Of course it may never get incredibly popular because many don't believe in it.
THey will proclaim that OUtlook was created 5000 computer years ago by the God of Redmond, and is all powerful. It is so perfect, it could not have been created by mere mortals. And we are doomed trying to replicate it. Never mind that it seems to be 'evolving' with each new release.
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
The creator of Evolution started the project specifically to develop an Outlook like application that would convince business that nonWindows options are worth a look. Business folk like things that look familiar as most people do especially when money is involved and an IT investement is money.
If your specifically going after the minds of an entrenched MS failthful market segment, it's wise to make your offering look familiar unless you got some serious design changes that are going to make that much of a difference.
If your question is more along the lines of why combine all the functions into one core app; I gotta admit, I really like Outlook on it's indavidual merits generally. It's really meant to be a business flow console more than an email client too so all the functions combined make sense.
The giant down side is the years of personal data I now have locked into Outlook dormant while I migrate to a cross platform option and look at ways to eventually move the data too.
Those would be my guesses anyhow.
If your specifically going after the minds of an entrenched MS failthful market segment, it's wise to make your offering look familiar unless you got some serious design changes that are going to make that much of a difference.
If your question is more along the lines of why combine all the functions into one core app; I gotta admit, I really like Outlook on it's indavidual merits generally. It's really meant to be a business flow console more than an email client too so all the functions combined make sense.
The giant down side is the years of personal data I now have locked into Outlook dormant while I migrate to a cross platform option and look at ways to eventually move the data too.
Those would be my guesses anyhow.
If one isn't going the open source route and Evolution looks and acts like Outlook along with a few wrinkles and poor Palm support, is there really a reason to adopt it?
Nope.
It's the age old open source problem. Make it as good but not better than the original and make it look and feel like the original and the user might as well use the original.
Nope.
It's the age old open source problem. Make it as good but not better than the original and make it look and feel like the original and the user might as well use the original.
The big difference here is User Interface vs. under the hood programing. Basically when a programmer is creating a program to compete against a Microsoft or Apple counterpart, it is certainly wise to use a similar ui design, given that people like to use what they are used to, and it does not hurt to use Redmond Experience in user interface, we have to admit they don't do it bad. But under the hood, that's another story, if you're developing a clone of a windows application then you try to give a better experience in the subtle details, like making it work faster, prettier icons, or being less a resource hog. That said, if you compare a linux desktop with a windows one, linux needs less resources and make a better use of ram, but certain applications as openoffice fall far behind the performance of their windows counterpart.
Bottom line: you copy windows ui, but the chance to be a better outlook than outlook is inside your app, and that's where evolution is better.
Bottom line: you copy windows ui, but the chance to be a better outlook than outlook is inside your app, and that's where evolution is better.
In application development, you don't re-invent the wheel when you don't have to. The Microsoft GUI is generally accepted and is (when they stop playing around with it) pretty intuitive. I would echo the comments about the under-the-hood part, however. Just because something looks like Outlook doesn't mean it is a clone - there's a huge difference between a 4-cylinder Mustang and a Mustang Cobra, yet they both look almost identical.
The other thing that should be pointed out is the cost factor - to get Outlook you have to pay $250 to get it included in the Office Suite. Evolution is free. And just as with OpenOffice, the question for businesses revolves around money: if you can get the same functionality without spending $250 a pop, why would you continue to spend the money?
The other thing that should be pointed out is the cost factor - to get Outlook you have to pay $250 to get it included in the Office Suite. Evolution is free. And just as with OpenOffice, the question for businesses revolves around money: if you can get the same functionality without spending $250 a pop, why would you continue to spend the money?
You can get Outlook in most, but not all, MS Office suites but it also used to come free with Exchange CALs. Probably not many noticed because folks who use Outlook generally use Office.
However, the free lunch ends with Exchange 2003. In Exchange 2008, one must not only buy the CAL, but also BUY an Outlook license unless one doesn't already have an Office suite that includes it.
When I was first told this, in response to a question I posed to MS, it made no sense at all. However, with Open Office getting better, it begins to make more sense: If I have to buy an Outlook license anyway, why not throw a few more bucks into the plate and get the whole suite?
However, the free lunch ends with Exchange 2003. In Exchange 2008, one must not only buy the CAL, but also BUY an Outlook license unless one doesn't already have an Office suite that includes it.
When I was first told this, in response to a question I posed to MS, it made no sense at all. However, with Open Office getting better, it begins to make more sense: If I have to buy an Outlook license anyway, why not throw a few more bucks into the plate and get the whole suite?
It's been in development for several years; Palm suppport is flaky; it apparently doesn't even support any other devices (like my old HP IPAQ); it MIGHT make better use of RAM (are you still using that old Altair micro with 256k Ram and no disk for swapping?); and it sort of works with Exchange. Wow -- what a bargain because it's free. All I have to do is settle for less functionality, and a possible performance improvement that could be addressed by buying another $20 worth of RAM. Maybe you have a chance of being better than Outlook, but this product (based on the review) certainly doesn't meet that goal. It's just another me-too school project ...
I agree with you in that its functionality is limited, and I have to apologize because I used evolution some years ago, therefore, outlook has grown up since then. Nevertheless, the problem I mention in memory use are not amount of used memory, but memory leaks. Basically, what happens in a memory leak is that a program does not return all the memory it used after it close. This was specially painful in Windows XP and previous, where you had to restart your machine every now and then to "clean it". (Note: I've been said that Vista handles that better). Linux (at least current kernels) don't suffer from that, either by mean of a garbage collector or better behaved programs. The memory leak problem WILL make you reboot from time to time, and I know by experience that Outlook suffered a clinic case of memory leaks. On the functionality point Touch?, you are most probably right, on the memory, a good programmer KNOWS the importance of memory efficiency so I will never agree in the philosophy of "just throw money at it to fix it" (no matter how cheap).
"If one is not going to go the open source route" indicates that one has already chosen (for any number of relevant reasons) to stay away from any FOSS developed options so why would they be comparing Outlook and Evolution in the first place.
Thunderbird and Outlook both have win32 installs so if that was the comparison then his comment would have some relevance but that is not the case. In this case he's saying his usual "FOSS sucks" comment but basing it on the prechosen assumption that the client was not open to FOSS solutions in the first place which completely negates itself.
(good to see he's still alive and kicking though I can't say I've missed the random injections of unrelated negative opinion the last few months)
Thunderbird and Outlook both have win32 installs so if that was the comparison then his comment would have some relevance but that is not the case. In this case he's saying his usual "FOSS sucks" comment but basing it on the prechosen assumption that the client was not open to FOSS solutions in the first place which completely negates itself.
(good to see he's still alive and kicking though I can't say I've missed the random injections of unrelated negative opinion the last few months)
Your dislike of me colors your judgement.
Someone mentioned on here Office at $250.
For $250, which if your company is like ours we use an office suite for say maybe 5 years before replacing it (think Office 2002).
That's $250 total but $50 a year or roughly $4 a month.
For $4 a month I get virtually universal compatibilty with everything from my Palm to Blackberries etc including intregration with our ERP software.
The article itself admits that there are a few wrinkles and issues with the open source solution.
For $4 a month, I don't have to deal with any issues. It's as simple as that.
I am most valuable to my company when my time is spent creating solutions and not troubleshooting problems or coming up with workarounds.
Outlook does that for me.
This isn't a philosophical issue for me. This is about me being the most effective, productivity employee I can be. I don't take sides, I get results.
Someone mentioned on here Office at $250.
For $250, which if your company is like ours we use an office suite for say maybe 5 years before replacing it (think Office 2002).
That's $250 total but $50 a year or roughly $4 a month.
For $4 a month I get virtually universal compatibilty with everything from my Palm to Blackberries etc including intregration with our ERP software.
The article itself admits that there are a few wrinkles and issues with the open source solution.
For $4 a month, I don't have to deal with any issues. It's as simple as that.
I am most valuable to my company when my time is spent creating solutions and not troubleshooting problems or coming up with workarounds.
Outlook does that for me.
This isn't a philosophical issue for me. This is about me being the most effective, productivity employee I can be. I don't take sides, I get results.
I do try to take each of your comments as indavidual and seporate objects but your history makes that dificult at times. Admittedly, your choice of icon image is about as balanced as if someone where to replace the penguin with the wavey four panes then wonder why the Windows fans see negative meaning in that person's posts.
I also have to admit that I was in a rather sour mood yesterday to begin with.
If Exchange/Outlook is the correct choice for the business then there's no question that they should put the money into it. Your comment opened with "If one is not going to go the open source route" though so any further discussion with that client about is not relevant since the choice is made.
My point was that right there, you cancel out what you where intending to say. If I read your meaning incorrectly then the error was mine.
"This isn't a philosophical issue for me. This is about me being the most effective, productivity employee I can be. I don't take sides, I get results."
The only thing to point out there is that you always take sides or accuraly, just the one side. You may not in your professional career but you sure do in your posted comments. I'm not sitting here watching for your posts but in passing, I've yet to see one that was worded in a possitive manner or did anything but try to convince other's that nonWindows options are all 100% unusable.
I also have to admit that I was in a rather sour mood yesterday to begin with.
If Exchange/Outlook is the correct choice for the business then there's no question that they should put the money into it. Your comment opened with "If one is not going to go the open source route" though so any further discussion with that client about is not relevant since the choice is made.
My point was that right there, you cancel out what you where intending to say. If I read your meaning incorrectly then the error was mine.
"This isn't a philosophical issue for me. This is about me being the most effective, productivity employee I can be. I don't take sides, I get results."
The only thing to point out there is that you always take sides or accuraly, just the one side. You may not in your professional career but you sure do in your posted comments. I'm not sitting here watching for your posts but in passing, I've yet to see one that was worded in a possitive manner or did anything but try to convince other's that nonWindows options are all 100% unusable.
"If one isn't going the open source route" then this discussion is not relevant to them in the first place.
If a client completely objects to "going the open source route" because of existing infrastructure or a lack of will to explore all relevant and possible business solutions then what difference does this discussion make to them?
Did you have an actual point to add or did you just want to take a nock at the horse in the race that you don't aprove of? Maybe you can explain how your "age old open source problem" bit is remotely relevant or even remotely based in reality.
(so what Linux based OS are you using regularily at home these days so that you can truly contrast and compare the different platforms from an informed and equally expert understanding?)
If a client completely objects to "going the open source route" because of existing infrastructure or a lack of will to explore all relevant and possible business solutions then what difference does this discussion make to them?
Did you have an actual point to add or did you just want to take a nock at the horse in the race that you don't aprove of? Maybe you can explain how your "age old open source problem" bit is remotely relevant or even remotely based in reality.
(so what Linux based OS are you using regularily at home these days so that you can truly contrast and compare the different platforms from an informed and equally expert understanding?)
1) "If one isn't going the open source route"
I added that simply because most people/companies aren't in the market for open source solutions simply because they want an open source solution.
Open source has to create a better mousetrap or most people won't switch. Create a better mousetrap and maybe people will switch. Evolution, according to the article, really isn't a better mousetrap.
2) I didn't say anyone was completely objecting to anything. Your dislike of me again coloring your judgement.
3) There are several articles around the web and even some on TR about this. Read them. Open source has to do more than create something similar, they have to improve upon it.
4) I am currently down to just Ubuntu and PC Linux.
I added that simply because most people/companies aren't in the market for open source solutions simply because they want an open source solution.
Open source has to create a better mousetrap or most people won't switch. Create a better mousetrap and maybe people will switch. Evolution, according to the article, really isn't a better mousetrap.
2) I didn't say anyone was completely objecting to anything. Your dislike of me again coloring your judgement.
3) There are several articles around the web and even some on TR about this. Read them. Open source has to do more than create something similar, they have to improve upon it.
4) I am currently down to just Ubuntu and PC Linux.
Some days you really don't make it easy to like you though I still can't fully identify if it's by intent (like to stir shrt up) or simply personality conflicts that would not exist outside text communication. In this case, I'm more than willing to admit that it may have been posting on a bad day ("don't drive angry. Don't drive angry" - ah Bill Murry).
If you meant "if a company is not shopping for an open source solution specifically" then that is how you should have worded it. Ambiguity does not benefit text based discussion very well. Too me "if one isn't going the FOSS route" reads like they are not open to the option at all rather than simply not specifically looking at solutions because they are produced throuth shared source.
Agreed; any option needs be a better moustrap or there's no benefit. Both Foss and closed options along with any product must realize that and accept it. If the solution does not adress the need then it's not the right solution. The reason Adobe couldn't make a go of the Linux based OS versions of it's products was for that very same reason; cost far dispreportionate too product functions and quality. The differences between Photoshop for *nix and other offerings did not justify 700$ per license or whatever the pricing was.
I'll read any FOSS related article I can get my hands on. TR is the last daily visit after a number of other news sites. Heck, I read any of the nonFOSS related articles that role across OSNews though I'm not currently administrating a Windows environment so I have less interest in fitting Windows specific news sites in my already limited reading time.
The irony here is that my initial post which you responded too was simply pointing out why the creater of Evolution said he started the project. I wasn't even saying that Evolution some kind of world savior so your comment may have been better placed below someone who was claiming such a thing.
Last, number 4:
For me it's WindowsXP/Mandriva host dual booting with Mandriva, Debian, Win98, WinXP and BSD VMs if I exclude the lesser used play things in my OS collection. Maemo runs my PDA/Tablet very nicely and provides seamless interaction with my other machines but that's outside the relm of desktop workstations or servers. Vista I poke around with on relative's computers but can't justify the license fee just so I can add it too my collection; maybe if that's the only way to support gaming in a few years but I think MS will have the new OS out by then anyhow.
How are you liking PCLinuxOS? I keep thinking I should give it a look but I can't find a compelling reason to move my personal machines away from Mandriva unless it's too Debian or a BSD. I hear PCL has good hardware support though and you gotta love the draktools included from Mandriva (I do anyhow). How did the distribution creaters choose to support USB and has it given you static mount point or do you simply access flashdrives and similar USB through the X window manager? With Mandriva, KDE manages the USB devices (excluding PalmOS) flawlessly since it always knows where it mounted the device?
I'm not sure how Windows is managing mounting flashdrives but this is one thing it still does better than the few distributions I'm playing with. The nonWindows world may have had 64bit, USB2, Bluetooth and many other functions before the Windows world did but Windows does some things rather well. I really should confirm if that's because it uses the device UID number rather than USB bus socket point.
If you meant "if a company is not shopping for an open source solution specifically" then that is how you should have worded it. Ambiguity does not benefit text based discussion very well. Too me "if one isn't going the FOSS route" reads like they are not open to the option at all rather than simply not specifically looking at solutions because they are produced throuth shared source.
Agreed; any option needs be a better moustrap or there's no benefit. Both Foss and closed options along with any product must realize that and accept it. If the solution does not adress the need then it's not the right solution. The reason Adobe couldn't make a go of the Linux based OS versions of it's products was for that very same reason; cost far dispreportionate too product functions and quality. The differences between Photoshop for *nix and other offerings did not justify 700$ per license or whatever the pricing was.
I'll read any FOSS related article I can get my hands on. TR is the last daily visit after a number of other news sites. Heck, I read any of the nonFOSS related articles that role across OSNews though I'm not currently administrating a Windows environment so I have less interest in fitting Windows specific news sites in my already limited reading time.
The irony here is that my initial post which you responded too was simply pointing out why the creater of Evolution said he started the project. I wasn't even saying that Evolution some kind of world savior so your comment may have been better placed below someone who was claiming such a thing.
Last, number 4:
For me it's WindowsXP/Mandriva host dual booting with Mandriva, Debian, Win98, WinXP and BSD VMs if I exclude the lesser used play things in my OS collection. Maemo runs my PDA/Tablet very nicely and provides seamless interaction with my other machines but that's outside the relm of desktop workstations or servers. Vista I poke around with on relative's computers but can't justify the license fee just so I can add it too my collection; maybe if that's the only way to support gaming in a few years but I think MS will have the new OS out by then anyhow.
How are you liking PCLinuxOS? I keep thinking I should give it a look but I can't find a compelling reason to move my personal machines away from Mandriva unless it's too Debian or a BSD. I hear PCL has good hardware support though and you gotta love the draktools included from Mandriva (I do anyhow). How did the distribution creaters choose to support USB and has it given you static mount point or do you simply access flashdrives and similar USB through the X window manager? With Mandriva, KDE manages the USB devices (excluding PalmOS) flawlessly since it always knows where it mounted the device?
I'm not sure how Windows is managing mounting flashdrives but this is one thing it still does better than the few distributions I'm playing with. The nonWindows world may have had 64bit, USB2, Bluetooth and many other functions before the Windows world did but Windows does some things rather well. I really should confirm if that's because it uses the device UID number rather than USB bus socket point.
I thought it was Microsoft who copies. Now open source people, who complain about Microsoft, are now copying Microsoft so they can provide an alternative. That's full circle. Sounds like the Mac people who act as rebels but Apple/Mac has always had the most exclusive monopolistic practices than any one els. That's why they enjoy a small percentage of the market.
http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=102&threadID=255052&messageID=2437107
There's a difference between using similar graphic design to stay within the end user's comfort zone and blatantly copying, stealing or buying out other's complete programming solution.
Your right about Apple though, they're just as end user hostile as Microsoft and even manage to provide a higher degree of lockin. I'll consider both along side other options when finding a solution for a client but that doesn't mean I'll turn a blind eye to either's business practices.
There's a difference between using similar graphic design to stay within the end user's comfort zone and blatantly copying, stealing or buying out other's complete programming solution.
Your right about Apple though, they're just as end user hostile as Microsoft and even manage to provide a higher degree of lockin. I'll consider both along side other options when finding a solution for a client but that doesn't mean I'll turn a blind eye to either's business practices.
This kind of thing to you is like politics.
Get past your hatred for closed source, get past your hatred for certain companies and really truly open your eyes to providing the best solution for your employer or customers no matter what that may be.
At times that may be closed source and at times that may be open source.
But I really don't think my employer or my customers really give a crap about Microsoft's or Apple's business practices.
Sure, in a perfect world we'd all care and we'd all try to do something about it.
But I get paid for solutions not political statements. I'm hired to provide the best service, solutions, etc at the most affordable prices.
I'm not here to save the hooded owl or spotted toad.
Get past your hatred for closed source, get past your hatred for certain companies and really truly open your eyes to providing the best solution for your employer or customers no matter what that may be.
At times that may be closed source and at times that may be open source.
But I really don't think my employer or my customers really give a crap about Microsoft's or Apple's business practices.
Sure, in a perfect world we'd all care and we'd all try to do something about it.
But I get paid for solutions not political statements. I'm hired to provide the best service, solutions, etc at the most affordable prices.
I'm not here to save the hooded owl or spotted toad.
.. and coding under the hood as the post I responded too was esentually a duplicate of a post above and directing them to that same resopnse was the most efficient use of my time.
I had the evolution problems under KDE on a
rather buggy 10.1 SuSE linux install. I
might not have the same problem now, but I'm
using my 10.3 SuSE notebook for work, and I
really hate to screw with it by installing
something major like gnome.
I really love Kontact. I just wish it hooked
to exchange.
I guess eGroupware had a major meltdown. Two
of the three developers quit and started
something called "Tine".
I run tomcat for my websites, and I don't
want to run Apache for the php in Groupware.
rather buggy 10.1 SuSE linux install. I
might not have the same problem now, but I'm
using my 10.3 SuSE notebook for work, and I
really hate to screw with it by installing
something major like gnome.
I really love Kontact. I just wish it hooked
to exchange.
I guess eGroupware had a major meltdown. Two
of the three developers quit and started
something called "Tine".
I run tomcat for my websites, and I don't
want to run Apache for the php in Groupware.
I love hearing updates on projects I've not kept up with the news on but boo.. eGroupware seems like a great option. All I wanted when I stumbled across it was centralized PIM storage so the browser interface was a nice surprise.
Drat.. back in the market for a groupware solution I guess. I guess it's time to cut a fresh VM and have a look at Tine then.
I can understand why you wouldn't want to muck with the work machine. I've taken to running a liveCD over the work machine too keep my mucking seporate from the installed drive. If you can isntall VMware Server or have it elswhere and can setup a VM; it's a great way to test out various install configs. I may try putting Evolution under KDE on one of my test VM before it get's scrubbed for a rebuild. Mandriva is a bit of a bleeding adge flake too so it may have the same results as Suse. I wonder if Debian handles it any better.
Drat.. back in the market for a groupware solution I guess. I guess it's time to cut a fresh VM and have a look at Tine then.
I can understand why you wouldn't want to muck with the work machine. I've taken to running a liveCD over the work machine too keep my mucking seporate from the installed drive. If you can isntall VMware Server or have it elswhere and can setup a VM; it's a great way to test out various install configs. I may try putting Evolution under KDE on one of my test VM before it get's scrubbed for a rebuild. Mandriva is a bit of a bleeding adge flake too so it may have the same results as Suse. I wonder if Debian handles it any better.
otherwise, I wouldn't have found this blog'n'thread.
Extraneous comment for Outlook buffs: Check TR and the 'net for folks having problems with Outlook in an Exchange environment. Tons of weird problems that very good admins have trouble resovling. MS has it's own bugginess, so I find that any problems with Evolution are at least equaled by those with Outlook.
Of course, if your business is using MS wares, you'd probably want Outlook. If you are in a *nix shop, Evolution might be a good option. I don't understand the bashing and defensiveness, at least in this particular thread. Cheers for all of the other discussion (oh, and the article too).
Extraneous comment for Outlook buffs: Check TR and the 'net for folks having problems with Outlook in an Exchange environment. Tons of weird problems that very good admins have trouble resovling. MS has it's own bugginess, so I find that any problems with Evolution are at least equaled by those with Outlook.
Of course, if your business is using MS wares, you'd probably want Outlook. If you are in a *nix shop, Evolution might be a good option. I don't understand the bashing and defensiveness, at least in this particular thread. Cheers for all of the other discussion (oh, and the article too).
may be you can visit this site
http://www.balitabiz.co.cc/top-5-free-email-client-programs
http://www.balitabiz.co.cc/top-5-free-email-client-programs
"And now that Exchange is ???owned??? by Novell"
That may be a typo
That may be a typo
Novell bought Microsoft yesterday. Bill let it go for two mint-condition MS. Pac-man tabletop models, the source code to WordStar, and season tickets to the 'Sonics.
Yeah, gotta be a typo.
Yeah, gotta be a typo.
Since Novell has MS patents opened up to them (hence
"owned"), they have access to do things that other companies
cannot do with regards to exchange compatibility. However,
I would have phrased it differently if I were Jack!
just my 2 cents (or less)
"owned"), they have access to do things that other companies
cannot do with regards to exchange compatibility. However,
I would have phrased it differently if I were Jack!
just my 2 cents (or less)
That would explain the quotes around Owned though as you mention, something like "With Novell having access to Exchange programming specs" would have left less room for interpretation.
Ah well, perhaps not a typo at all.
Ah well, perhaps not a typo at all.
yes that would be a typo. Evolution is owned by Novell. 
Exchange...well, you all know who owns that.
Exchange...well, you all know who owns that.
I remember Palm syncs being rock solid with the old serial cable connections due to the port being static. I've yet to see a USB connected PalmOS device sync or even get past setup. The sync process seems to reset the connection which usualy brings the device back in a different address. This reset breaks the sync process as a result.
The best aproach I managed to find was setting the T5 too flashdrive mode when copying files too and from the SD card. An SD reader works even better. In these cases, your sill not syncronizing the PIM data though, only what you've stored on the SD.
If there was a way to force the USB devices to always mount under a unique identifier. There are the odd /dev subfolders which link a device too a static identifier but using these for mounting things doesn't seem to be the norm outside of Windows. (It usually means a trip to fstab for me after each install or new flashdrive)
For my PalmOS needs, I'm 95% on Maemo now anyhow. What Palm does, it does very well (Calendar with it's different views is fantastic) but the last thing keeping it in my pocket is the PIM functions and those are due to be replaced with the GPE office suite and native syncronizatino with Evolution.
Sidenote: I've been a faithful korganizer lover but I think it's time to give Evolution another go provided it integrates into KDE well.
The best aproach I managed to find was setting the T5 too flashdrive mode when copying files too and from the SD card. An SD reader works even better. In these cases, your sill not syncronizing the PIM data though, only what you've stored on the SD.
If there was a way to force the USB devices to always mount under a unique identifier. There are the odd /dev subfolders which link a device too a static identifier but using these for mounting things doesn't seem to be the norm outside of Windows. (It usually means a trip to fstab for me after each install or new flashdrive)
For my PalmOS needs, I'm 95% on Maemo now anyhow. What Palm does, it does very well (Calendar with it's different views is fantastic) but the last thing keeping it in my pocket is the PIM functions and those are due to be replaced with the GPE office suite and native syncronizatino with Evolution.
Sidenote: I've been a faithful korganizer lover but I think it's time to give Evolution another go provided it integrates into KDE well.
... to force the USB devices to always mount under a unique identifier.
I had to have a look at the date you posted this ... hmmm if it was posted 1995 ... it is IN FACT posted 2008!
What about udev?
It makes my ScanDisk USB disk mount on /mnt/Cruiser, the Agenie USB sisk on /mnt/Agenie, the HP PhotoSmart Camera on /mnt/PhotoSmart and the Canon camera on /mnt/Canon.
It could be that it would be possible too to mount the palmtop on ... lets say ... /mnt/palm
Just my $.02
I had to have a look at the date you posted this ... hmmm if it was posted 1995 ... it is IN FACT posted 2008!
What about udev?
It makes my ScanDisk USB disk mount on /mnt/Cruiser, the Agenie USB sisk on /mnt/Agenie, the HP PhotoSmart Camera on /mnt/PhotoSmart and the Canon camera on /mnt/Canon.
It could be that it would be possible too to mount the palmtop on ... lets say ... /mnt/palm
Just my $.02
If your distro consistantly mounts a palmOS device on the same USB /dev/device then your all set. What distro is it your using?
I was recently told that Mandriva uses HAL to mount flashdrives to a static /media/folder if the flashdrive has partition labels set. I have to look into it further though as my flashdrive seems to still be jumping around and I've not confirmed if it's "attached before boot" vs "attached after boot" that makes the difference.
If I was going through KDE, the UI would take care of the background links and I'd just use the media icons but at least one of my flashdrives needs to be mounted and available by samba share when I'm at home.
For me, it's back to adding /dev/disk-uid/device to my fstab to stabalize the one mount point that I need remaining static.
(I wish this complaint had long since gone away with 1995 but such is the case)
I was recently told that Mandriva uses HAL to mount flashdrives to a static /media/folder if the flashdrive has partition labels set. I have to look into it further though as my flashdrive seems to still be jumping around and I've not confirmed if it's "attached before boot" vs "attached after boot" that makes the difference.
If I was going through KDE, the UI would take care of the background links and I'd just use the media icons but at least one of my flashdrives needs to be mounted and available by samba share when I'm at home.
For me, it's back to adding /dev/disk-uid/device to my fstab to stabalize the one mount point that I need remaining static.
(I wish this complaint had long since gone away with 1995 but such is the case)
Look at your list of complaints and issues compared to my install Outlook and everything works out of the box.
For $4 a month!
Palms and Blackberries are everywhere in corporate America today.
If Evolution finds a way to work out a few of their issues, I'd be more than happy to give it a try.
But not until then.
For $4 a month!
Palms and Blackberries are everywhere in corporate America today.
If Evolution finds a way to work out a few of their issues, I'd be more than happy to give it a try.
But not until then.
But I'm not going to discount the option simply because I don't agree with the licensing and development model employed.
Where have I ever said it was a silver bullet? Why should I discard the functioning 98% because of 2% of my functional needs having bugs in them. Further, a few bugs in one distribution are not representative of all possible offerings. Mandriva is known to be a bleeding edge and a bit buggy distribution but it's just one of many different options.
Are Windows solutions perfect? Do they support 100% of everybodies needs? If they do then why are there any other options in the first place?
I'm willing to see the flaws in both (and many other) platforms. I'm willing to consider the benefits of both platforms. Are you open to the same?
We could have a very good and rational discussion on the subject if you'd be so kind as to open the window or front door before you start throwing stones from inside your glass house.
I speak from a life of growing up infront of Microsoft platforms and spending much of my free time exploring them in great detail. My dislike of MS business practices and product quality is no secret but I'm not blind to other options.
Finally, does your install of Outlook make you special? Heck, I have over five years of history or more locked up in PST files and still prefer Outlook as my PIM under Windows; it doesn't make me special either, just accepting of the benefits from either platform.
Still, good to see your alive and kicking even if your aproach to alienating other's hasn't changed. We should really have a positive discussion about Windows some time so you could contribute too.
Where have I ever said it was a silver bullet? Why should I discard the functioning 98% because of 2% of my functional needs having bugs in them. Further, a few bugs in one distribution are not representative of all possible offerings. Mandriva is known to be a bleeding edge and a bit buggy distribution but it's just one of many different options.
Are Windows solutions perfect? Do they support 100% of everybodies needs? If they do then why are there any other options in the first place?
I'm willing to see the flaws in both (and many other) platforms. I'm willing to consider the benefits of both platforms. Are you open to the same?
We could have a very good and rational discussion on the subject if you'd be so kind as to open the window or front door before you start throwing stones from inside your glass house.
I speak from a life of growing up infront of Microsoft platforms and spending much of my free time exploring them in great detail. My dislike of MS business practices and product quality is no secret but I'm not blind to other options.
Finally, does your install of Outlook make you special? Heck, I have over five years of history or more locked up in PST files and still prefer Outlook as my PIM under Windows; it doesn't make me special either, just accepting of the benefits from either platform.
Still, good to see your alive and kicking even if your aproach to alienating other's hasn't changed. We should really have a positive discussion about Windows some time so you could contribute too.
on the needs of the organization. I've not found any need for 90% of the functions in Evolution.
Mozilla's Thunderbird for email.
[ using the Seamonkey suite, the only thing missing from the basic use is a calendar app, which is installed by default with any linux distro that has a PIM suite included. ]
I don't have a palmtop, or ipod like device, so the whole synch issue is of no importance, I don't use any calendaring app, since I have an excellent memory and use that.
For me, the requirements are met by much smaller apps.
Mozilla's Thunderbird for email.
[ using the Seamonkey suite, the only thing missing from the basic use is a calendar app, which is installed by default with any linux distro that has a PIM suite included. ]
I don't have a palmtop, or ipod like device, so the whole synch issue is of no importance, I don't use any calendaring app, since I have an excellent memory and use that.
For me, the requirements are met by much smaller apps.
it still has a critical failure.
no support for multiple email addresses in the client.
no support for multiple email addresses in the client.
What about the "Thunderbird" program? I seems to me to do everything that "Outlocked" is supposed to do.
Note: concuring with Jaqui here.
It is a multi-platform, multi-OS, multi-language, Open-source, User-friendly program. And can be Secure as well. (as in PGP enabled encripted e-mails)
Works for me.
That would make it 3. (at least)
IMHO -d
edited to add: might be a double post here some-where, a case of disappearing posts today. hummm -d
Note: concuring with Jaqui here.
It is a multi-platform, multi-OS, multi-language, Open-source, User-friendly program. And can be Secure as well. (as in PGP enabled encripted e-mails)
Works for me.
That would make it 3. (at least)
IMHO -d
edited to add: might be a double post here some-where, a case of disappearing posts today. hummm -d
T-Bird meets my needs, but it doesn't have the collaboration tools that Evolution and outbreak have.
again you're correct in that the Seamonkey is a better choice for collaboration, but it still has a lot of growing pains. I still prefer the, now old, plain Jane, Mozilla Browser. Unfortunatly... Question here for you; Would including collaboration in T-Bird comprise it's security? -d
edited to correct (some) spelling and grammer. -d
edited to correct (some) spelling and grammer. -d
since every function that is added that has network access is a new hole in security.
I'm sure the developers would make it as secure as they can, but network access is a security hole. That is the drawback to the whole networked systems environment.
I think that the whole collaboration tool concept is based on a flawed design. It should NOT be based on an email app.
it should be a separate app that accesses whichever resources are required for that particular users / organizations needs, with administrator defined functionality needs.
while email is a part of it, it is not the biggest part, so it shouldn't be the primary tool.
edit to add:
Seamonkey is only better as a collaboration tool because it has web browser, email, address book AND irc chat.
any collaboration tool that is focussed around communication needs a live meeting tool as a part of it.
I'm sure the developers would make it as secure as they can, but network access is a security hole. That is the drawback to the whole networked systems environment.
I think that the whole collaboration tool concept is based on a flawed design. It should NOT be based on an email app.
it should be a separate app that accesses whichever resources are required for that particular users / organizations needs, with administrator defined functionality needs.
while email is a part of it, it is not the biggest part, so it shouldn't be the primary tool.
edit to add:
Seamonkey is only better as a collaboration tool because it has web browser, email, address book AND irc chat.
any collaboration tool that is focussed around communication needs a live meeting tool as a part of it.
Agreed. (on the exterainous net access comprmising security)
" It should NOT be based on an email app.
it should be a separate app that accesses whichever resources are required..." Also agreed. I think where we would part company on this, is to what service is used. For normal users Yahoo works for me. (I know, I know) but it can be semi-secure, and it's 'normal user' friendly. I hate taking half a day explaining 'how to' for a ten minute collaboration 'chat' with some-one. For the rest a private IRC is fine. This is a major problem, BTW, the world over. A lot of money is spent (most, aperantly not wisely) just on this set of applications. (hummm...) And as for "...while email is a part of it, it is not the biggest part, so it shouldn't be the primary tool." 100% correct. Wrong tool for the wrong job. IMHO anyway.
I'm still working out some of the bugs in the Seamonkey that I'm working with. It could be because I'm jsut getting old, or jsut plain stubborn. I like the old Mozilla Suite. I wish it was still being devoloped, instead of going 'flashy' with more 'eye candy'. There is FF already for that. I see no sense in trying to make another FF, one is enough. -d
" It should NOT be based on an email app.
it should be a separate app that accesses whichever resources are required..." Also agreed. I think where we would part company on this, is to what service is used. For normal users Yahoo works for me. (I know, I know) but it can be semi-secure, and it's 'normal user' friendly. I hate taking half a day explaining 'how to' for a ten minute collaboration 'chat' with some-one. For the rest a private IRC is fine. This is a major problem, BTW, the world over. A lot of money is spent (most, aperantly not wisely) just on this set of applications. (hummm...) And as for "...while email is a part of it, it is not the biggest part, so it shouldn't be the primary tool." 100% correct. Wrong tool for the wrong job. IMHO anyway.
I'm still working out some of the bugs in the Seamonkey that I'm working with. It could be because I'm jsut getting old, or jsut plain stubborn. I like the old Mozilla Suite. I wish it was still being devoloped, instead of going 'flashy' with more 'eye candy'. There is FF already for that. I see no sense in trying to make another FF, one is enough. -d
but you obviously aren't using it in a large corporate environment. Outlook isn't just emails, it's calendar, contacts, and any number of forms of data sharing across corporations, not just machine to machine. It does it seamlessly and is configurable by roles. That is the functionality that needs to be replaced, anything can do email.
>> Outlook isn't just emails, it's calendar, contacts, and any number of forms of data sharing across corporations
This statement only holds up when your talking about Outlook with Exchange Server in the background. If your enterprise has non-windows based clients, or collaborates directly with external entities, without Exchange Server, Outlook is a hurdle to overcome.
Outlook provides marginal additional value without Exchange server. No shared calendaring (because Outlook doesn't support standard internet calendars). Spotty LDAP directory support (do to embrace and extend), so contacts are not as valuable. The worst is mangling messages with attachments (send yourself an HTML e-mail with an event attached, open it in Evolution,KMail or TBird, works fine. Fire up Outlook and let it download the message header, close outlook, now try going back and opening it with Evolution,KMail or TBird, you will never be able to open this message again without Outlook.)
10+ years ago when MS was building their collaboration platform, they made many decisions that made sense at the time. Many of the Internet standards are still not complete today. (Apple is making the same decisions today, even though the standards are significantly more developed.) I have no problem with maintaining support for MS proprietary standards, but the world is not homogeneous. The desktop client model is cresting as the sole, or even preferred, method for accessing a collaboration platform. Having a product that gives end-users that Outlook feel, but can support internet information standards seems like a smarter way to leverage collaboration.
This statement only holds up when your talking about Outlook with Exchange Server in the background. If your enterprise has non-windows based clients, or collaborates directly with external entities, without Exchange Server, Outlook is a hurdle to overcome.
Outlook provides marginal additional value without Exchange server. No shared calendaring (because Outlook doesn't support standard internet calendars). Spotty LDAP directory support (do to embrace and extend), so contacts are not as valuable. The worst is mangling messages with attachments (send yourself an HTML e-mail with an event attached, open it in Evolution,KMail or TBird, works fine. Fire up Outlook and let it download the message header, close outlook, now try going back and opening it with Evolution,KMail or TBird, you will never be able to open this message again without Outlook.)
10+ years ago when MS was building their collaboration platform, they made many decisions that made sense at the time. Many of the Internet standards are still not complete today. (Apple is making the same decisions today, even though the standards are significantly more developed.) I have no problem with maintaining support for MS proprietary standards, but the world is not homogeneous. The desktop client model is cresting as the sole, or even preferred, method for accessing a collaboration platform. Having a product that gives end-users that Outlook feel, but can support internet information standards seems like a smarter way to leverage collaboration.
Actually, Outlook 2007 does support the ICS calendar format. You can publish and subscribe to ICS calendars. It took MS long enough to deliver this functionality, however!
It jsut depends on what you do. As stated elsewhere, for 4 persons comapny like me, nothing beats outlook because I can use it as a CRM. We don't share calendars or anything like this. I have yet to find an alternative software that allow me to set an event on a calendar (appointment, quotation sent), associate it in one click with a contact (appointment with John Doe), and later on retrieve events and emails associated with one contact(when was that quotation sent to John Doe). All one click. Plus sync all of this with PDA or phone in seconds, to use when you're on the road to visit customers. That's what outlook is about. The Exchange part is only for bigger company (though I agree it is also important for them).
Last time I checked Evolution did not allow this kind of CRM operation, for it would not retrieve emails or calendar event associated with a contact. Has this changed ?
Last time I checked Evolution did not allow this kind of CRM operation, for it would not retrieve emails or calendar event associated with a contact. Has this changed ?
However if your OS is Linux or other Unix OS, Outlook is not even an option. A Windows user that has not purchased Office may find the Evolution port the best choice because of the huge price of an Office license. For a small business without volume licensing, Open Office and Evolution may be the best option. Just because Outlook is best for you... does not mean it's best for me.
So true that Outlook is not just an email application. I
can't keep track of my calendar 'in my head' as one post
replied because it changes all the time. I am constantly
booked into meetings, and without a secretary with rights
to my mail to accept or decline, and my crackberry to
notify me that I have yet ANOTHER meeting to attend. Ok,
so that sounds so self-important, but email is the least of
my use with Outlook. I also use the journal extensively to
ensure that I properly bill my time to clients - I didn't see
any journal functionality in Evolution nor instructions on
how to "share" with my secretary.
But there is that email, and I have extensive inbox rules to
sort by client and key words, I have at least 20 PST folders
open on any day - I didn't see instructions for Evolution to
import those PST files and set up inbox rules to move mail
off of the exchange server into those files.
I would love an alternative to Outlook, but so far, I don't
see anything that will help me run my work "life" as well
as Outlook does.
can't keep track of my calendar 'in my head' as one post
replied because it changes all the time. I am constantly
booked into meetings, and without a secretary with rights
to my mail to accept or decline, and my crackberry to
notify me that I have yet ANOTHER meeting to attend. Ok,
so that sounds so self-important, but email is the least of
my use with Outlook. I also use the journal extensively to
ensure that I properly bill my time to clients - I didn't see
any journal functionality in Evolution nor instructions on
how to "share" with my secretary.
But there is that email, and I have extensive inbox rules to
sort by client and key words, I have at least 20 PST folders
open on any day - I didn't see instructions for Evolution to
import those PST files and set up inbox rules to move mail
off of the exchange server into those files.
I would love an alternative to Outlook, but so far, I don't
see anything that will help me run my work "life" as well
as Outlook does.
Big problem with anything coming out of Novell and Miguel di Icaza is probable contamination with Microsoft patented code.
The Americans won't be worried as profit is the godhead over there, but the rest of the FOSS world should be. Better to use software from organizations who do not have a patent deal with MS.
How about some alternatives for the rest of us, Jack.
The Americans won't be worried as profit is the godhead over there, but the rest of the FOSS world should be. Better to use software from organizations who do not have a patent deal with MS.
How about some alternatives for the rest of us, Jack.
Typical - it can't make calender functionality stable, so it blames Microsoft for writing 'flakey' software.
Funny, I've never had a problem with Outlook / Exchange - Could it be that this free hobbyist bodge isn't written correctly?!?!
Funny, I've never had a problem with Outlook / Exchange - Could it be that this free hobbyist bodge isn't written correctly?!?!
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
