICAR, just to see if the plumbing on the AV is working.

Microsoft flags ProduKey, and I bet Norton does not flag that and
make a fuss.

Paul

On 07/11/2023 at 16:56, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 07.11.23 um 17:21 schrieb Wilf:
>> On 07/11/2023 at 11:46, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Am 07.11.23 um 12:02 schrieb Wilf:
>>>> Norton complains about Betterbird. Not sure why?
>>> ^^^^^^^^^
>>>
>>> Snake Oil! Throw it away!
>>> Why are you using such crap?
>>>
>>
>> It's offered free with my ISP. Would I be better off with Windows
>> Defender?
>
> Yes, if you think you need an AV. What do you think who knows best your
> Windows?
>

Well I'm pretty au fait with Windows 11 but I'm no expert so thought
that it would be a good idea to have some protection. Should I just
uninstall Norton and get rid of Defender? I don't really understand
what you're suggesting.

--
Wilf

On 11/8/2023 6:19 AM, Wilf wrote:
> On 07/11/2023 at 16:56, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>> Am 07.11.23 um 17:21 schrieb Wilf:
>>> On 07/11/2023 at 11:46, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>>>> Am 07.11.23 um 12:02 schrieb Wilf:
>>>>> Norton complains about Betterbird.  Not sure why?
>>>> ^^^^^^^^^
>>>>
>>>> Snake Oil! Throw it away!
>>>> Why are you using such crap?
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's offered free with my ISP.   Would I be better off with Windows
>>> Defender?
>>
>> Yes, if you think you need an AV. What do you think who knows best your
>> Windows?
>>
>
> Well I'm pretty au fait with Windows 11 but I'm no expert so thought that it would be a good idea to have some protection.  Should I just uninstall Norton and get rid of Defender?  I don't really understand what you're suggesting.
>

If you remove Norton, the OS should revert to Windows Defender.

Some third-party AV products, you go to Programs and Features, remove
the product there, then a Cleaner such as this one is used. Whether
the Cleaner does the whole job, or it relies on the Uninstaller,
the instructions should say which type of Cleaner it is. A few AV products,
have no cleaner at all.

https://support.norton.com/sp/en/us/home/current/solutions/v60392881

Windows Defender is controlled by a registry location, which third party
AVs "camp in" to indicate they are taking over. Windows Defender doesn't
seem to run in parallel with Norton. As long as the uninstaller and a cleaner,
restore the registry location to its default condition, then Windows Defender should work.

You can test Windows Defender with the EICAR Wikipedia string, paste
in a text file and try and save. And it should delete the file.
And present a notification.

Each program has obnoxious behavior when a detection is made.
Windows Defender is not Prince Charming, and will annoy you if
you don't do what it says. I had to remove ProduKey off C: to
stop the hounding. I don't know what Norton is like, when a positive
is found. I tried to tell it to "leave ProduKey alone" (it is classified
as hackerware and is not malware), and WD would not listen to me.

Windows Defender has an Exclusions setting, and for performance-related
issues, you can keep it out of any folder that has a couple hundred thousand
files in it. Some programs, when they start, are significantly delayed by
scanning activity going on.

windows Defender is not "zero weight" either. If I run HashDeep and
generate checksums for the entire C: drive, Windows Defender interferes
with the I/O and "reads every file" that hashdeep is reading. This
slows the rate of progress to 12% of normal. You might also notice
weirdness when copying files. It's either a System Write Cache discipline
problem, or Windows Defender is acting up.

But the one difference is, the BetterBird download did not trigger a
"Reputational" detection by WD ("hey, we've never seen this before")
and it scanned the file and found 7331 files inside it. This
indicates the unpacking of the file was not difficult for it.
Sometimes the file count is wrong, as it may detect "things" inside
files it is treating as files, when they are not traditional files.

Windows Defender has "Cloud-Detected Protection" and "Sample Submission",
and presumably instead of just scanning with signatures, for those
it will send a checksum to Microsoft, and command an upload of the
file, to be added to their "collection".

[Picture]

https://i.postimg.cc/sxHh1vwD/windows-defender-controls.gif

Sometimes the interface on that dialog, is just a white sheet without
text. Or, some part of the engine "won't start up". These things
usually get resolved, whatever the problem is. I think I've tested
in the past, and a reboot does not make the white screen one go away.

Paul

On 08/11/2023 at 13:03, Paul wrote:
> On 11/8/2023 6:19 AM, Wilf wrote:
>> On 07/11/2023 at 16:56, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Am 07.11.23 um 17:21 schrieb Wilf:
>>>> On 07/11/2023 at 11:46, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>>>>> Am 07.11.23 um 12:02 schrieb Wilf:
>>>>>> Norton complains about Betterbird.  Not sure why?
>>>>> ^^^^^^^^^
>>>>>
>>>>> Snake Oil! Throw it away!
>>>>> Why are you using such crap?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's offered free with my ISP.   Would I be better off with Windows
>>>> Defender?
>>>
>>> Yes, if you think you need an AV. What do you think who knows best your
>>> Windows?
>>>
>>
>> Well I'm pretty au fait with Windows 11 but I'm no expert so thought that it would be a good idea to have some protection.  Should I just uninstall Norton and get rid of Defender?  I don't really understand what you're suggesting.
>>
>
> If you remove Norton, the OS should revert to Windows Defender.
>
> Some third-party AV products, you go to Programs and Features, remove
> the product there, then a Cleaner such as this one is used. Whether
> the Cleaner does the whole job, or it relies on the Uninstaller,
> the instructions should say which type of Cleaner it is. A few AV products,
> have no cleaner at all.
>
> https://support.norton.com/sp/en/us/home/current/solutions/v60392881
>
> Windows Defender is controlled by a registry location, which third party
> AVs "camp in" to indicate they are taking over. Windows Defender doesn't
> seem to run in parallel with Norton. As long as the uninstaller and a cleaner,
> restore the registry location to its default condition, then Windows Defender should work.
>
> You can test Windows Defender with the EICAR Wikipedia string, paste
> in a text file and try and save. And it should delete the file.
> And present a notification.
>
> Each program has obnoxious behavior when a detection is made.
> Windows Defender is not Prince Charming, and will annoy you if
> you don't do what it says. I had to remove ProduKey off C: to
> stop the hounding. I don't know what Norton is like, when a positive
> is found. I tried to tell it to "leave ProduKey alone" (it is classified
> as hackerware and is not malware), and WD would not listen to me.
>
> Windows Defender has an Exclusions setting, and for performance-related
> issues, you can keep it out of any folder that has a couple hundred thousand
> files in it. Some programs, when they start, are significantly delayed by
> scanning activity going on.
>
> windows Defender is not "zero weight" either. If I run HashDeep and
> generate checksums for the entire C: drive, Windows Defender interferes
> with the I/O and "reads every file" that hashdeep is reading. This
> slows the rate of progress to 12% of normal. You might also notice
> weirdness when copying files. It's either a System Write Cache discipline
> problem, or Windows Defender is acting up.
>
> But the one difference is, the BetterBird download did not trigger a
> "Reputational" detection by WD ("hey, we've never seen this before")
> and it scanned the file and found 7331 files inside it. This
> indicates the unpacking of the file was not difficult for it.
> Sometimes the file count is wrong, as it may detect "things" inside
> files it is treating as files, when they are not traditional files.
>
> Windows Defender has "Cloud-Detected Protection" and "Sample Submission",
> and presumably instead of just scanning with signatures, for those
> it will send a checksum to Microsoft, and command an upload of the
> file, to be added to their "collection".
>
> [Picture]
>
> https://i.postimg.cc/sxHh1vwD/windows-defender-controls.gif
>
> Sometimes the interface on that dialog, is just a white sheet without
> text. Or, some part of the engine "won't start up". These things
> usually get resolved, whatever the problem is. I think I've tested
> in the past, and a reboot does not make the white screen one go away.
>
> Paul

Thank you, but I'm still confused. Are you recommending I use Defender
instead of Norton? Happy to do so as long as it's considered to be a
good option.

--
Wilf

On 08.11.23 14:22, Wilf wrote:
> Thank you, but I'm still confused. Are you recommending I use Defender
> instead of Norton? Happy to do so as long as it's considered to be a
> good option.

The best you have. Nobody knows this OS better than $MS$.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

On 08/11/2023 at 17:37, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> On 08.11.23 14:22, Wilf wrote:
>> Thank you, but I'm still confused. Are you recommending I use Defender
>> instead of Norton? Happy to do so as long as it's considered to be a
>> good option.
>
> The best you have. Nobody knows this OS better than $MS$.
>

Thank you.

--
Wilf

On 11/8/2023 8:22 AM, Wilf wrote:

>
> Thank you, but I'm still confused.  Are you recommending I use Defender instead of Norton?   Happy to do so as long as it's considered to be a good option.
>

They are roughly equal, at the engine level.

It is the interface, which is a "personal taste" issue.

If you find reputational flagging of files to be obnoxious,
you could change AV in that case.

You might find Windows Defender equally annoying.

If I could not define an Exclusion, and have my AV leave
a file alone, I would be pissed.

With software, there is no guarantee you'd be happy with any
of them.

I've only had (obvious) malware on a computer once. It
came in via a web browser. The site I was visiting, was
the main URL of a motherboard company for computers. Two
of the majors were hacked the same day. I missed getting
infected on one of the sites, but in the other case, they
were hacked and a redirect placed at the top level, two
hours before I got there. If you have safe-hex practices,
you scan new files on Virustotal and so on, you might not
need an AV, but the web browser (or an email attachment)
are the single biggest risks on the computer. and as for
the signature scanning done on Virustotal, there are
obviously limits to what it can detect.

Even my work, got malware one day. The company providing
our AV, wrote a custom malware remover within 24 hours and
that was our recovery time. This was before the "age of Ransomware".
Which is why we could escape.

You have to know where the threats come from, you have to
estimate your own skills, to decide what AV is "good enough".
For some individuals, there isn't an AV on this Earth
that could help them :-/ If a button said "Get Your Malware here",
they would click it. Sometimes I tell a person "the download
button is the green one", and they click the blue one instead.
Why do I even bother helping them ??? :-)

Summary: Continue using Norton. That's the "least effort" answer.
See if there is a setting you can use, to modify the
reputational analysis. You can also connect to www.virustotal.com
and have a Norton-flagged file, scanned there. For a second opinion.

Paul

Yes and, credit where credit is due, Betterbird is also free software
(software that respects a user's software freedom to run, inspect,
share, and modify the program at any time for any reason). So if
Betterbird isn't doing what you think it should do, or if you don't
trust it, you can get the source code and see what Betterbird does,
make changes, and (if you wish) share your improvements with others to
help them out.

AllanH <nospam@unokix.invalid> wrote:
> You can install Betterbird at the same time as Thunderbird and run them
> on the same profile. That means that you can try out Betterbird with
> zero hassle, and go back to Thunderbird if you don't like it - which is
> unlikely."

I've found it to be incredibly handy to use IMAP connections to the
same email account because you can see the changes you make with one
client reflected in another client in near realtime. This isn't
specific to Betterbird per se but something one can do with Betterbird
as well as other mail clients that work with IMAP.

J.B. Nicholson wrote:
> Yes and, credit where credit is due, Betterbird is also free software
> (software that respects a user's software freedom to run, inspect,
> share, and modify the program at any time for any reason). So if
> Betterbird isn't doing what you think it should do, or if you don't
> trust it, you can get the source code and see what Betterbird does,
> make changes, and (if you wish) share your improvements with others to
> help them out.
>

You can indeed do that, but it could lead you into a maze of complexity.
You'd have your own tailored version (passed on, maybe, to friends) and
then there'd be the "official" version. And any changes in the
"official" version would need to be known about, applied to your version
and then sent to friends.

Steer clear of that situation.

Ed

Ed Cryer wrote:
> J.B. Nicholson wrote:
>> Yes and, credit where credit is due, Betterbird is also free software
>> (software that respects a user's software freedom to run, inspect,
>> share, and modify the program at any time for any reason). So if
>> Betterbird isn't doing what you think it should do, or if you don't
>> trust it, you can get the source code and see what Betterbird does,
>> make changes, and (if you wish) share your improvements with others to
>> help them out.
>>
>
> You can indeed do that, but it could lead you into a maze of complexity.
> You'd have your own tailored version (passed on, maybe, to friends) and
> then there'd be the "official" version. And any changes in the
> "official" version would need to be known about, applied to your version
> and then sent to friends.
>
> Steer clear of that situation.
>
> Ed
>
>

The people running Betterbird show signs of excellent competence. See
their website for a start;
https://www.betterbird.eu/faq/index.html

I was particularly struck by this;

"Why Betterbird?

Betterbird aims at providing a better user experience by fixing annoying
bugs in Thunderbird and implementing new features. We will submit all
changes to upstream to eventually benefit Thunderbird. So far,
Thunderbird has accepted these changes recently (full list) with more
pending acceptance."

There's ongoing cooperation with Tbird, no sign of antagonistic rivalry;
and the maturity of outlook that shines from Betterbird gives me
confidence that it'll stay that way.

Ed

Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
> You can indeed do that, but it could lead you into a maze of
> complexity.

People have had no problem managing this for decades. Democracy is
complex. Software freedom is not something to be feared and we are not
better served by treating free software as though the software were
non-free by not leveraging our freedom when we find it
necessary. After all, that is how Betterbird came to be in the first
place.

J.B. Nicholson wrote:
> Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
>> You can indeed do that, but it could lead you into a maze of
>> complexity.
>
> People have had no problem managing this for decades. Democracy is
> complex. Software freedom is not something to be feared and we are not
> better served by treating free software as though the software were
> non-free by not leveraging our freedom when we find it
> necessary. After all, that is how Betterbird came to be in the first
> place.

Yes, but Betterbird gets all T.bird updates passed down; all
improvements, bug fixes, security fixes.
If you hive off a version of your own, ok you're on Freedom Road. But
your version will soon be inferior to Betterbird.

Ed

Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
> If you hive off a version of your own, ok you're on Freedom
> Road. But your version will soon be inferior to Betterbird.

Maybe for you that's true because perhaps you're not a software
developer. But you have no evidence that is true for others, even
others who don't know programming now but are willing to learn as they
edit code. That's how all programmers started out, after all, even
Betterbird's programmers.

Your unbacked claim is also a false dichotomy: "inferior" is a vague
comparison that isn't for you to determine for others. You pointed out
that Betterbird does inherit code from Thunderbird and include
modifications all its own. Nothing stops anyone else from doing more
of the same; making their derivative to their own liking.

There's simply no magic to Betterbird's development here that would,
by design, fail for anyone else to leverage their software freedom but
remain a valid and reasonable thing for Betterbird to leverage. Your
scare talk doesn't convince me at all, there's no reason to try to get
software freedom to seem like non-free software dependency.