Slashdot Mirror
More on KDE Groupware
e8johan writes "The KDE PIM Team will integrate all their applications into one common interface and create an Outlook-like application.This is being done in the Kroupware project commissioned by the German government. There is a prototype of KOrganizer with KMain embedded into it (shots 1, 2), and another prototype with KMain running as a KPart in Kaplan (shot 1, 2, 3). This looks hopeful and if they manage to build the application as flexible and modular as other KDE projects this will hopefully mature into something great." Kroupware is a catchy name, but I wonder if the KDE team is aware of the English word croup.
I'm a kde user but I also use evolution. Why would I want to switch to Kroupware when evolution already does this and has the ability to connect to exchange servers? Aren't KDE and Gnome already redundant enough?
So much precious OOS developer time wasted on reinventing the wheel.
Imagine if we have a KDE compatible/look like evolution, we can save so much time in redoing just another outlook client - kaplan, which is basically the same thing as evolution.
I dont ever need to use two PIM client (outlook clone) that has identical functionality but with two different set of configuration files and stores my information differently.
I've been seeing people say 'this is the last step' or similar things, about some type of 'outlook killer' app for Linux. It won't be the last step. By the time there is something that is workable/usable for the majority of companies, there will be some other roadblock/obstacle which people start saying 'we have to have or we can't switch'. I'm not saying I necessarily even know what that is at this point, but it'll happen.
First it was web browsers.
Then an office suite.
Now an 'outlook' killer.
What next? `
Personal security/prefs setting ala 'passport'? Though that hasn't seemed to have taken off as pervasively (or publicly) as might have been. Honestly I can't think of what it might be, but there'll no doubt be some other area of corporate culture MS gets embedded into quickly, which will take years to wean people away from (if in fact they want to get weaned away - if it works for them, just let it be).
creation science book
The client looks fine and dandy, it looks like a wrapper for a bunch of different programs.. and people are already asking how is this better than evolution.. so KDE and Gnome have their own Outlook killers, but where is the Exchange killer ? I don't want to see screenshots of people's emails, I want to see screenshots of the tools an admin would use to configure the backend, how would I administer the calendaring portion of the server ? How about users email ? where is the equivalent of MMC ?.
Or do they still expect the admins to use vi, or kate to edit config files ?. Editing config files is fine, but with the targetted goal of the system, it will be too complex to remember which config file changes x and y. We need good, cross Environment (Kde or Gnome), tools to do this.
Wake me up when those are ready, I can't code, and I can't learn how to code and start contributing to this project by weeks end. I really hope the govt focuses some of this talent towards the Admin side.. I'm sure they will. But, I felt like beating a dead horse.
So don't use it. That's why I just install the browser component of Mozilla and use Pine for my personal email. For work purposes (at least mine and many others), an integrated groupware suite is the best way to go.
In an office environment, especially one that's all about communicating ideas amongst coworkers and clients, you'd be running all those separate programs at the same time anyway. You might as well have all that stuff (mail, shared calendar, contacts, appointments, meetings) stuck in one window.
Another advantage of an integrated suite like Outlook or Evolution is that you can have a single homepage-type screen that neatly summarizes any new mail messages, tasks or meetings for the day or next few days outwards.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
The thing that bothers me about
applications/desktops/wm's/etc
that are made to look exactly like
microsoft applications is that it
only fuels the argument that no
actual innovation is happening.
There seems to be too much
emphasis on making things as
pretty and familiar as possible
for the annoyed windows user looking
to migrate, and less emphasis on
making something unique and earth
shatteringly ground breaking. I'd
think it would be more important to
make something that is so much
better that it's forgone conclusion
as to whether or not you want to bother
playing with it.
The most important thing any republican needs to know.
Is it the governments job to take tax-money payed by all of us and put them into projects that competes (unfairly) with the products we make?
Is the government supposed to squander our tax money on over-priced software produced by a company constantly in court due to anticompetitive business practices and abuse of its monopoly? I see where you're coming from but it's not that simple. Frankly I'd rather compete against open source apps in a truly open market than compete with microsoft.
The different "modules", i.e. the mailer part, the calendering part, etc, are implemented as KParts. This means that you will be able to specify which KPart you want to embed for what functions (similar to how you can choose which text editing widget you want to use, KVim as Konqueror's textarea anyone?).
:)
It also means it is mostly "just" a shell around existing components, not another re-invented wheel. Not more bloated than running the components seperately (probably less overhead even, because you only need one KApplication instance).
In a sense it is tying existing technologies together (think back-end here too, using Open Source tech) into a slick package.
You don't *have* to use it, but corporate settings will probably like it.
As for your tax money (you live in Germany?) paying for the development, would you rather see the money go to Microsoft and get a product in return which will need upgrading eventually? Oh, and *you* personally don't get anything out of it, whereas now you get to use this development to your heart's content. And even if you don't like to use it personally, you'll be able to deploy it for your clients so they can at least use open technology).
To loosely quote Miguel de Icaza: it's not about making money, it's about *solving the problem*.
Personally, I'd happily pay 1% extra taxes to Germany (and I don't even live there!) to be used on similar projects because they benefit *everyone* (read below before you say "except software companies").
You see, times change. It used to be good business selling boxed software, but it's becoming less and less so. The trick now lies in providing a *service*. There will always be a need for skilled IT people, but to provide services, not simply products. I.e. a company specifies what their infrastructure needs to do, what requirements there are, etc, and you implement it using open source technology. There are no purchase or license fees (apart from specialised high-end software) and the value is in how well you set things up. It works for me
Nonsense! They've already invented words like 'kmail', 'killustrator', and now 'kroupware'. They've just begun!
do not read this line twice.
While you definately have a point, it's also the developer's choice. Most KDE development is in framework, i.e. you can embed the Kmail component into Kaplan. The requirement for this is that the component was designed with this framework in mind, or is ported to do so.
Application development with KDE is fast, because you get to build on a great framework with many components to choose from.
There is very little duplicate code in KDE, although much of the KDE code does the same as similar code in other projects. What you have to remember is that this KDE code can be plugged into any other KDE program, and KMail for example is a shell for the (now) KMail component which is built on SMTP, POP, IMAP, etc kio-slaves.
KDE's architecture is very advanced, and very well planned. To make full use of it, it needs to be considered from the start. Hence re-doing something for KDE as opposed to slapping KDE menu's on an existing program.
The reason KMail is part of KDE is that any KDE app can embed and control KMail components and vice versa. If you need IMAP in your application, it's trivial to add it.
The reason Xchat is part of Gnome is that it uses Gtk and some other Gnome libs. If you want to include IRC in your Gnome app (along with all Xchat functionality), is it also trivial?
There's a difference. And no this does not say anything about wether Gnome or KDE is better, bless both projects. I'm just pointing out there *are* others reasons than NIH.
As much as I hate Microsoft and dislike Outlook, I must admit that the meeting planner in Outlook is a "must have" application in business.
The one serious flaw in the planner is the human factor. All too often people wouldn't keep their calendar up to date or wouldn't bother to reply to a meeting notice.
-- Will program for bandwidth