FossaMail doesn't offer anything that isn't already present in Thunderbird. And it would come with the added user confusion of not working on Windows XP and not working on later Windows versions where non-SSE2 processors are present. Plus, it would likely have the same extension compatibility issues that Pale Moon does. There's no reason to go through the work of packaging up Thunderbird with a different name and more issues.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
Oh, yes, you are absolutely right. I just thought that Fossamail could be faster than Thunderbird. But even if it really was it's not worthy to invest time in it making FossaMail portable for reasons you mentioned. Thanks for your explanation.
FossaMail doesn't offer anything that isn't already present in Thunderbird. And it would come with the added user confusion of not working on Windows XP and not working on later Windows versions where non-SSE2 processors are present. Plus, it would likely have the same extension compatibility issues that Pale Moon does. There's no reason to go through the work of packaging up Thunderbird with a different name and more issues.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
Oh, yes, you are absolutely right. I just thought that Fossamail could be faster than Thunderbird. But even if it really was it's not worthy to invest time in it making FossaMail portable for reasons you mentioned. Thanks for your explanation.
Pale Moon is slower than Firefox and FossaMail is based on Pale Moon, so FossaMail is likely not faster than Thunderbird.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!