<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">I think Matt's main point is that for the vast majority of users
(which does not include power users), the web version of AMO causes
real problems, and it is far preferable that they use the in-product
interface to AMO.? That of course requires that there is great
functionality in the interface.
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Matt point is that he would remove browser access to AMO which is in my
opinion very bad move.
I agree it's not intuitive to install TB addon via browser, it sucks,
and nobody should do it that way. But I can't remember single addon I
discovered via Thunderbird UI, not one.
It was always Google and/or AMO search, then refining that into 1 - 3
addons that I think come close to what I want, then install each via
Thunderbird interface, test and delete those that didn't satisfy my needs.
And on the bad since, all SEO gathered from addons will be lost.
<p>I second Mihovil's comments. <br>
<p>For many years (it seems to be working now) there were some
extensions that the search field in tools -> add-ons ignored.
You had to either browse for them on the web site (using a
browser) or know to click on a link such as "see all" in tools
-> add-ons -> get add-ons so that you could browse for them
in a tab. Browsing for them in a tab in Thunderbird worked, but is
annoying as there is no back arrow or history. That can make some
It also seems wrong to have just one mechanism to find/install
add-ons, when there is such a variety of ways users prefer to work.
There is a reason why you can configure Thunderbird to read messages
in a tab, window or message pane for example.<br>