Paul Thurrott's SuperSite for Windows
Home > Type > News > Thunderbird 3 Beta 1

Thunderbird 3 Beta 1

Dec. 10, 2008 Paul Thurrott | Paul Thurrott's Supersite for Windows

Mozilla Messaging has released their first milestone preview of Thunderbird 3, the Mozilla-based email client:

Thunderbird 3 Beta 1 is now available for download. This milestone is focused on testing the core functionality of the new features and platform changes that will be included in Thunderbird 3. Thunderbird 3 Beta 1 includes new database technology that will make it possible to build fast new ways of navigating mail. For more background and for previews of experimental add-ons, visit this blog post.

New features and changes in this milestone that require feedback include:

  • Tab interface for Mail
  • Improvements to IMAP for faster message viewing
  • Improved message reader view
  • New Add-ons Manager
  • Improved Address Book interface
  • Improved import of mail from other Mail clients
  • Integration with Windows Vista search
  • Integration with Mac OS X Address Book

Mozilla Messaging’s David Ascher has some more information as well:

In some ways, this is a typical beta — we’ve changed a lot of code since Thunderbird 2, and we need a lot of people to tell us if we’ve made any boo-boos when fixing bugs. It’s also a good beta in that we’ve moved the product forward, in part thanks to new capabilities in the underlying Mozilla platform, which gives us faster performance all around, an add-on manager which will be even more useful for Thunderbird users than for Firefox users. We also have important new mail-specific capabilities, including a new “autosync” system that gets Thunderbird to download IMAP message bodies early, so they’re already there when you need them, and a much faster implementation for deleting and moving IMAP messages, which I can’t imagine living without at this point. The one-click add-to-addressbook is also an elegant and shameless ripoff of the Firefox bookmarking model, which our alpha users love.

Discuss this Article 82

benjwah
on Dec 10, 2008
snore. Thunderbird? More like... stupid... bird. Anyway, Thunderbird, who cares?
DRWAM
on Dec 10, 2008
Not even I would install this on my $400 Vista laptop;)
Lindy
on Dec 10, 2008
Who cares? Thunderbird is very popular because of its REAL IMAP support. Ever use Outlook with a IMAP account? What a joke. Anyhow Thunderbird is great if you move between Windows/OS X/Linux, especially now that it supports the address book in OS X. Once client for that looks and works the same across all platforms, sort of like FF3. BTW FF3.1beta2 is smokin fast.
shark47
on Dec 10, 2008
"Thunderbird is very popular because of its REAL IMAP support. Ever use Outlook with a IMAP account? What a joke." Who cares?
gorath
on Dec 10, 2008
I care, I've been using thunderbird as my main personal email client for some time now, on Windows, Unix, and OSX. However, I can already search my emails using vista's built in search, I might have some kind of add-on that enables that I suppose, but I don't remember specifically installing anything.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 10, 2008
Lindy "Thunderbird is very popular" Really? No smiley on that? Care to explain how you define "very popular" because if Thunderbird qualifies you're using some definition I was previously unaware of. I seem to recall Thunderbird has a bit over 2% share of the mail client market. That make this "very popular" program even more of a niche product than Macintosh. It makes it wildly less popular than Zune so you must think that the Zune is "extremely popular" or maybe "incredibly popular".. OK, Thunderbird IS more popular than Linux desktops but then, I suspect, influenza is more popular than Linux desktops.
Lindy
on Dec 10, 2008
@shark47 yeah I forgot you use POP3 with msn/hotmail/livemail/outlook/oulookexpress/Vista Mail/Live Mail....and Windows Mobile. Do you have much time in your day to anything after you keep those in sync manually? Here is another great multi OS email/calendar/contacts app.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_%28software%29
Lindy
on Dec 10, 2008
Microsoft Mikey like clock work. I am surprised you are out today, must have finished Tuesday patching early? It was not bad this round my Vista VM only bitched about 5-6. Oh I think they missed one.... http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-10120341-83.html?tag=newsEditorsPicksAr...
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 10, 2008
Lindy Ah, a personal attack and a subject change rather than answering the question. Guess you're filling in for robertsjoe until he gets out of school. We'll be watching for you to start refering to the "wildly successful Zune" whenever you mention it from now on.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 10, 2008
Or, maybe the rest of us should just say "Zune (which Lindy calls wildly successful)" everytime we mention it.
shark47
on Dec 10, 2008
"It was not bad this round my Vista VM only bitched about 5-6. Oh I think they missed one...." First of all, nice way to change the topic. Secondly, how did you miss this? "The user must be running Windows XP or Windows Server 2003, and using Internet Explorer 7."
shark47
on Dec 10, 2008
"@shark47 yeah I forgot you use POP3 with msn/hotmail/livemail/outlook/oulookexpress/Vista Mail/Live Mail....and Windows Mobile. Do you have much time in your day to anything after you keep those in sync manually? Here is another great multi OS email/calendar/contacts app...." Well, to be fair, I don't use a mail client other than Outlook (on my office laptop), so, this one's not for me. :) I used to use Thunderbird as a grad student, but that was years ago.
Lindy
on Dec 10, 2008
"Ah, a personal attack and a subject change rather than answering the question. Guess you're filling in for robertsjoe until he gets out of school." Mike you calling someone out on a subject change so as not to answer a question....FRAKING hilarious. You are the unchallenged king of subject change and spewing BS and NEVER backing it up with anything. You have been called to the table at least a dozen times. I have no links on how popular Thunderbird is, but lets just say this Paul posted in his blog about it on the Winsupersite. Gorath echoed what I said. Zune...how did we get on that subject??? Oh that's right you went there. mikegalos@mson.com = http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wintard&defid=2071502 I would pay good money if that site posted your picture you use here on next to that definition. "The user must be running Windows XP or Windows Server 2003, and using Internet Explorer 7." Nope did not miss a thing. There were updates for a XP, 2003 and Vista yesterday. There is not fix for that bug yet genius, and when there is I am pretty sure it will only apply to XP and 2003...or so they say that now.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 10, 2008
Lindy, Since you probably missed it while trying to figure out how to change the subject to bashing Microsoft, I'll repeat for your benefit: -------------- "Thunderbird is very popular" Really? No smiley on that? Care to explain how you define "very popular" because if Thunderbird qualifies you're using some definition I was previously unaware of.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 10, 2008
Oh, and I think that's supposed to read "Zune (which Lindy calls wildly successful)... how did we get on that subject??? "
Lindy
on Dec 10, 2008
Very popular the opposite of very un-popular. For un-popular see the nearest mirror.
shark47
on Dec 10, 2008
"wintard One who uses Microsoft Windows and or any Microsoft products. " What a definition!!
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 10, 2008
Lindy, Your sense of self importance has you confused again. What you see in a mirror isn't what the rest of us see. And, again. I'm guessing that since you didn't write it you didn't bother reading it: -------------- "Thunderbird is very popular" Really? No smiley on that? Care to explain how you define "very popular" because if Thunderbird qualifies you're using some definition I was previously unaware of.
Shmanky
on Dec 10, 2008
I care. Thanks for letting me know Thunderbird 3 has gone into beta. I find it to be the best free e-mail application because of its new-mail notifications and the way it groups e-mail by "Today," "Yesterday," and "Old Mail."
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 10, 2008
FYI: Grouping mail by "Today", "Yesterday", "Last week", "Older", etc. is also a feature of Outlook. (Just in case anyone thought it was a unique feature of Thunderbird)
tayme
on Dec 10, 2008
I haven't used Thunderbird in a while, but it used to be pretty good. I use Outlook on my Windows PCs and Entourage on my Mac. Both have the "Group by" feature. I don't read email on the other OSes that I use. I doubt if I try this version, though. --tayme
whiplash55
on Dec 10, 2008
People who use terms such as Wintard or anything tard over arguments about freakin operating systems are what we in public service call "Adam Henry's".
johnbaxter
on Dec 10, 2008
I bailed from Thunderbird primarily because it doesn't (at least without extensions I didn't bother looking for) arrange to quote only selected parts of the message being replied to. (Most clients manage that either as the default or with a simple extra action like shift plus the reply action.) It has some other problems which tend to keep me away from it. So, when Thunderbird 3 is more nearly done (by their description, it is a "beta" only by the incredibly lax standards as to what that means in many circles these days), I will kick its tires again. I'm not sure why I would use it, though--the tire-kicking could convince me. All that said, it is good to see progress on the Thunderbird front.
alamfour
on Dec 10, 2008
mike and shark47, just grow up and shooting each other on the supersite blog. You have your differences, fine, just don't involve the rest of us in it. In regard to the topic here, THUNDERBIRD 3, it is great to see progress. Personally thunderbird 2 was useless. Evolution was a better product for me. I will give thunderbird 3 a try but I doubt it will change my mind. I personally am now fully using outlook to manage all 3 of my email accounts.
Raf
on Dec 10, 2008
Does it help the argument if I say I use Thunderbird religiously? It's simple, free, and Just Works(tm). I'm looking forward to trying this new beta out.
millia
on Dec 11, 2008
Aside from all the name calling, and the market share debates, etc., here's the simple fact: Debating market share for mail programs is beginning to look like debating buggy whip qualities: it's useful to a certain subset of the population, but most people drive a car. I recently set up t-bird for a person, and they were AMAZED that you could get your mail some other way than through a browser. Even here at the office, I have co-workers who prefer to aggregate mail inside a browser than use any multiple-account mail program. Mail programs are becoming increasingly irrelevant. It's a shame, really. The competition is good, they're all getting better, and most everybody has moved on to IMAP so that it's relatively painless to try the different programs. Ah well. Glad to see t-bird improving.
Waethorn
on Dec 11, 2008
Who the F* uses IMAP, when all mail clients software programs support leaving messages on the server, and have for years now???
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 11, 2008
millia Market share really isn't important to the debate. Telling people a product is popular when it isn't, however, is a problem because it frames the debate based on a false premise. I agree that people going to web based clients is a shame. As good as web access is, and even with its benefits, even the best web clients are still nowhere near as rich as the local clients like Thunderbird or Outlook (or Live Mail).
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 11, 2008
Waethorn "Who the F* uses IMAP, when all mail clients software programs support leaving messages on the server, and have for years now???" GMail users seem to use Google's version of IMAP a lot. Unfortunately, while Google using IMAP has increased people being aware of the protocol, their quirky implementation has the same people often thinking that GMail IMAP is how the protocol is supposed to work.
Waethorn
on Dec 11, 2008
@mike: Gmail is supposed to support POP3 already anyway, so again the question stands.
Delmont
on Dec 11, 2008
Waethron: I agree, what is the hype about IMAP? Just use POP3. Lindy: I think your mom is calling, time to do your chores. Also, I will never give up Outlook. Untill you can get me 150gig online storage to move my pst/ost file to...I'm keeping Outlook. Plus...I still don't trust the "cloud" enough to store ALL my emails that I've kept for the past 14 years via Outlook. Plus, I want someday to have one unique identifier for me that routes all my cell phone traffic, IM traffic, email traffic and twitter traffic all to one device. And that routing of those different protocols/forms of communication are invisible to the senders. All everyone should have is just one unique identifier to contact me, for everything. I think Bill G. has talked about this.
tayme
on Dec 11, 2008
@mikegalos - "...their quirky implementation has the same people often thinking that GMail IMAP is how the protocol is supposed to work." If most users of IMAP are on gmail, would that not make it the "standard" implementation of IMAP...much like you have said that IE's rendering of web pages is the "standard" in the past? Now, like others...I would say...just use POP3, but for consistency's sake, I'm just saying.... --tayme
lotsamystuff
on Dec 11, 2008
"Who the F* uses IMAP, when all mail clients software programs support leaving messages on the server, and have for years now???" Does putting three question marks at the end indicate that you're really serious? Or is that what they teach in Canadian schools these days? IMAP is ideal if you're managing multiple accounts from multiple computers and want to keep everything synchronized, it's great for collaboration, it's fast, and as someone else pointed out, it just works. I'm sure you know this already. Aren't you supposed to be all about "choice", Waethorn? Why the hostility? Oh, that's right. This article is about Thunderbird, a non-Microsoft product. That explains it.
tayme
on Dec 11, 2008
@Delmmont - "store ALL my emails that I've kept for the past 14 years via Outlook" Really??? Wow! I thought I was bad. I keep 3 years worth of email. I figure if it is older than that...I don't need it any longer. --tayme
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 11, 2008
tayme For consistency's sake, I have no problem with people calling GMail's IMAP the "de facto standard". None at all. But, then, also for consistency's sake, those same people shouldn't talk about how they like GMail because of its support of standards. I'm really fine either way. De facto standards have some huge benefits as do de jure standards at differing stages of a protocol's or product's life.
Waethorn
on Dec 11, 2008
"Does putting three question marks at the end indicate that you're really serious? Or is that what they teach in Canadian schools these days?" One word: nucular. That says it all. "IMAP is ideal if you're managing multiple accounts from multiple computers and want to keep everything synchronized, it's great for collaboration, it's fast, and as someone else pointed out, it just works." So does POP3 with the option to store messages on the server. Nothing you mention is unique to IMAP, and yet more mail clients support POP3. Your smugness knows no bounds.
WebGuy3000
on Dec 11, 2008
I don't understand the negativity about IMAP either. I check a bunch of different email accounts from a bunch of different computers. With IMAP, which emails have been read, and all your sent items, are always consistent from ccmputer to computer. You know, like Exchange? That's a good thing. For me anyway. Plus, pretty much all email clients give you the option to keep a local copy of all messages if you're paranoid about non-local storage issue.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 11, 2008
tayme "I keep 3 years worth of email. I figure if it is older than that...I don't need it any longer." You've obviously never had to deal with a DOJ anti-trust case... :-)
Waethorn
on Dec 11, 2008
"de jure" Speaking of wordplay.... Does anyone notice that this looks suspiciously like the French term "du jour", meaning "of the day"? Taken in context, one can take the existing "standards" (which nobody adheres to) and satirize them by calling them the "standards du jour".
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 11, 2008
"So does POP3 with the option to store messages on the server. " Unless you're using GMail. In which case you pretty much have to use their IMAP because their "quirky" way of handling the inbox doesn't work correctly with accessing mail that's been read with their POP3 implementation.
lotsamystuff
on Dec 11, 2008
@"waethorn": Answer the question. Why are you anti-choice and hostile towards IMAP? It's a protocol, for heaven's sake, not a religion. "Your smugness knows no bounds." Pot, meet kettle. @tayme: "I keep 3 years worth of email. I figure if it is older than that...I don't need it any longer." I still have all my 9/11 mail archived. It's interesting from a historical standpoint to go back and read the initial reactions to that event. "If most users of IMAP are on gmail, would that not make it the "standard" implementation of IMAP...much like you have said that IE's rendering of web pages is the "standard" in the past?" Interesting distinction. I guess "mikegalos" has no problem with Apple's Protected AAC being the "standard" for legal online music since, you know, they're the world's largest music retailer now. ;-) (And yes, "mikegalos", I put "standard" in quotes just for you!)
Waethorn
on Dec 11, 2008
@losta: I can't stand IMAP because it's NOT fast (despite your false claims to the opposite), and not implemented correctly by most mail client programs. POP3 is both fast and hasn't been implemented incorrectly by any recent mail client program. It also works better in offline states.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 11, 2008
lotsa Instead of speculating on what I'd say, maybe you could read what I actually said a few messages earlier. I have no problem with somebody saying that Apple's protected AAC is a de facto standard. I DO have a problem with somebody saying it is THE standard because there are others. And I have no problem with people saying something like "GMail's IMAP is now the defacto standard for IMAP" but I do have a problem with people saying "I like (or dislike) IMAP because..." and then saying something that's specific to GMail. And I have a problem with people saying things like "X is a bad product because it doesn't support IMAP" when what they mean is "I don't like X because it supports IMAP rather than GMail's IMAP" It's really a clarity issue and about not teaching people things that are wrong.
lotsamystuff
on Dec 11, 2008
"I have no problem with somebody saying that Apple's protected AAC is a de facto standard." I know. That's what I said. Hence my use of the quote marks in "standard". It's just fun to poke you with a sharp stick and watch you spring to life. "Instead of speculating on what I'd say, maybe you could read what I actually said a few messages earlier." It's tough to do that when I'm composing my e-mail as yours is being posted. ;-) FWIW, "mikegalos", I absolutely agree with you.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 11, 2008
Actually, now that I think about it, I would have a problem with saying, "GMail's IMAP is now the defacto standard for IMAP" until somebody has actual data. It may be. It may not be. Given that GMail is still only a tiny provider for email, it may well be the case that there are more people using non-Google IMAP. In which case, it would be better to say ""GMail's IMAP is a non-standard implementation of IMAP that some mail clients support" Again, clarity is what's important.
Lindy
on Dec 11, 2008
"So does POP3 with the option to store messages on the server. Nothing you mention is unique to IMAP, and yet more mail clients support POP3." Amateurs R - US POP3 is THE most limited email method/protocol. Sure you can leave email on the server, not a function of POP3 more of server feature. So you POP down email, delete some, forward some etc. If you keep it on the server as well then you MUST manage it as well, especially if you have a limit which is less of a concern today with larger mailboxes being a selling point if you will. IMAP, even GMAIL's version of it from a users perspective is a like having Exchange minus the push. If you used a PC with Outlook, thunderbird whatever and deleted email, sent mail etc, then when to the web site did more stuff, then went to a Mac and did more then went to Linux and did more, and then use a mobile device to further manipulate your email it would all be in Sync at each location using IMAP. Yahoo offers IMAP now as well, via the excellent Zimbra Desktop tool, with multi OS support. http://www.zimbra.com/products/desktop.html Yahoo even has free PUSH email to the iPhone. Maybe someday hotmail/msn/live mail will offer it. Doubtful they will open it up to non-MS imap clients, they will probably make it work with Live/Outlook products. Also free IMAP access to hotmail/msn/live mail would cut into hosted Exchange for individuals consumers.
Lindy
on Dec 11, 2008
Mike why do you need data, you never provide any.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 11, 2008
Lindy Actually, I provide more data than just about anyone on here besides Paul. I suspect you're just confusing "data" with "data you like"
mikegalos@msn.com
on Dec 11, 2008
lotsa "It's tough to do that when I'm composing my e-mail as yours is being posted. ;-)" Sounds like you could fix that problem by not speculating on what other people think and just posting when you actually have something to add.
shark47
on Dec 11, 2008
Microsoft has its own standard with HotMail - DeltaSync. It actually works really well with Outlook or Live Mail. What does it matter whether MS supports IMAP or not when each company seems to have its own quirky implementation. Yahoo Mail IMAP is offered only through Zimbra. GMail is quirky, according to Mike.

Please or Register to post comments.

Related Articles

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use
Apr. 18, 2013
Article

What I Use: On the Road 20

Every so often, I publish an updated version of my “What I Use” document, which details the technology products and services I actually use day-to-day. Since I’m currently on my third business trip in five weeks, this is perhaps an ideal time to discuss the technology products I rely on when I travel and a few related points....More
Mar. 6, 2013
Article

What I Use: March 2013 33

Lots of changes since November, including a new PC-based home server running Windows 8, several new smart phones, new PCs and tablets, new cloud backup, Office 365 Home Premium and a nice doubling of my Internet speeds courtesy of Verizon FIOS....More
WinSuperSite.com
Related Penton Sites
Copyright © 2013 Penton Media, Inc