Slashdot Mirror


Will Evolution Exchange Microsoft?

Anonymous Howard writes "Infoanarchy has a comprehensive review of Ximian Evolution. The reviewer claims that the Windows/Outlook combination is inherently inferior in terms of security, because users have too many privileges on the host system. Also, Evolution's indexing appears to be quite well scalable."

36 of 323 comments (clear)

  1. Would You Trust a Source Named Anarchy? by quakeaddict · · Score: 3, Funny

    Would You Trust a Source Named Anarchy?

    Enough said.

    --
    I'm still working on a clever footer.
  2. Instead of Outlook/Windows by funkmastermike · · Score: 3, Funny

    Everyone should switch to AOL email.. I mean come on.. dont you read the news? The easiest just got easier!

  3. Evolution by dnaumov · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Evolution is one of those pieces of OSS, that you can point at and say: "OSS can deliver, there, eat this". It belongs to the group of amazing projects like Apache, Samba and Mozilla if you ask me. Now if we had some great multimedia programs (MPlayer is getting close though).

  4. NNTP support by AirLace · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anyone who's been tracking Evolution development from the early days will be aware that it used to have preliminary NNTP (news/Usenet) support that was lobotomised for the 1.0 release. At present, this is the only major feature that's holding it back from competing with the likes of Outlook Express and Outlook. Sure, GNOME already has the Pan newsreader, but it's clearly designed for computer-literate people and doesn't really integrate with any email client.

    So, what's holding back NNTP support? It can't be all that difficult to do, after all Evolution provides all the infrastructure for handling large lists of messages. Only when NNTP support arrives do I think Evolution will be-feature complete.

    1. Re:NNTP support by tps12 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I would think that these are seperate enough that they should be distinct Bonobo components (that have a lot of components in common, of course) that are then wrapped together with a lightweight navigator (or just stuck in a web browser?). Maybe they are trying to figure out some kind of elegent design for this?

      Also, while I agree that technically, dealing with newsgroups is similar to dealing with mailboxes, the two have always been semantically different in my mind. Whether your email is stored locally or on a server, and whether the news articles are on a server or cached locally, email tends to have more of a "sense of mineness" about it. By that I mean, e.g., I would expect my email program to let me set up a filter that puts any email with "narts" in the subject into my narts.com mailbox, but I would be very surprised if my newsreader allowed me to set up such a "filter" for putting things into alt.narts. Deletion is similar in its different meanings in each context.

      Basically, I think there is a UI issue to resolve. Namely, an interface that is too consistent across the two applications risks implying more similarity than is really justified, while inconsistency requires the user to learn twice as many interfaces. I think the second option is better (though I don't know how best to go about it), since in either case, the user is going to have to learn two sets of semantics. The second one makes this explicit by also requiring the learning of two sets of syntax.

      --

      Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
    2. Re:NNTP support by fejjie · · Score: 5, Informative

      While Evolution is broken for inline pgp, I have to ask - did you submit bug reports? :-)

      Most of the in-line pgp bug reports didn't start flowing in until after the 1.0 release which by that point was too late to fix for the most part because it to fix it right, we have to redesign the way we handle it completely.

      btw, I as well as the mutt maintainer and every other mail client author that implements in-line pgp will agree that in-line pgp is just plain broken to begin with.

      if you read the bug report that you linked to, you'll notice that there are a lot of possible security holes that all clients must face when implementing in-line pgp.

      I would highly suggest you convince your friends to use PGP/MIME. There is some slight brokeness in Evolution's PGP/MIME implementation too (it sometimes says a signature isn't valid when it is, but it will never ever say a signature is valid when it isn't) but this is being fixed in the development branch. If you have questions about why this didn't work, feel free to email me or the evolution mailing lists and I will explain it in as much detail as you want.

    3. Re:NNTP support by tps12 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I could see the newsgroup filtering work in a couple reasonable ways. For example, you could "filter" a newsgroup by just not showing messages which match the filter. And you could implement delete by either just not showing the message, or possibly issuing a cancel for it (making this choice a user preference).

      This actually kind of supports my original point, though. Some functions of a newsgroup "filter" would be present in the email counterpart, but you are not going to have 100% feature overlap (without majorly crippling either or both). That being the case, you either force the user to remember what kind of filter they are dealing with, or make it difficult for them to be confused (by using, as you suggest different color schemes, widgets, layouts, and terminology).

      An example of this in Unix would be regexes and globs: they are similar, but by giving them different names (instead of using vague words like "wildcard" or "pattern") and trying to make it clear when and where each is used, we avoid confusion and errors.

      BTW, I have a great example of email/news confusion; in college, my friends and I commandeered an unused school newsgroup for a little while. I showed my girlfriend how to access it from pine (de facto standard school email client), and she ended up hitting "R" to reply to a news message of mine, incorrectly assuming that this would perform the same function as it does when reading mail. Of course, the newsgroup function would more accurately be called "follow up", as it responds with a *public* message. Basically, if the pine interface had differentiated a little better between the two UIs (or, mea culpa, if I'd explained it a little better to begin with), it would have prevented a little bit of embarrasment on the parts of my friends and me.

      --

      Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
  5. Security vs useability by YeeHaW_Jelte · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What this all boils down to is security vs. user-friendliness. What the reviewer basically says about security is that the older 9x windows versions are not secure -- which is true, and that the newer NT based versions are but the lazy users don't bother to configure their systems in a secure way. Then he chalks down a point for linux and goes on.
    But this is not a inherent linux strenght or windows weakness; it's just user behaviour. It's comparable with doing regular backups and such. Basically, the reviewer is saying: "My installation of linux runs a cronjob which makes a tarball of my important files daily, and my installation of windows doesn't; hence linux is less prone to data loss"
    It's just a differance in accent; windows puts more of an accent on user-friendliness and linux more on security.

    --

    ---
    "The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
    1. Re:Security vs useability by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thr problem I find with many "secure out of the box" solutions is that they do it in such a way that the system is totally locked down and almost useless. No problem for an experienced sysadmin, they make the necessary changes for what they need. However this is frustrating to your average user and they are likely to just turn all the security off and leave it at that. My mom does not want to know how her computer works, and does not want to mess with configuration, she just wants it to work.

      Believe me, a bunch of average Joes that aren't technically savvy were running Linux, most or all of them would be logging in directly as root since they wouldn't want to be bothered with SUing.

      I'm not saying that OSes should be somewhat secure by default, and Microsoft has been doing a better job of this as of late, however you can't make them uber locked down systems like most geeks have, it will just piss them off.

    2. Re:Security vs useability by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm not saying that OSes should be somewhat secure by default, and Microsoft has been doing a better job of this as of late, however you can't make them uber locked down systems like most geeks have, it will just piss them off.

      Exactly. In most cases security goes directly against usability. Why do I have to log into my *home* machine? Why do I have to log in as admin/root to install a new application? Why can I only run this particular program as admin/root? These are all questions that the typical home user will ask when using their home machine. Having to do these things ends up making the machine less usable to the home user(albeit more secure).

  6. Look and Feel by skroz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Am I the only person that wonders why MS hasn't sued the crap out of Ximian yet? As far as look and feel goes, Ximian Evolution is as close to Outlook in terms of apperance as it could get. The only real differences in user experience exist in areas where functionality differs in such a way as to necessarily alter the UI.

    --
    -- Minds are like parachutes... they work best when open.
    1. Re:Look and Feel by reaper20 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Though many Linux apps suffer from clone ripoff syndrome - Evolution was designed like this on purpose.

      A guy came by my desk yesterday, and I was running Evolution on my linux box. He sat there and stared at it for a moment. He thought it was Outlook. I told him it wasn't. He wasn't even aware that something like Evolution existed for *nix. So, I let him play with it for a while - he picked it up EASY.

      I've also been doing some user tests with Openoffice and KOffice. By far, Evolution is the easiest for the typical office users to learn. They even call it Outlook.

      I'm not a fan of the Outlook-esque UI, but if that means that Joe Blow can easily switch to Free Software, then I'm all for it.

  7. Haven't [out]looked back by zerOnIne · · Score: 5, Funny

    i've recently switched to using evolution under debian linux at work, and i've been extremely pleased ... corporate standard here is netscape messenger v4.x, and so i'd basically defaulted to that on my old sparc workstation ... when i finally got a new PC, it came preinstalled with win2k, and for a while i just didn't have the time to install a proper os on there... i didn't really look forward to using outlook (no matter how much i dislike messenger) so i just kept my mailstore in ns messenger ... when i finally got a chance to put linux on my desktop pc, i tried out kmail, which effortlessly imported all my nsmail messages ... at this time i also decided to switch to IMAP, though, and kmail's IMAP support is decidedly lacking (at least in 2.2) ... a coworker suggested i try out evolution, and it's been absolutely great ... had no problem interfacing with the IMAP and LDAP servers here, and the interface is just what i've been wanting in a mail client for a long time ... virtual folders are absolutely great, as they allow me to have everything all nice and sorted in a graphical interface (ie, evolution), whilst keeping things in just a straight list for console clients (ie, pine) for when i'm only able to SSH into the corporate network

    so yeah, overall it totally rocks, and while there are a few bugs / annoyances in it, i've been very pleased overall ... and besides, the logo has a monkey! how can you go wrong with a monkey?

    --
    09
  8. Open protocols are even more important by DocSnyder · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Both at work and at home, Evolution is my primary email and PIM software. It is a really good idea for Ximian to provide a plugin capable of talking to a Microsoft Exchange server through its proprietary interfaces.

    Yet a much more important issue is the other direction - open and freely accessible groupware protocols implemented by a free-as-in-speech server solution, with Outlook connectivity provided by a Windoze plugin. For example, the Bill Workgroup Server takes this approach.

    Microsoft Exchange is not the only major proprietary groupware solution - Lotus Notes is here to stay, to be even more proprietary - it's quite impossible to read or write Lotus NSF files with anything but Lotus software. Free groupware standards exist and should be used by anyone. The user should have free choice between PHPgroupware, Evolution, Outlook and Lotus Notes, similar to IMAP providing choice between lots of different email clients.

  9. scalability by ajs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I sent myself a few thousand extra messages by accident last night. The acid test of every mail reader I've used has been exactly this scenario. Evolution opened my mailbox, showed me the messsages. I deleted them.

    It all took less than 10 seconds, and most of that time was SSL/IMAP reads from my IMAP server. Best darn mail reader I've ever used.

    If you haven't tried it try this out: bring it up, select a message in the subjuct summary window. Right-click and go to the "create a vfolder on this message" sub-menu. It just rocks. You can even have vfolders that encapsulate multiple real folders or EVEN ACCOUNTS.

    Very sweet!

  10. Evolution Comments by tucay · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've been using Evolution 1.03 built from sources using Gentoo and I have been extremely happy with it. Evolution will even underline your spelling errors which my Outlook98 would not do. I imported six years worth of email which was an 800MB Outlook PST file and have some folders with over 6,000 messages. The filter functions are very powerful and I'm able to filter out spam very easily. There still is the odd bug that I encounter but none have been show stoppers that prevent its use. I'm sure those will be fixed soon. Evolution was the program that allowed me to use Linux as my primary computer. I only boot Windows to run my tax program and accounting programs now. I might try Plex86 to see if I can run my Windows legacy applications within Linux. Goodbye Outlook. /g

    1. Re:Evolution Comments by Nodatadj · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you use Mozilla on win32 you can convert .pst files into mbox files, that Evolution can then import. It's not the nicest way, but tis the only way at the moment.

  11. Huge blind spot in OSS collaboration offerings by EricLivingston · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This review does point out a huge blind spot in OSS with regard to group collaboration: the lack of an OSS Exchange equivalent server. I was initially excited about the review, because I hoped that it might reveal such a holy grail, but alas, no. As soon as he started talking about group calendaring, it quickly devolved into "Pay $70 for this closed-source connector (per user) to connect to Exchange" which, of course, running on top of W2K server, would cost major bucks (I think a minimum 5-seat W2K Server is $800, then add Exchange, etc).

    And, of course, cost aside, this also implies that a shop with microsoft-free aspirations currently has to buckle under and purchase at least one Windows server/exchange combo, plus hire or contract the skill to administer the beast. This is exactly what happened to my small company recently. We were going to go Linux (and in fact our Web site and time tracking server were Linux-based), but being a "virtual" company, with everyone working out of our homes, we required strong group collaboration. So, reluctantly, in came the W2K Server box running nothing but Exchange. If only there were a Linux-based option (even if it weren't OSS!). And yes, we looked at Notes, but I don't even want to go there... Of course there used to be OpenMail by HP (I think) but that's been sold off, is unavailable, and we can only wait and see where that goes (and, regardless, it won't be OSS).

    Now that a polished, capable client exists, it would be fantastic to complete the offering with a server.

    --
    Please Rate my comment (and help support Fre
    1. Re:Huge blind spot in OSS collaboration offerings by Lysander+Luddite · · Score: 5, Informative

      Please review this article in which a company used OSS to creat software that allows PC users using Outlook client to connect to Exchange servers.

      InsightServer is built atop these unmodified pieces of Open Source software:
      Cyrus IMAP Server, from Carnegie-Mellon University
      http://asg.Web.cmu.edu/cyrus/
      Exim MTA (Message Transfer Agent), from Cambridge University
      http://www.exim.org/
      Berkeley Database, from the University of California
      http://db.cs.berkeley.edu/
      GDBM GNU Database Libraries from Free Software Foundation
      http://www.gnu.org/software/gdbm/gdbm. html
      ProFTP from the ProFTPD Project
      http://proftpd.linux.co.uk/
      Apache HTTP Server from the Apache Foundation
      http://httpd.apache.org/

      Bynari has not modified these, and does provide the source code with the Open Source components.

  12. Getting closer by s.a.m · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Evolution is one of the few things out there that could draw attention of the corporate eyes to using Linux as a desktop. The features that it has are really nice and comprable to those found in Outlook.

    What will make it even better is the ability to import my mail from Outlook Express and handle about 10000 emails in a folder.

    When it supports shared calenders then it will be great. Want to know why that feature is important? Well simply because the office manager can enter everyone's schedule into it and then everyone else can look at it to see where they're supposed to be, or if someone is gonna be going on vacation.

    But all in all, it's a great program and I reall hope it keeps on improving. Now if only they got on of the MTA's to mimic the functionality of Exchange, as one easy to use package, then THAT would be awesome! I'd be able to convince my company to switch in no time.

  13. Ximian to MS: I want to be just like you by mike_sucks · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Am I the only person that wonders why MS hasn't sued the crap out of Ximian yet?"

    Sort of. I don't know why MS hasn't sued them, but I'm more curious as to why Miguel/Ximian insists on copying *everything* MS does. I have a strong dislike of Outlook's UI, and so there's no chance I'm going to use Evolution - it looks exactly the same as it's non-free competitor. Yiick!

    Gnumeric of course was the first such example. Use a windows-like GTK theme and you'll have trouble telling the difference between it and Excel. Doesn't Gnumeric also use a VB-like scripting language? I know the function library is very similar.

    Then there's the whole Mono/.NET thing. C#, the intermediate format, the runtime - it's all a Java clone, but dancing to MS's tune rather than Sun's. Given how the majority of the Free Software / OSS community has shun Java, why are these guys jumping on what is essentially the same bandwagon, albeit one that's shiny new and pink, rather than a more mature one?

    ObJavaFreeSoftwareDisclosure: I *am* a free software Java developer, so I guess I am biased here.. but honestly, what gives?

    Anyone taking bets on Ximian's next product? An IE clone based on Gecko? A shoddy OS based on Linux? Sendmail with GUI just like Exchange's?

    Mike.

    --
    -- "So, what's the deal with Auntie Gerschwitz et all?"
    1. Re:Ximian to MS: I want to be just like you by RangerBob · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Part of the reason you'd emulate what the majority of people are using is to make it easier for them to transition to your software. You can't expect the majority of home users to want to switch to OSS if they'd have to relearn what might have taken them a long time to learn previously (and no, anyone that's had to try to help home users learn software can attest that this isn't an exaggeration).

      Businesses are the same way. They've trained users on the software they need to do their jobs. While the total cost of OSS may be lower, we can't forget that switching to OSS would incur training costs more than likely. By making OSS emulate the competitor, you provide an extra enticement for switching.

      Yeah, we might not like how some of the MS stuff looks, but the one good thing about most OSS software is that it's often times easy to customize the interface :)

  14. Re:Hold you horses! by BreakWindows · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reviewer claims that the Windows/Outlook combination is inherently inferior in terms of security, because users have too many privileges on the host system.

    I don't see what this has to do with Outlook.


    I think the quote was misleading, or just assumed we'd assume. Windows/Outlook is inherently inferior because users have too many privileges on the system, which lets those .VBS's toast the system when some sap forgot to disable them, or didn't realize upgrading Outlook with the default settings would put support for them back in.

    If I was to run Evolution on Windows I'd have exactly the same problem

    There's no scripting support in evolution (at least, not yet). I don't know of any security problems with it. I'm sure someone could configure it to make Word the default editor, thus allowing that MS flaw of surpassing macro checks, but that's not "inherent". Outlook tries to do too much, which is a recipee for disaster. The bigger they are, the harder they fall.

  15. Re:I might... by gowen · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Would You Trust a Source Named Anarchy?

    More than I would trust one ending with .gov

    And yet, irony of ironies, the infoanarchy article is copyright and the vast majority of stuff on .gov (www.nps.gov, say) is in the public domain.

    Anarchy, smanarchy, I say.
    --
    Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
  16. Few Points by NetJunkie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    First, a user doesn't REQUIRE full access to a Windows system. Just like UNIX, I can log in as root if I want, but it's not always a good idea. Set your users up to be just users and they'll have a harder time killing the system. Outlook 2000 is always more secure in regards to viruses. It won't let you run many attachments directly, and it will prompt you before letting something access your address book.

    Second, Evolution costs more than Outlook in an Exchange environment. When you buy an Exchange client license you get with it an Outlook license. If I were to use Evolution I'd still have to purchase the Exchange client license PLUS the Evolution connector for Exchange. So, it's not always cheaper.

    Finally, I consider Exchange to be Microsoft's best product. The server is very robust and extremely reliable. A good Exchange admin can set up Exchange and only needs to do minor maintenance and it'll run itself. Notice I said a GOOD admin...not just someone off the street. My Exchange servers run until something else, such as a hardware repair or firmware update, requires me to restart the system. The only software restarts I have to do usually are the fault of anti-virus software getting hung. Now that we've switched to Antigen those have gone away as well.

  17. Outlook at work, Evolution at home by truthsearch · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I use Outlook at work... because I have to. Ok, so I could get a job at a place that doesn't use Windows, but I'm trying to get the ignorant to open their eyes and migrate. I'll save that story for another time...

    But I've been using Outlook at work for years, including all of its "advanced" features like custom forms. I've been using Evolution at home for maybe 6 months. I deal with up to 100 emails a day at work and I have to say Outlook's scalability absolutely sucks. To keep it running at any reasonable speed, I let it "auto-archive". When my local mail box was about 85mb, the client was just too slow. Searches could take 3 or 4 minutes (on a fast machine). And the custom forms are horrible. I'll never use them again. We also tried importing a few thousand contacts through Outlook (to Exchange), but beyond maybe 100 for a single Outlook user, it grinds to a screeching hault.

    It may sound silly, but my favorite feature of Evolution that's not in Outlook (97 at least) is the discussion threaded e-mail view. On a mailing list, for example, I can see a tree of the conversation and read it in conversation order rather than date. It's such a little thing, but that's really handy. With that, it's nice, easy configuration, it's speed, and all the other great features others are posting about, overall I prefer Evolution.

    One other thing about it that relates to every Windows and KDE/GNOME app: Linux desktops are multi-threaded properly so windows will never freeze with an app and the desktop won't freeze unless the destop app itself has a problem. If Outlook freezes, well I've got to see that frozen windows until if and when I can "end task" and all of the other apps run slowly around it, when the desktop doesn't feel like freezing also. When connected to a big e-mail server, proper multi-threading is a great feature for the client to have.

    1. Re:Outlook at work, Evolution at home by scrytch · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It may sound silly, but my favorite feature of Evolution that's not in Outlook (97 at least) is the discussion threaded e-mail view.

      View -> Current View -> Group by Conversation.

      Probably an Outlook2k thing (what I have). Outlook 97 is awful -- upgrade a little and you'll probably find you have less problems with scalability also (also depends a lot on your Exchange server, if that's slow, you're going to be slow).

      : Linux desktops are multi-threaded properly so windows will never freeze with an app and the desktop won't freeze unless the destop app itself has a problem

      Don't care to be a usage nazi, but Linux desktops tend to be in no way multithreaded. Just multi-process, in that the window manager runs separate from the rest of the GUI. This has its good and bad points, but in any case has zero relevance to the interaction of mail clients. You are using an ancient version of Outlook that doesn't multithread or do much of anything in the background. I could cast many aspersions on 5 year old versions of Linux as well...

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
  18. confusing usability and shallow learning curve by j09824 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    One valid reason in the past has been that traditional Unix mail clients do not care much about usability. Most of them are console-based, all with their own keyboard syntax and menu layout.

    Console-based and keyboard-based apps can have excellent usability, as applications like Emacs show. What they don't have is "usability for beginners"--it takes a while to get proficient at them. But once people are proficient at them, they can be more efficient with them than in GUI-based systems.

    It is true that this may limit their adoption in corporations, but it is absolutely not true that therefore we all should settle on user interfaces that make making easy things easy to learn their number one priority.

    Also, few if any of the old clients have collaboration features like Outlook -- they are email clients and nothing else.

    Gee, this is no coincidence. In the UNIX world, collaboration and group applications happen in the file system. This is doubtlessly confusing for people who are used to Windows, but it has worked very well for the last 30 years on UNIX systems. Windows/Evolution-style systems don't look like an improvement over that.

    Don't get me wrong: Evolution is a nifty E-mail client, and it will doubtlessly attract many users, in particular users coming from Windows. However, neither Windows nor Evolution are the single gold standard for usability--there is not single gold standard for usability. There are many different kinds of user interfaces and many different kinds of people. Let's not fall into the Windows/Gates trap of believing that one size fits all.

  19. I hear people talking about by rutledjw · · Score: 3, Interesting
    the fact that Evolution cannot unseat Outlook because outlook works and most users aren't going to make the effort to move to something new for essentially the same thing. Maybe not, it's the lemming factor.

    Nonetheless, if one was an SA or esp in management (of an SA group), I would think that finding an e-mail client that offered similar functionality, better security and ease-of-use as compared to Outlook would be welcomed. Particularly when these "idiot" e-mail viruses continue to be a problem. They waste the time of the SA group (cleaning up the mess) and kill productivity for the poor saps that are "victims" by opening these viruses. Finally, due to the similarity between Evolution and Outlook, a memo describing the new e-mail client and that it works like Outlook would likely suffice for transition.

    The fact that it DOESN'T run on Windows is an issue that will hopefully be resovled, although doesn't affect me, I admit...

    --

    Computer Science is Applied Philosophy
  20. Major Evolution gripe... by Alik · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...is its lovely behavior of permanently saving every email as a file in your directory, even if you're using something like an IMAP server where the whole point is *not* to save messages locally. This leads to two problems:

    1. My quota gets eaten twice. I lose the mail quota for having mail stored on the server, plus I lose disk quota for the local copies.

    2. The directory is created with your default permissions, which for most shared systems include readability by others in the organization. I have been able to wander through other Evolution users' home directories and read their email. Joe User is not going to have a *clue* that this could be happening.

    OK, sure, local caching is good, but use some compression or encryption or *something*. (And yes, I still use it, because it's the nicest client out there. But security is not *that* hard.)

  21. Even Microsoft will evolve by wackysootroom · · Score: 3, Funny

    When Hemos ask the question "Will Evolution change Microsoft?" I feel obligated to say that evolution has theorically changed pond scum into human beings, but the downside is that it took millions on years.

  22. Re:Evolution 1.0.3 by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 4, Insightful
    In a subscription based model, IT managers pay a yearly fee and never ever have to worry about upgrades, patches or licensing issues.

    Users on a subscription model don't have to worry about licensing issues in the same way that a dog chained to a post doesn't have to worry about trampeling its neighbors' lawns.

  23. Exchange connector academic price??? by zerofoo · · Score: 4, Informative

    We buy the academic open license MS Office suite for $60.00/seat. This includes Outlook as well as the whole office suite.

    Now how am I supposed to tell my boss that Linux/Evolution/Open Office, will free us from the licensing costs and license tracking overhead of closed proprietary software? The OS academic open license for Windows XP costs $40.00/seat and the Office suite costs $60.00/seat...for a total of $100.00 per seat.

    The exchange connector for Evolution costs $69.00! This doesn't give me an entire office suite....just an Exchange connector! And I still have the license tracking overhead of closed proprietary software.

    I'd be willing to consider this product as an Outlook replacement, but not at this cost.

    -ted

  24. win32 port? by jilles · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I mostly use windows with outlook. I am pretty fed up with outlook (slow, unstable, insecure, vendor lock in and hard to export mail/addresses without losing information) and would like an alternative. I've been looking for a serious alternative for a while. I specifically dislike Netscape (too slow, insists on running in the same process as my browser), Eudora (too ugly/old) and Pegasus (too ugly/old)and consider them to be inferior options and haven't seen any other comparable mail clients (in fact I consider outlook express to be better than any of these). There are plenty of other mail clients but they all lack features.

    Specifically I want HTML in my mail but no scripting (unlike the popular beliefs here, outlook can provide this functionality). This disqualifies any command-line clients. I want flexible filtering. I receive a lot of mail and filtering is essential to me. Outlook is pretty good in this area too. I don't use/care about calendering right now but may need it in the future. It needs to be fast. Outlook does not scale well. Searches take forever in my mailbox and sometimes it just sits there for minutes doing god knows what for no obvious reason leaving me waiting to read/send some mail.

    Evolution looks like it has most of the features I need and I would consider using it instead of Outlook. I like the concept of a virtual folder and would probably use such a feature to organize my mail (1 virtual folder for each of my colleagues, 1 folder per topic I'm working on, 1 with everything in it, etc.). Because it is open source I have some level of confidence it performs well and is secure. If only it had a win32 version.

    I think being crossplatform would convince a lot of organizations of standardizing on evolution. Reality dictates that most companies need to use ms office and depend on calendering. However, a lot of people are very annoyed by the continueing stream of outlook related security breaches. Most large companies have lost valuable time fixing such issues in the past few years. I'm an advanced user and know how to dodge security issues in outlook but it still is annoying.

    If evolution is anywhere near as good as it is claimed to be, a lot of people would switch if it was available on their platform of choice. I certainly would give it some serious consideration.

    --

    Jilles
  25. Re:Outlook 97? Are you serious? by truthsearch · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As a large company we have to use MS apps that are a few years old for security and stability reasons. We're now slowly migrating to Windows 2000. We didn't consider it stable until the middle of last year (I still don't like it...). Most large companies, from what I've been researching, are only migrating to Win2K because support for NT is going to end soon. Most won't just to XP because of instability, too many bugs, and too many security holes. It's become an industry standard to wait a year after an MS app is released before using it in production.

    Also, if Outlook 97 has worked until now, why pay many thousands of dollars to upgrade to a new version which contains at minimum the same number of bugs and security holes. Any minor new features aren't worth it. We're now forced into MS's upgrade cycle.

  26. Another goal for the OSS community, BUT... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 3, Insightful
    ...we're still lacking some essential tools for a vast group of corporate desktop environments. Of course, the server arena is far ahead, but OSS desktops are lacking, when we're talking about a 'complete solution'.

    Here are some of the things that we have that work, and work well. So far, we have:

    kdevelop - development environment

    KDE3 - desktop environment

    Evolution - mail, PIM, colaboration (albeit, you need the Connector to use Exchange Server)

    Mozilla/Konqueror - pick one. Browser, o'course. And there are others that are 'satisfactory' for most tasks as well.

    Xine/mplayer/xmms - media

    PDF viewer - many are available that work well.

    samba client component - combined w/ all the various file managers for X, it's equally as functional as the Windows clients.

    These items are getting there, but still need a lot of/some help:

    GIMP - 'replace' photoshop. Still needs a lot of work on making it easier to use for 'non-script writing' users. Several generations behind Photoshop in that respect, but quite/just as powerful for a technically advanced artist.

    OpenOffice - I'd say it's arrived for most things, if it were able to deal with Word documents and had revision history support. There are just too many documents out there that are in Word format that will still need to be read and written to. Those features need to be supported.

    gnumeric - as far as I know, it should be able to do anything someone needs to do, but I've never really used Excel or gnumeric, besides for some very basic work. It did what I needed it to.

    There might be some commericial solutions to these things (WineX, for instance), but the idea is to not have to rely on MS's horrid licensing extortion, etc.

    Here are the main applications that I feel are the main things that are keeping linux back on the desktop in companies:

    AutoCAD - there really aren't any OSS CAD solutions, let alone one that's comparable to AutoCAD. IMO, the best thing AutoDesk could do would be to release a version of their software for linux. The (possible) added development that would be necessary to port it would be beneficial to the overall stability of their product as well. I really don't see there being an OSS solution for AutoCAD in the near future, unless it's an abstration layer. CAD is such a complex, involved item and would require a high degree of backward compatability.

    Complete independence from any Microsoft product - Unless this happens, MS will still have a strong foothold on manipulating the industry, and will make things general hell for everyone else involved as long as possible.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers