rolling Firefox back to 2.x

[Rashkae]

Mumia W. wrote:
> On 09/02/2008 02:58 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>> 2008/9/2 NoOp <glgxg at sbcglobal.net>:
>>> On 09/01/2008 10:29 PM, Steve Lamb wrote:
>>>
>>>>     I don't need the above.  I've been there.  I know the issues.  I work
>>>> around them.  I'd rather not have to hence my question to Dotan.  Please,
>>>> unless you have something *meaningful* to contribute, don't reply.
>>>>
>>> Not to worry, you'll see no further replys from me in the future.
>>>
>>>
>> Nik, I hope you realize that one of the most helpful people on this
>> list (and other lists that I subscribe to) just told you that he will
>> not help you anymore. You might want to rethink the way you word your
>> responses to those who are trying to help you.
>>
> 
> Steve Lamb is a very, very knowledgeable person in his own right, and he 
> helps (both here an in debian-user) far more people than from whom he 
> receives help. I read nothing from Steve in this thread that should have 
> offended anyone.
> 
> FX3 is flawed in several ways, and there will be much weeping when 
> security support for FX2 ends in December. I hope someone or some 
> organization is willing to step up to the plate and provide continuing 
> security support for FX2--even for money.
> 
> Mozilla's mismanagement of its flagship browser is going to make someone 
> rich.
> 
> 

Where do you get this from?  So far, most of the talk here is about
security issues with the new data storage, which is debatable, but for
most people is, probably just a red herring

And then is there version fatigue with the new Awesome bar.  I'm sure if
it were really such an issue for more than the smallest percentage of
users, there would *already* be an extension to replace this, and have
no doubt one will pop up soon in any event.