Slashdot Mirror


Outlook, Evolution and Kontact Side-by-Side

gaijincory writes "Opensourceversus.com has put together a nice side-by-side comparison of Microsoft Outlook, Evolution and KDE's Kontact groupware programs. The screenshots delve in to the nitty gritty details and should help in making an informed choice, if nothing else. This is a follow up to their comparison of the Outlook Express and Thunderbird e-mail clients."

245 comments

  1. Windows and Linux by tehshen · · Score: 5, Informative

    These guys also did Windows and Linux comparisons which make for good viewing.

    --
    Guy asked me for a quarter for a cup of coffee. So I bit him.
    1. Re:Windows and Linux by xtracto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just some comments. I think the comparisons are a little bit biased.

      For example, in the Calculator comparison, while the Linux ones are on scientific mode, it seems they didnt wanted to show that the Windows calc can also do it.

      In the Instant Messenger comparision, what about opening a messenger windows (in the Windows version) and starting a video or audio conversation, and comparing it to the others (mmm I do not think it is possible to have an audio or video conversation with gaim).

      The paint program comparison... WTF! comparing paintbrush with The Gimp?? if you tell me that it is because the Gimp is part of the OS, let me tell you that it is NOT, and you CAN install it on Windows too, so no, there is no point comparing them! that was the most biased comparison for me.

      I know that the idea of making these comparisons is cool, but, again I would like to see them made by a non biased source, this seems a bit biased.

      I do not want to deffend Windows, as I like Linux (I run Ubuntu in my house PC) but if we cry when we see those TCO studies that Microsoft pays... ok we can not make the same mistake.

      P.d... so loooooooong (karma falling down to the bottom of the abyss...)

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    2. Re:Windows and Linux by poningru · · Score: 1

      You have a point but I have to tell you that yes you can do vid and audio with Gaim. go search sourceforge I dont have time to go find it.

      --
      Calm down people, its a religion not an operating system.
    3. Re:Windows and Linux by brpr · · Score: 1

      Not on msn in the latest version.

      --
      Freedom is not increased by mere diminuation of government. Anarchy is freedom for the strong and slavery for the weak.
    4. Re:Windows and Linux by toofast · · Score: 4, Informative

      The paint program comparison... WTF! comparing paintbrush with The Gimp?? if you tell me that it is because the Gimp is part of the OS, let me tell you that it is NOT, and you CAN install it on Windows

      But GIMP is already packaged on the compared Linux distributions. With Windows, the graphics tool packaged with the OS is Paint.

      Same thing for text editors: you can install a bunch on Windows too, but the one that comes bundled with the OS is feature-lean Notepad.

      At least the author didn't compare Word Processors: MS's WordPad would have looked equally lame vs. OpenOffice's Write, which, again, is bundled with just about every Linux distro out there. Yes, you can download and install OOo on Windows, but it's not part of the Windows Distribution.

    5. Re:Windows and Linux by jd142 · · Score: 1

      The problem is that people claim to be comparing windows and linux when what they are really comparing is what you get when you buy a retail copy of windows vs. what you get when you buy the commercial distribution *bundle* for approximately the same price.

      If you look at the comparisons in that light, then comparing gimp to paint makes slightly more sense, because for your $185 for the Windows XP Pro SP 2 upgrade the best you get is paint. I didn't bother taking the time to run down the price for a non-upgrade version. For your $90 version of Suse 9.3 Professional (all prices are just the result of a quick Amazon search, pretending to be a naive buyer who doesn't know how to download and install software our even understand that free software let's you do that) you get the gimp.

      It's still an unfair comparison of course, especially since the reviewers rarely make that difference explicit.

    6. Re:Windows and Linux by mrtom852 · · Score: 1

      Whether an app is part of an OS is hard to tell as there is no clear line. What I will say is that _I_ am running Debian and as part of that 'product' I have GIMP and it's fully supported. The only fully supported graphics app with the Windows product is.... Paint. What's unfair about this?

      I've recently started using Windoze again for my new job and the amount of features I consider missing is rediculous. So far I have installed the following unsupported apps...

      • Firefox
      • Python
      • Cygwin (inc. bash, perl, gcc, grep, tail, awk, sed, head.....)
      • MS Powertools Virtual Desktop (which sucks)
      • Putty (as a flippin Console for bash!)

      I'm still looking for a decent text editor(!?!), media player, clipboard viewer.

      And I don't want to hear any stupid arguments about normal people not needing a unix tools. I created one-liner yesterday to summarize some logs that people used to manually examine (and roughly). My boss is concerned with productivity and this took about 60 seconds. (As far as my scripting skills go they are pretty shoddy too!)

    7. Re:Windows and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not to mention you can run Gimp for Windows

    8. Re:Windows and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is just silly.

      If you want GIMP on a default windows install just integrate GIMP install with the nLite windows xp steamliner.

      Windows isnt a "distribution" and comparing it to a linux one is just ridiculous

      Equally i dont see GIMP packaged with all distributions. The only real standard for all linux distributions is the kernel itself!

    9. Re:Windows and Linux by Khuffie · · Score: 1
      decent text editor(!?!), media player

      Try TextPad and Zoom Player.

    10. Re:Windows and Linux by xtracto · · Score: 1

      A descent text editor: have you tried Notepad 2 for me it has worked wonders, as I was looking for a text editor as fast as notepad with more features but not as bloated as JEdit or UltraEdit (this last is not free).

      Descent media player, have you tried VCL? personally I think MS Media player is quite good, as I can play almost everything on it, but of course as it is from Microsoft it surely is crap for you so, VLC will do it.

      Decent Clipboard viewer, this (clipbrd) page might be useful for you and guess what, you have to TYPE the command to use it, so you wont miss the Linux way.

      And what do you mean by "unsupported"?? unsupported by who? by the operating system? those apps are not more supported by Linux than by Linux, in both OS they have the exactly same licenses. In none of them can you call the OS company representatives to help you using them (as both of them will tell you to RTF-Forums-FAQs, etc).

      And the Gimp is equally FULLY SUPPORTED in Windowze, I can see you are just flamebaiting... ask the people who made the Gimp how much "more" they support The Gimp for windows and for Linux... WTF are you barfing about?... I do not know why am I answering to your comment...

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    11. Re:Windows and Linux by VStrider · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For example, in the Calculator comparison, while the Linux ones are on scientific mode, it seems they didnt wanted to show that the Windows calc can also do it.

      Uhm, no. That was the basic mode. Have you seen the scientific mode??

      In the Instant Messenger comparision, what about opening a messenger windows (in the Windows version) and starting a video or audio conversation, and comparing it to the others (mmm I do not think it is possible to have an audio or video conversation with gaim).

      Yes, you can. There's Gaim-vv. Also you could use GnomeMeeting.

      The paint program comparison... WTF! comparing paintbrush with The Gimp?? if you tell me that it is because the Gimp is part of the OS, let me tell you that it is NOT, and you CAN install it on Windows too, so no, there is no point comparing them! that was the most biased comparison for me.

      Well, I'm sorry but I find it fair. When you install your WinXp system, how do you process images? The only tool you got is MS Paint, unless you want to pay some £500+ for photoshop.
      On the other hand, on Linux you got Gimp which is included on your installation, is on par with photoshop and costs nothing.
      Sure you could install Gimp on WinXP, but you'd need to compile and install GTK+ and then compile and install Gimp. That's too much for most average users. On Linux it'll be installed without any action from you.
      And btw it would be unfair to boost MS WinXP by showing open source programs on it. If you use open-source programs on Windows, why run windows at all?

      I know that the idea of making these comparisons is cool, but, again I would like to see them made by a non biased source, this seems a bit biased.

      How can you bias a screenshot?? There was no bias at all. You can tell windows has lost their "edge" when you get windows fanboys trying to defend them from simple screenshots! :D
      And it's good that websites like this are around to show people what they can do with Linux and open-source.

      --
      VStrider.
    12. Re:Windows and Linux by sholden · · Score: 1

      If you install the X packages in cygwin you get rxvt which can run without an X-server and works as reasonable console.

      It also works with the 'chere' command (the chere package isn't installed by default I think) to get a Bash shell here right click menu option in explorer...

    13. Re:Windows and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not the fairest comparison on a few of those items. Firefox has a few features that IE doesn't, and is safer for lacking ActiveX, but I would describe the failure of MS to bundle Firefox a major failing. Cmd has some (not enough, but some) of the features of bash, so you should contrast bash with cmd. ActivePerl and ActivePython don't require Cygwin. On the other hand, grep, tail, awk, sed, head all are missing equivalents from Windows. Why you'd need Putty is beyond me, as I work in bash in X Cygwin. Decent text editor? There are plenty of Windows ports of emacs, and vim and other text editors can be added to Cygwin; or if you're looking for a windowed text editor and don't mind paying a license fee, UltraEdit is good. There is a built-in clipboard viewer, but it's not installed by default. Windows Media Player isn't that horrible; I'd install QuickTime too, and probably an open source player as well.

    14. Re:Windows and Linux by iwan-nl · · Score: 1

      I mostly use cross-platform apps. VLC is a good media player (Get it while you can!). And if you want a familiar text editor you can try gVIm for windows.

      --
      I'm trying to improve my English. Please correct me on any spelling/grammar errors in this post.
    15. Re:Windows and Linux by VStrider · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      And the Gimp is equally FULLY SUPPORTED in Windowze, I can see you are just flamebaiting... ask the people who made the Gimp how much "more" they support The Gimp for windows and for Linux... WTF are you barfing about?... I do not know why am I answering to your comment...

      Gimp is "more" supported in windows???!! Did you get that from Microsoft's "Get the facts"? Here's some facts for you windows fanboy, Gimp is built on GTK which is a Linux API. Think Win32 the Linux way. The windows port needs the GTK windows port as well. A GTK app will never feel windows native to you because they're not. The devs were kind enough to port GTK to windows so you get to play with our toys. Thank them and STFU.

      --
      VStrider.
    16. Re:Windows and Linux by aslate · · Score: 0

      Sure you could install Gimp on WinXP, but you'd need to compile and install GTK+ and then compile and install Gimp. That's too much for most average users. On Linux it'll be installed without any action from you.

      Wow, that took the downloading and running of a whole two exe or msi files. A double-click is far too much for me, i'd rather download the binaries, compile it under Linux and then try and fiddle with the dependancies... Of course you also have the check-box at install time, that's a few clicks less then Windows, oh no!

      And btw it would be unfair to boost MS WinXP by showing open source programs on it. If you use open-source programs on Windows, why run windows at all?
      Oh sorry, i'll make sure i stop running Firefox, Thunderbird, The GIMP, Apache...

    17. Re:Windows and Linux by vrt3 · · Score: 3, Informative
      Well, I'm sorry but I find it fair. When you install your WinXp system, how do you process images? The only tool you got is MS Paint, unless you want to pay some £500+ for photoshop.

      Or install The GIMP.
      On the other hand, on Linux you got Gimp which is included on your installation, is on par with photoshop and costs nothing.
      Sure you could install Gimp on WinXP, but you'd need to compile and install GTK+ and then compile and install Gimp. That's too much for most average users.

      Actually it's much easier than that. Download and install two files from http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/stable.html, one for GTK and one for The GIMP, and you're ready.
      --
      This sig under construction. Please check back later.
    18. Re:Windows and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But MS and Sun do this all the time.

      Oh look, Linux (meaning Linux distro) has as many security issues (forget rating them) as we do...

    19. Re:Windows and Linux by VStrider · · Score: 1

      Wow, that took the downloading and running of a whole two exe or msi files.

      Yes, you can get precompiled GTK+ and Gimp for windows, but they are not the latest versions. If you want the latest versions on windows you'd need to compile them yourself.

      i'd rather download the binaries, compile it under Linux and then try and fiddle with the dependancies... Of course you also have the check-box at install time, that's a few clicks less then Windows, oh no!

      Try "yum install gimp". That's all there is to it. It'll download gimp and install it for you including any dependencies.

      Oh sorry, i'll make sure i stop running Firefox, Thunderbird, The GIMP, Apache...

      Noone asked you to stop using them. I think it's nice that you find Linux apps better and you use them, even though your OS is windows. My point was if you use mainly Linux apps, why not actually jump to Linux?

      --
      VStrider.
    20. Re:Windows and Linux by smchris · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I hear you. But after reading Windows Nearly Ready For Desktop Use (currently still on the /. home page), I'm more inclined to say it is a valid comparison. The fact that Windows isn't a "distribution" is simply a point against Windows. It's all a frame of reference and it is about time we promoted the idea that Windows is a naked OS and doesn't meet the standards of a distribution in total value and ease of desktop installation.

    21. Re:Windows and Linux by aslate · · Score: 0

      I've tried it, but i'm not ready for a switch. There's loads of annoying things like my Windows email archives, and things you get used to. I might set up a cheap Linux box at some point. I never did get BitTorrent working properly under Linux either.

      Anyway, the people that are "Too stupid to install it" won't care if they're the latest files of versions. Doesn't matter to them, it'll work fine for anything they use. My point was that it's just as easy under both.

    22. Re:Windows and Linux by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 3, Insightful
      My point was if you use mainly Linux apps, why not actually jump to Linux?

      Open source is not Linux. Open source applications such as Firefox, Apache, GIMP, are applications, that happen to run on a variety of operating systems.

    23. Re:Windows and Linux by swillden · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And the Gimp is equally FULLY SUPPORTED in Windowze, I can see you are just flamebaiting... ask the people who made the Gimp how much "more" they support The Gimp for windows and for Linux

      This isn't true. The GIMP's primary developers all work on *nix and they design the UI around the common X11 window managers. This actually causes lots of complaints by GIMP users on Windows, because the X11 window managers are more sophisticated and featureful than Windows' is, and the result makes the GIMP UI behave badly on Windows. Most of the common complaints about the GIMP UI are problems only on the Windows version.

      The GIMP's developers don't care, though, because they develop for X11, and it works just fine there.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    24. Re:Windows and Linux by footissimo · · Score: 1

      There's lots of ways of converting email archives from WindowsLinux - most of linux email apps seem to use mbox format anyway. I'm currently using XP with old emails collected whilst using Mandriva, Ubuntu and 98 :) Oh and BT - I'll be willing to bet its as easy as typing urpmi bittorrent (or whatever package manager your distro uses) or just clicking on a couple of buttons and typing bittorrent into a search box. Alternatively, you could just use Azureus.

    25. Re:Windows and Linux by Stween · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think gaim-vv has rudimentary support for MSN webcams.

      From glancing at the forums, it's probably flaky as hell just now, and probably not entirely easy to set up, but at least progress is being made. If MSN webcams is your idea of progress, that is.

    26. Re:Windows and Linux by pesc · · Score: 1

      if you tell me that it is because the Gimp is part of the OS, let me tell you that it is NOT, and you CAN install it on Windows too, so no, there is no point comparing them!

      Of course you can install stuff on a plain Windows XP installation to make it usable. Just look here.

      --

      )9TSS
    27. Re:Windows and Linux by brpr · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, it doesn't have rudimentary support for msn webcams in the latest release. They're waiting on farsight, which looks rather over-engineered and will likely take ages to finish.

      You can blame it all on GStreamer.

      --
      Freedom is not increased by mere diminuation of government. Anarchy is freedom for the strong and slavery for the weak.
    28. Re:Windows and Linux by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 1

      But they're paying for an operating system.

    29. Re:Windows and Linux by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1
      When you install your WinXp system, how do you process images? The only tool you got is MS Paint, unless you want to pay some £500+ for photoshop.

      So there is nothing in between Paint and Photoshop? Stand by while I laugh my ass off at that thought.

    30. Re:Windows and Linux by nmb3000 · · Score: 1

      I'm still looking for a decent text editor(!?!), media player

      Try looking at SciTE. It's for Win32 and Linux, free, open, blah blah. I use it for a variety of things, mostly scripting and programming and it does a very good job. Very configurable.

      For a media player, I'm not sure what you have against WMP 10, but I will admit occasionally I've come across a video that doesn't play quite right (a small problem with the encoding I've found usually). When this happens I try Media Player Classic. It's a revamped version of WMP 6.4 (many say the best version of WMP released, ever). It supports all the installed codecs and DirectShow like WMP 10. If that still doesn't do it for you, try out some that others posted.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    31. Re:Windows and Linux by loginx · · Score: 1

      By "supported", the parent basically mean that he can ask his package manager to perform a system update (keeping a system up to date is important for servers as it increases security of the system by automatically installing newer releases of software with specific vulnerabilities addressed, and important for a workstation as it almost always increases usability of your desktop), and these apps will be upgraded automatically.

      I do not know of a windows update manager that is able to perform updates on third-party software, therefore these apps are not supported. You need to remember what apps you have installed on your system (easy) and periodically check the website of these projects to make sure you have the latest version. If that's not the case, you need to go to the app's download site and install the upgrade. Otherwise, proceed to the next application.

      If you're lucky, you'll see an announcement somewhere (/. for example) about *some* new releases for major applications.

      Keep in mind that the reason this would not really work out for Microsoft is that a very large part of software out there available for windows is commercial and upgrading your system once a month for example, would probably entail spending a few hundred dollars at each upgrade since you need to pay for upgrades for most of these tools. And Microsoft cannot maintain a repository of open-source software for windows-update to maintain because they would be admiting that it is simply more convenient to maintain a system based on open-source software.

      I hope this helps.

    32. Re:Windows and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would compare wordpad with abiword actually.

      Of course you can get abiword for windows. It's NICE and fast.

      And OO.o

      And Gimp

      granted, gimp is crashy as hell on windows, but I suspect that's not the fault of the OS.

    33. Re:Windows and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Gimp is "more" supported in windows?

      From which school of reading comprehension did you translate the phrase "equally fully" to "more"

      > Gimp is built on GTK which is a Linux API.

      And we all know it doesn't work anywhere else. You're a fucking idiot.

    34. Re:Windows and Linux by violajack · · Score: 1

      I agree with you, but I feel the need to play Devil's Advocate for just a moment....

      Could Microsoft really get away with bundling as much software with Windows as the average Linux distrobution comes with? In the EU, they aren't even allowed to include their media player with their OS. There was all that fuss about including a web browser a while back. (I know, they have underhanded ways of including their own stuff to the detriment of their competition and the market and all. There's also their monopoly problems, but I'm just playing devil's advocate here.) Could they really get away with including the GIMP on the install CD?

      I know it wouldn't happen because Microsoft likes to write its own software for inclusion in its OS. What if they beefed up Paint the point where it competed with Photoshop? Would you complain that it was unfair competion against Photoshop? I'm afraid that because of Microsoft's past troubles they will never really be able to bundle as much software with the OS install as Ubuntu, even though they both only live on one CD.

      Of course the other thing stopping them is the fact that they would rather charge you extra for things like your Office applications.

      What if Microsoft offered a Windows XP Complete Solutions that came with all of the categories of applications the average Linux flavor comes with and a separate Windows XP Bare Bones OS that came with nothing but the basics (notepad, paint, solitare, things like that)? Would the market allow them to do something like that? Which would your new pc come with? Which would you install on the machine you pieced together to give your grandma?

    35. Re:Windows and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't even require you to install the X packages, actually -- it's a separate package. Much better than the piece of garbage CMD window

    36. Re:Windows and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never did get BitTorrent working properly under Linux either.

      As the other poster said, if you use the distro's (whichever that is) install tool, it will handle dependencies for you. Otherwise you will need python and wxPython(GTK) for the GUI.

    37. Re:Windows and Linux by benjcurry · · Score: 1

      Yes, but GNOME isn't part of the "Linux OS" either. There is an argument to be made that in fact Linux (as in GNU/Linux) DOES include all of these related tools, as they all use one another to create more advanced applications. They were comparing Windows XP, Suse and Ubuntu. The GIMP is included with 2 of those. :) About the calculator...mmm...Ok. :)

    38. Re:Windows and Linux by benjcurry · · Score: 1

      Exactly...I mean, look at OS X nowadays. Light years ahead of Win in terms of being complete in and of itself.

    39. Re:Windows and Linux by benjcurry · · Score: 1

      I think it would be acceptable for MS to do this as well, as long as ALL the included apps could be installed or not based on the choice of the user. MSN Messenger, Media Player, IE, etc. should all be optional.

    40. Re:Windows and Linux by g0_p · · Score: 1

      Sure you could install Gimp on WinXP, but you'd need to compile and install GTK+ and then compile and install Gimp.

      Linked from the gimp website is http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/ which has binaries for windows including the gtk binaries.

    41. Re:Windows and Linux by rikkards · · Score: 2

      Just some comments. I think the comparisons are a little bit biased.

      You think? With a website name of opensourceversus what would make you think that?

    42. Re:Windows and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No offense cause I do kinda agree with you but you have to remember that Windows is getting sued right and left cause they already have so much in their OS. Could you imagine if they made their own paint program and distributed it with windows(a real good one like photoshop or GIMP)? They would be sued by every company and government around. I'm just waiting for Linux to get big in europe and then watching all the distros being told that they can't package all those programs cause its killing the competition. Just cause its not happening now doesn't mean it won't if Linux ever gets big. It is unfair to compare two products where one is being held back by the courts and the other totally free to do whatever they want. In this case I would agree with the grand parent in that it was a bias comparison. Right now Linux is going unchecked but it may not always be the case so enjoy your freedom while you have it. I have a feeling that if Linux ever gets as big as windows it will be facing some legal problems since it would hamper other businesses cause it distributes every thing. Sure just like in Windows you can download what ever you want but most people only use what they have and if thats the case it may not always be like it is now.

    43. Re:Windows and Linux by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      At least the author didn't compare Word Processors: MS's WordPad would have looked equally lame vs. OpenOffice's Write, which, again, is bundled with just about every Linux distro out there. Yes, you can download and install OOo on Windows, but it's not part of the Windows Distribution.

      OTOH, consider that most people buy Windows pre-installed on their new PC, and many of those new PCs also come with Office pre-installed. In those cases, don't you think you could call Office "part of the distribution"?

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    44. Re:Windows and Linux by Vantage13 · · Score: 1
      OTOH, consider that most people buy Windows pre-installed on their new PC, and many of those new PCs also come with Office pre-installed. In those cases, don't you think you could call Office "part of the distribution"?

      I think you are mistaken there. Works often comes bundled with new PC's, it's rare you'll find a full blown office install bundled (unless there's additional charge for it).

    45. Re:Windows and Linux by VStrider · · Score: 1

      I've tried it, but i'm not ready for a switch. There's loads of annoying things like my Windows email archives, and things you get used to. I might set up a cheap Linux box at some point. I never did get BitTorrent working properly under Linux either.

      I undestand that it's difficult to change habits, but don't be afraid of making the switch. Sure you'll have questions and you might get stuck somewhere, but there lots of friendly forums you can get help from. You don't have to dump windows completely. I'd say keep them for a while, till you are confident in Linux; setup your system to multiboot Windows/Linux.

      --
      VStrider.
    46. Re:Windows and Linux by VStrider · · Score: 1

      Open source is not Linux. Open source applications such as Firefox, Apache, GIMP, are applications, that happen to run on a variety of operating systems. Never said open source is Linux. Read my post carefully. I was talking about Gimp, gaim etc which *are* Linux apps. They are coded on GTK. GTK is the premier GUI API in Linux (think win32 in windows). The whole lot of Gnome is based on GTK. Sheeesh...

      --
      VStrider.
    47. Re:Windows and Linux by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1
      Nonsense. GIMP and GAIM are open source applications, which run on a variety of platforms. One of those is Linux, another of which is Windows.

      What they are coded in makes no difference.

    48. Re:Windows and Linux by Ayende+Rahien · · Score: 1

      Are you ready to say that to a KDE developer?

      --

      --
      Two witches watched two watches.
      Which witch watched which watch?
    49. Re:Windows and Linux by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Hmm, OK. I guess Works wouldn't fare much better against OpenOffice than WordPad would.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    50. Re:Windows and Linux by VStrider · · Score: 1

      haha Qt is good as well. GTK is a personal preference.

      --
      VStrider.
    51. Re:Windows and Linux by VStrider · · Score: 1

      That's because GTK has been ported to windows. Just like win32 has been ported to Linux with Wine.

      An open source app written in win32 is still a windows app. An open source app written in GTK is still a linux app. I don't see why you cann't understand it.

      --
      VStrider.
    52. Re:Windows and Linux by Gulthek · · Score: 1

      Actually it's much easier than that. Download and install two files from http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/stable.html, one for GTK and one for The GIMP, and you're ready.

      Still too hard for most users. Finding an obscure program from an obscure website when they could've just popped in the Linux install disks and gone to town?

      Disclaimer: I'm an OS X user, which is (IMNSHO) still the best choice, especially for the kinds of users we seem to be talking about.

    53. Re:Windows and Linux by I'm+Don+Giovanni · · Score: 1

      "Well, I'm sorry but I find it fair. When you install your WinXp system, how do you process images? The only tool you got is MS Paint, unless you want to pay some £500+ for photoshop."

      There's always Paint.Net :-)
      There are also plenty of image processing apps on download.com.
      There is also the Windows version of Gimp, itself.

      The funny thing is that you'd be among the first to scream bloody murder if Microsoft did bundle more powerful apps with Windows, as that would be "anti-competitive" (and you probably did scream as much with regard to browsers). The hypocrisy is palpable. LOL

      --
      -- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
    54. Re:Windows and Linux by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      I know I'd like to see more side by side comparisons on funcitonalities. I'd say this is a good start for both OS camps.

    55. Re:Windows and Linux by Lord+Kestrel · · Score: 1

      Textpad is probably the best text editor I've ever had the pleasure of using. That it also can also be extended to compile/debug code is the icing on the cake :)

    56. Re:Windows and Linux by mvdw · · Score: 1
      Probably in the wrong place, but anyway, the other day I was doing a list of what I dislike about windows. Here it is:
      • No decent command-line shell container out-of-the-box (cf. xterm/rxvt/aterm/eterm/konsole etc)
      • Not true multi-user (one login at once -> cf. VNC+Linux, Xwindow system etc)
      • No sloppy focus
      • Taskbar doesn't span multiple monitors (At least on my setup)
      • taskbar is inflexible as a container for other apps (cf. KDE/gnome taskbar, fluxbox slit, wmaker)
      • Only one window manager available
      • No virtual desktops (Out-of-the-box)
      • No OOTB window roll-up
      • Only one focus model

      That's all available out of the box on Linux. My lappy runs fluxbox cause it's only a PIII-600, while my desktop is a full-blown KDE job. The KDE environment is much more productive than my work WinXP box. Who says Linux isn't ready for the desktop?

    57. Re:Windows and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh that's why they're being sued. For giving away too much free software! Here, from reading the articles, I thought it was because they used their position of controlling the source to prevent other software from working as well as theirs, and preventing PC makers from distributing non-MS software. Thanks for clearing that up.

  2. Original and counterfeit? by Bender_ · · Score: 2, Insightful


    How comes copying GUIs, look and feel and functionality of software is seen as a normal thing while people go mad about copied Ipods etc?

    1. Re:Original and counterfeit? by ciroknight · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It only seems like the normal thing because most Open Source coders look at something that already exists, and try to mirror its functionality. This is a great example of it.

      As for the marketplace, the iPod's interface was design genius, and is it's sole link to fame. Stealing the interface of an iPod is stealing the iPod. The same shouldn't be said for software; the interface and the application should be two very seperate tools. That way, you can use whatever interface you like, and nobody complains. Like Linux, for example.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    2. Re:Original and counterfeit? by eyeye · · Score: 1

      " It only seems like the normal thing because most Open Source coders look at something that already exists, and try to mirror its functionality"

      I understand people coding a new email client might make it look like what they are used to, however Evolution used to ape the old version of Outlook but they have implemented outlook 2003 looks too (those mail etc.. "buttons" on the left side). Basically they are doing a poor job of copying and playing catch up. How about sitting down and trying to make the best email app there is instead of just trying to copy existing ones down to their cosmetic features.

      disclaimer I love open source and use thunderbird as my email client (at home) - at work I use Outlook because its mandated (not because of the way it looks!).

      --
      Bush and Blair ate my sig!
    3. Re:Original and counterfeit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because said people are #$%^&*( Apple fanboys.

    4. Re:Original and counterfeit? by pboulang · · Score: 2, Interesting
      How about sitting down and trying to make the best email app there is instead of just trying to copy existing ones down to their cosmetic features.

      Frankly, the way that OSX does it works for me. Tightly coupled yet separate mail, calendar, address book, etc. Each app does what it does really really well.

      --

      This comment is guaranteed*

      *not guaranteed

    5. Re:Original and counterfeit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny that many aspects of OS X were copied from elsewhere...

    6. Re:Original and counterfeit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      How comes copying GUIs, look and feel and functionality of software is seen as a normal thing while people go mad about copied Ipods etc?

      eh, the question is "who started that trend." look-and-feel argument came to an end when Microsoft got away with making Mac look-a-like when the concept of GUI was new. now who's copying what?

    7. Re:Original and counterfeit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've an original Diamond Rio Mp3 player that works just fine. It was designed and marketed many years before the Ipod was a gleam in Steve Job's eye and suprisingly the Ipod interface looks exactly like it.
      Who stole from whom?

    8. Re:Original and counterfeit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who are you? Q*bert?
      It's ok to type out the profanity.

  3. Choice? by Zonnald · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't see how three almost identical screenshots(of each piece of functionality) actually gives you enough information to make a choice.

    1. Re:Choice? by tehshen · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, it does give us an idea of how both clients work.

      "In Outlook, you can do this, and it works just like this in Evolution. See, look at the screenshots, it's easy."

      All of the other factors (security, spam filtering, etc) are in the comments at the end of the page.

      --
      Guy asked me for a quarter for a cup of coffee. So I bit him.
    2. Re:Choice? by ciroknight · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem as I see it is that the screen shots don't really show how any one product is better than the other; they're all virtually identical, so why not use any of them, which defeats the point of "choice" anyways.

      Compatibility is one thing, but design is entirely another. These apps were designed to be carbon copies, not to be Outlook compatible.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    3. Re:Choice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I find most amusing is the hypocrisy this exposes in the KDE Kamp. I do remember them slagging off (as they do anything not "K") Evolution because it was "too much like Outlook" -- never mind that the Evolution team's stated aim was to develop an Outlook killer and encourage a transition.

      Now we see the KDE Kamp desperately trying to do the same by copying almost bit for bit the user interface. One more thing: watch out for screenshots. One trap I used to fall into with KDE software was the screenshot syndrome. The first thing done on KDE projects is always a mock up with lots of impressive looking options that gets posted to slashdot to whip up the zealotry about how much KDE r00lz. When you actually click anything you get "not implemented yet", or a crash since the code is early alpha, or even claimed support for complex features that are only 1/3 implemented.

      Both evo and outlook are proven solutions installed in corporate environments across the world -- though Outlook obviously leads in that department.

    4. Re:Choice? by Jotham · · Score: 1

      and who says that open source isn't innovative... oh wait, now it's a good thing...

    5. Re:Choice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evolution is now the only FLOSS app?

    6. Re:Choice? by Krimszon · · Score: 1

      Well, if the looks are the same, it is probably easier for users to make the switch, and these so called 'productivity' programs are a big factor in making the overall switch from Linux to Windows in most office environments.

      One thing it fails to give info on, is the possiblity of synchronizing with PDA's, that's an important feature for me.

    7. Re:Choice? by xtracto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would like to have a review of these software where they told me what they can NOT do.

      It would be nice to see, for example, that Evolution or Thunderbird can NOT sync with some PDA's, and that Outlook do NOT have a learning anti SPAM algorithm, and all that.

      You know, I think it is great, when comparing things to see all the bad side of them, or the features they do not have, that way you would be able to make a chose based thinking like "ok, so this software do not have all this, but I think these characteristics it has is enough for me to use it".

      And it goes also for OS (Windows, OSX, Linux, *BSD), Office suites (OOo, MSOffice, WordPerfect, ...), Web browsers (Opera, Firefox, IE, even Lynx!).

      As an example, I have read about 2 subjects, the first one was about a PhD, so I searched for information about "how to succesfully make a PhD", and of course I found a lot of tips etc, but almost all the pages where telling the same, but one friend of mine showed me a document that had this other approach "how NOT to make a PhD", and it was really useful, and funny.

      The other example was with something quite similar, about publishing a paper, so if you look about "how to publish a paper" you will find tons and tons of information from the different publishing houses about the guidelines, in some other places you will find tips of how to "write" etc. But if you search something like "how NOT to publish a paper" you certainly find (I did) nice documents that with sarcasm, will tell you everything you need to do to get your paper rejected.

      I know, it is not a usual way to see things, but I think it gives you more information that you wont have with the usual reviews.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    8. Re:Choice? by r3dx0r · · Score: 1

      parent is right.
      the applications may look similar, but that doesn't tell you if e.g. one of these apps is buggy or how it interacts with other applications.
      i do care about screenshots, it's just that things like stability should be considered too.

    9. Re:Choice? by Forthan+Red · · Score: 1

      Exactly. This is pretty useless. What's the point of side-by-side comparisons when the thumbnails are too small to make anything out, and expanding them to full size makes side-by-side comparisons impossible? The authors really need to re-think this, if they want to present something useful.

    10. Re:Choice? by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      they're all virtually identical, so why not use any of them, which defeats the point of "choice" anyways.

      So choose on other grounds than "what it looks like". Like price, like security, like integrated spam filtering.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    11. Re:Choice? by Khelder · · Score: 1

      If you like that style, you may also like Dave Patterson's "How to have a Bad Career in Research/Academia".

    12. Re:Choice? by TwistedSpring · · Score: 1

      This only goes to support the claim that few open source developers are really innovating, they're just copying in the hope that users will switch to Linux because it's a familiar experience instead of promoting a better experience like Apple does. Kontact is Outlook! And if all the applications on Linux look exactly the same as the ones on Windows, and function similarly too, what on Earth is the point in switching to a Linux desktop? Does it boost my productivity? Evidently not.

      I don't use Linux for the desktop, I use it for servers, something at which it excels. I find Linux desktops to be clunky and slow compared to OS X or Windows (I don't have a massively powerful machine), and I don't see anything that makes my life easier or better in a Linux desktop. All it does is make my life considerably cheaper, but less feature-rich.

    13. Re:Choice? by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Care to post links to these two sites?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    14. Re:Choice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that'd be his point.

  4. Can't see any pics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Might be adblock filtering them, but there are no images on these screenshots pages for me

  5. Lack of Innovation by ciroknight · · Score: 0, Troll

    This just shows how sad innovation is in the Open Source market. These are the kinds of systems we should be innovating most because we use them most; clunky interfaces and useless features suck when it comes to task management and email.

    I found it almost shocking to see how closely Kontact mirrored Outlook 2k1. While this might be alright for the come across user, it's not likely to actually /attract/ any users.

    I'll stick with Gmail and iCal for now.

    --
    "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    1. Re:Lack of Innovation by krymsin01 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem is that there are two groups arguing here, and often members are interchangable depending on the specific case. Group A wants innovation and less copying, to attract users. Group B wants everything to look like a commercial product to attract users. The problem is that Group B wins out hands down in the intial run, because most people out there want something that looks and feels familiar to them. If corporations are to take up linux on the desktop, you can bet they are going to go with something that looks and acts a whole lot like microsoft. Group A can get it's way when people have adopted the software philosophy, because they are then more open to trying new things that could potentialy be better than what they are used to.

      --
      stuff
    2. Re:Lack of Innovation by kernelpanicked · · Score: 0

      Honestly, how much can be done with the interface to an email client. It's meant to be functional, not look pretty.

      Gmail does rock hard. Even better when looking at it in my Mozilla Mail.

      --
      Ubuntu: If at first you don't succeed, blindly slap a sudo in front of it
    3. Re:Lack of Innovation by ciroknight · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Gmail is the perfect example of what can be done for the interface of an email client, even if it is only web only. Content groups, filtering, integrating search technologies, etc.

      iCal is another good example, even if it doesn't seem it. It's simple enough for anyone to pick up and understand in minutes, and is compatible enough to work with the open source programs out there that do the same thing. Plus it gives you a lot of room and leeway to do what you want to do with it, such as RSS-like calendar feeds, which was all defined in the standard it was written to project.

      Calendaring and email systems in my opinion are the worst programs out there in interface, which is why I stay with separate, very down to earth solutions for both. If a calendaring program could do good group management, automatically set up my contact groups based on who emails me, build social nets, etc etc, I'd switch to it in a heart beat. But these carbon clones of Outlook aren't helping me as a software consumer, which means there is virtually no incentive for me to switch to Open Source.

      God forbid anyone thing that Open Source authors learn something about design instead of functionality. That's the difference between Software Engineers and Code Monkeys.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    4. Re:Lack of Innovation by kernelpanicked · · Score: 0

      Let me get this straight...you think that if functionality id put before design, that makes the author just a code-monkey? But if it looks good, no matter how bad it really sucks, the author is a software engineer?

      Do you work for Microsoft?

      --
      Ubuntu: If at first you don't succeed, blindly slap a sudo in front of it
    5. Re:Lack of Innovation by ciroknight · · Score: 1

      The problem is that there are two groups arguing here, and often members are interchangable depending on the specific case. Group A wants innovation and less copying, to attract users. Group B wants everything to look like a commercial product to attract users. The problem is that Group B wins out hands down in the intial run, because most people out there want something that looks and feels familiar to them. If corporations are to take up linux on the desktop, you can bet they are going to go with something that looks and acts a whole lot like microsoft. Group A can get it's way when people have adopted the software philosophy, because they are then more open to trying new things that could potentialy be better than what they are used to.

      The problem is that Group A and Group B can both be a single group, if we chose to go that route instead.

      Nothing is really stopping us from making Commercial-grade software. The dependent libraries are there. The potential for eye candy is there. The implementation code is there. What we need is design.

      When you look at any product, absolutely anything out there, you are presented with choice. For example, the difference between a Segway and a Moped. The Moped was designed to do a very specific task, as simple as possible, and to look something like the little brother to a motorcycle. The Segway was designed to do everything a Moped can do, but to give you better flexability with what you want to do with it.

      The problem with Group A+B is that it's a lot of work to get both implementation and design working, and nobody wants to do it for free. Anyone can code a copy to something in a given set of time. It takes a set mount of time, plus probably even two times that to draw out and design your interface, figure out its weaknesses and strengths, do comparisons, etc. That's why the Segway still costs four times that of a good Moped.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    6. Re:Lack of Innovation by ciroknight · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No. I think if a code author writes code just to be writing it, he's a code monkey, reinventing the wheel.

      A software engineer spends his or her time researching as well as implementing. For most Open Source authors, researching encompasses a Google search coming up blank. Now I'm not saying all of them are. There are a lot of good authors out there, creating things that I could have never dreamed up. But the problem is, these people are good engineers, and often are gulped up into companies like Microsoft for example, which has its margins, which means you do it their way, or its the highway.

      If something really sucks, then that's an example of poor design, which means that the engineer did a poor job researching the situation.

      Email clients are notoriously hard to get right. They've got to deal with a lot of information coming in, and try to process it in a way that it's useful, hopefully without cluttering the whole world up with useless buttons and scroll bars and chrome. But if you sit down and point out what's important in a mail client (the MAIL perhaps?) and think of how to represent it in a clear, concise way, then you quickly start getting ideas of how to implement it, and you can quickly go through those ideas, choosing which are good, and which are crap. I swear I don't think most of the code developers I know ever go through this step. They just look at something that exists, and clone it. And that's what I'm against.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    7. Re:Lack of Innovation by Lucractius · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As far as im concerned I just use Thunderbird as a newsreader. Google nailed it dead on, when they designed Gmail i think they quite possibly found one of those lofty pinacles that so few programs ever manage to perch on where theres an overwhelming majority that agree wethere they use it or not that it has a superior design. But thats just me ;)

      Gmail responds faster over my net connection than Thunderbird does and the UI is near perfect. and i am NEVER going to be happy without groups again. theyre a think of absoloute genius. I just wish i could flag my files like that for Google Desktop Search.

      there is definatly room for Innovation. Shame that theres so little. But there has to be a "norm" for people or else everyone would give up cause no to things would be alike at all, and using a new program would take valuable time away from people that genuinely use these kinds of programs as buisness tools regardless of how much computer skill they have.

      --
      XML - A clever joke would be here if /. didn't mangle tag brackets.
    8. Re:Lack of Innovation by kernelpanicked · · Score: 0

      I can partially see your point, however I could care less about the interface. I just want it to work properly. Honestly, non of the 3 options given work for me.

      Outlook- Does that run on OpenBSD?
      Evolution- Might as well be running Outlook
      Kontact- Don't use KDE

      But Mozilla Mail works. Might not look pretty but it works, and that is what I'm after.

      --
      Ubuntu: If at first you don't succeed, blindly slap a sudo in front of it
    9. Re:Lack of Innovation by kfg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Open Source projects are broader than KDE, Gnome and Mozilla.

      Get out and look around, what you see might surprise you, but then don't start bitching that it doesn't have the interface you're used to.

      In the meantime what the majority of users want is a Linux mirror of what they're already used to, not innovation.

      Innovation itself is highly overated anyway. What you really want is what works, tweak it only when real improvement results and otherwise leave it the bloody hell alone, but you can't keep a revenue stream of new sales to old customers going that way.

      KFG

    10. Re:Lack of Innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Impressive. You'll stick with a webapp that offers less functionality for now. That's a great plan. Where do you work, McDonald's?

    11. Re:Lack of Innovation by thinkliberty · · Score: 1

      Unfortunatly they dont show any of the innovation of kmail. Like integrated Gnupg/PGP support, that is color coded, green header and footer if the key is good. It will automatically sign using GnuPG and or encrypt the message if you have a key assigned to that email address. It makes using GnuPG seemless.

      They don't show industrial strength spam filter plug-ins as an option in kmail. They are automatically detected on your system if they are installed. You check a few boxes and have spam protection.

      Maybe they didn't offer screenshots on these "sad features" because microsoft has not "innovated" them yet.

      The other thing they did not cover is price ;) retail price on outlook is $109US

    12. Re:Lack of Innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You all do realize that gmail is strikingly similar to Opera's built in M2 mail client right?

    13. Re:Lack of Innovation by afd8856 · · Score: 1

      Apples to oranges. Thunderbird, unless there's a way to connect it to Sunbird, it's not equivalent to Outlook. The guys that did the test also have a comparison between OE, Thunderbid and I think Kmail

      --
      I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
  6. I always use Outlook... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Recent security issues in open source products have convinced me that obscurity provided by closed source is far superior security-wise.

    1. Re:I always use Outlook... by tehshen · · Score: 2, Funny

      Recent security issues in open source products have convinced me that obscurity provided by closed source is far superior security-wise.

      You're not a VBS virus writer, by any chance? :)

      --
      Guy asked me for a quarter for a cup of coffee. So I bit him.
    2. Re:I always use Outlook... by Lucractius · · Score: 1

      Obscurity is a powerful factor in security that shouldnt be overlooked :P

      *from one who is trying to build a totaly transparent VAX emulation enviroment on OpenBSD

      Up with the VAX! The Most Obscure of All!

      --
      XML - A clever joke would be here if /. didn't mangle tag brackets.
    3. Re:I always use Outlook... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Up with the VAX! The Most Obscure of All!

      Never used MPE or a pr1me, have you?

  7. Surprisingly similar by hoka · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I made the move a long time ago on my Windows machine from Outlook to Eudora, but after looking at the image comparison I think I might switch to some open alternative. Especially judging how easy the configuration appears to be on the open alternatives. Good to see that the interfaces are starting to look fairly standardized.

    1. Re:Surprisingly similar by Zonnald · · Score: 2

      So you actually saying that Eudora is not enough like Outlook for you.

    2. Re:Surprisingly similar by hoka · · Score: 1

      Eudora lacks a lot of the features that Outlook has, but works very effectively at simply reading and writing mail. Managing it is sort of a chore, which is why I welcome an easy and open alternative. I havn't really bothered to look anywhere ever since I made the switch, and so seeing this is rather eye opening. Sadly I now feel like I am missing out on a lot of things (easy to manage contact lists, calenders).

  8. Pretty by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I like eye candy. I spend most of the day, most days sat staring at my monitor, so I want what's on it to look as pleasing as possible.

    That said, I also want my software to work well. So in any comparison of groupware clients, I need two questions answered:

    1) What is the speed like accessing mail on an Exchange server?

    2) Does it fully integrate with Exchange's calendaring?

    I ask 1) because my company uses Exchange, and in the past I've tried KMail and Mozilla Mail, and both were sluggish as hell accessing my mail. I'm impatient, I don't *want* to wait.

    I ask 2) because several years ago, use of the Exchange calendaring feature was mandated. That's how you book meetings, that's how you're told you've been booked to attend a meeting (and some people don't bother speaking to you about it!), you're even supposed to mark time spent away from your desk on holiday or even at lunch, so people know you're not there. If the alternative groupware clients can't do all this with Exchange, then I can't use them.

    Exchange is part of the reason I switched back to Windows. Sure, I could run Linux, but to access my mail (acceptably) and calendar (at all) I had to use Outlook, and that meant wasting resources running VMWare. (I also, personally, found XP more aesthetically pleasing than Mandrake 9, but that's purely subjective)

    1. Re:Pretty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've gota 2.4 ghz box as my main work station at work that has Outlook up all day to access our exchange servers. I also have an old 400 mghz laptop setup with Fedora core 3 with Gnome/Evolution running on it. Typically the Linux box will see my new emails before my faster work station. I know alot of that has to do with timing on when it checks the server ectc. But there is no delay such as you mention when using my exchange account.

      It also handles all the calendaring very smoothly. I haven't tried sending a meeting notice through it so I'm not sure there.

      Its only major problem is the ability to check more than one inbox at a time. There are several boxes I have to look at through out the day. Outlook allows you to add these and scroll through them. I haven't been able to find anything similiar to this in Evolution.

  9. And what about pine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still use pine for my email, and I love it.

    People are so annoyed when they learn that their carefully crafted email, with color, fonts & images gets rendered to plain text when I read it :)

    1. Re:And what about pine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're the same melvin who chimed in about not owning a television in the broadcast flag thread, aren't you?

  10. Evolution by nuggz · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty happy with evolution except for one "features"

    Deleting a message takes you to the next message, it doesn't close the window.
    This doesn't make any sense to me, and there is no option to fix it. The developers seem to think this is the correct behaviour.

    Does anyone know of an equivalent mail program that solves that problem?

    1. Re:Evolution by datadriven · · Score: 1

      I can't think of a program that doesn't behave that way. Do you still have the message list showing, or have you closed it?

      I prefer Kontact, but the behavior is the same.

    2. Re:Evolution by Chess_the_cat · · Score: 1

      Think harder. Deleting a message in Outlook simply closes the window and brings you back to the message list without opening the next e-mail.

      --
      Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
    3. Re:Evolution by Bipedismaximus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One of the advantages of using software that makes the source code available is that you are able to "correct" things like this. You could add a feature to the configuration where you could choose what happens after you delete a message. If you are not a programmer, you might have friends who are who could implement this for you. You could probably send an email to the evolution mailing list and say "Hey! I really want this feature. I'll pay the first person to add this to evolution $X." Or if you didn't feel comfortable with that maybe "Hey! I really want this feature. I'll make a donation of $X to the FSF (or any nice charity for that matter) when this has been implemented." Make the FOSS development model work for you!

      --
      The way to a man's heart is through the left ventricle
    4. Re:Evolution by datadriven · · Score: 1

      If the message is in a window by itself. Not if it is viewed in a panel.

    5. Re:Evolution by wallykeyster · · Score: 2, Informative
      I've been using Evolution on Ubuntu at work recently and I really do like it. However, I've found a few problems.

      It seems to work fine as long as I'm continually using it, but if I leave it alone for a while (say, at night) Evolution seems to forget what to do. It stops keeping my folders up-to-date and I have to switch to a different folder then back to my Inbox to get an accurate view.

      I have not figured out how to access my public folders. I can see them but I can't do anything with them.

      I don't understand why they didn't implement the "check names" button. It is in OWA and Entourage, so it shouldn't be complicated to add.

    6. Re:Evolution by wrecked · · Score: 1

      I am also using Evolution with the corporate Exchange server via WebDAV. For those of you who don't know what WebDAV is, it's a web-server interface to your Exchange mailbox, calendar etc. If your company has it enabled, then you can point any browser (yes, Firefox is good) to your company's Exchange server (eg. http://webdav.mycompany.com/ and after authentication, you will see an Outlook-like interface in your browser.

      Evolution is somewhat slower than Outlook when accessing an Exchange server, probably as a result of WebDAV. However, I personally found Outlook ain't all milk and honey, either. Aside from the security issues, I found that about once a month, when I exited Outlook it would hang WindowsXP, requiring a hard reset.

    7. Re:Evolution by nuggz · · Score: 1

      When the message is open in its own window (not the preview pane). And you delete it, the next email shows up in that window.

      I can't think of any other email program that works this way.

  11. No information - what I would like to see is by tetrode · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A comparision side by side of the features of all these programmes. Can I handle my 2 Gb of PST files with Evolution and Kontact? If not, then I'm not interested. Can I search pretty quickly? If not, forget it.

    Can I connect to POP3 / IMAP / Exchange / Notes servers? If not, come back when I can. Integration with calendar requests from MS Exchange and Lotus Notes? I think that is very necessary.

    This sort of eyecandy is very nice to look at, but utterly useless.

    1. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by cahiha · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      This sort of eyecandy is very nice to look at, but utterly useless.

      Actually, the only thing that's useless is your comment. You know full well that third party software cannot reliably connect with Exchange servers, and you also know full well that the reason is that Microsoft keeps them proprietary and non-interoperable.

      Fortunately, increasingly, that doesn't matter because Microsoft's outdated, insecure, and proprietary protocols are being replaced by open standards.

      So, why don't you crawl back into the intellectual hole you came from and commune with your Exchange servers and buggy Microsoft Email clients, while the rest of us enjoy our choice in high-quality free software.

      Can I handle my 2 Gb of PST files with Evolution and Kontact? If not,

      2G is about where Outlook irreparably damages your mailbox, so I would say that you are probably approaching the point where Outlook can't handle your PST files anymore either. Oh, and don't forget that PST is proprietary, too, so you will not be able to migrate your mail easily to anything else.

    2. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by Timesprout · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thats one of the major probems with OS mail clients. For some reason theres an assumption that if the GUI looks like like Outlook that it works like Outlook and because its OS its even better than Outlook, completely ignoring the fact that all the stuff outlook does in the background, and the exchange integration and the extensibiliy actually have to be implemented.

      It always makes me wonder just how many people here actually have experience working at a corporate level when this attitude prevails. I bet there are only a few people here who understand how MS actually expected Outlook to be used at a corporate level. It forms critical communication and workflow infrastructure which companies are not just going to drop because slashdot thinks Outlook sucks, and this is why Linux is years from the corporate desktop.

      I tried Evolution a while ago and apart from being disappointed at the lack of imagination at an utterly shameless rip off of the Outlook UI it was glacially slow, making it look like a vert cheap imitation indeed.

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    3. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by Timesprout · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Actually, the only thing that's useless is your comment. You know full well that third party software cannot reliably connect with Exchange servers, and you also know full well that the reason is that Microsoft keeps them proprietary and non-interoperable.

      Bullshit, plenty of 3rd party programs can integrate with Exchange. Just because some not quite as 1337 as they thought OS coders cant do it properly does not mean no one can.

      2G is about where Outlook irreparably damages your mailbox,

      Care to provide some evidence of this?

      Oh, and don't forget that PST is proprietary, too, so you will not be able to migrate your mail easily to anything else.

      Complete and utter bullshit which really shows you are only trolling and I should not be responding. You have obviously never seen the export option on outlook. Is csv portable enough for you? FFS even Mozilla claim to be able to import PST files.

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    4. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by popeyethesailor · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Oh FSCK OFF. Seriously.

      Somebody actually asks a relevant,on-topic question requesting a comparison of actual product features, and all you could do was blather about proprietary software?

      News for you: Proprietary software gets reverse engineered all the time. Ever wondered how Google Desktop search so nicely indexes all the Outlook emails ? Not to mention every mail server nowadays support POP/IMAP. Including Exchange and Lotus notes.

      And Outlook 2003 is the best damn email client available. Ever wondered why your "high-quality free software" email clients look so much like Outlook ?

      Have you actually worked in a Corporate environment? Do you even understand why people need Calendaring and scheduling?

      If not, SHUT THE FSCK UP.

    5. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by pmc · · Score: 2, Informative

      2G is about where Outlook irreparably damages your mailbox,

      Care to provide some evidence of this?


      How about http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=288283

      Quote: "Offline files (.ost) are limited to approximately 2GB in size. The is the same limitation as a personal folders (.pst) file. "

    6. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by Timesprout · · Score: 1

      When the size of your offline files (.ost) or personal folders (.pst) files approaches 2 gigabytes (GB), you may not be able to add more data to the .pst file or the .ost file.

      You seem to have trouble distinguishing between 'stops accepting data' and irreprable damage, let me guess, your cup explodes as well if you fill it to the brim with coffee, and I just dont want to be anywhere near you when you fill your car with gas.

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    7. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by toofast · · Score: 1

      2G is about where Outlook irreparably damages your mailbox,

      Care to provide some evidence of this?


      It's not his job to provide evidence. It's a known fact to those who know. He knows what he's talking about. If you don't believe it, you should look it up yourself.

      Provide evidence. Sheesh. The world doesn't owe you evidence.

    8. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by TyrionEagle · · Score: 2, Informative

      You seem to have touble with people who present facts.

      I have had Outlook screw me over with the 2GB limit twice now. I know, I should have seen it coming the second time, but a mail loop from a fax server can really ruin your day.

      PST files are another MS "filesystem in a file" format. When a PST file reaches 2GB, Outlook tries to add more data, but the internal file pointer wraps. Two pieces of data with the same pointer value and things go to shit quickly.

      These days, Outlook recognises the fact it's done it and tells you. Previously it just happily went around overwriting data.

      For more details, check out The MS KB.

      --
      -- I like the cut of your thinking, young man. - me.
    9. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by tetrode · · Score: 1

      With a score of 4, I don't think that other ./-ers think my comment is useless.

      Third party software can connect with Microsoft Exchange servers - the protocol is not described, but this has not hindered the people from Samba to discover the SMB protocol. Microsoft has tried hard to keep it closed and difficult to interoperate but until now, Samba performs at least as good as Microsoft software.

      As you, I am happy that proprietary protocols are being replaced by open standards, as this is the only way to move forward.

      I really don't get your remark regarding this intellectual hole. At work I must use Microsoft Windows and Exchange, otherwise I cannot communicate with my clients. I can, however choose what else to install on my computer (OO.o, FF). I really would like to use Linux, just as I'm doing at the moment (at home, using Fedora Core 3) - but I need all the items I mentioned.

      I know that 2 Gb the max is that Outlook can handle. If you read my remark again you will see that I have 2 Gb of PST files. I don't have one PST file that is 2 Gb in size, no, I have multiple PST files, all around 200-400 Mb. And I would like to search information residing in there. Pretty quickly just like with the combo Outlook & Nelson Email Organiser (5 seconds full text search).

      I have tried to migrate my PST files, and perhaps to your surprise, this *IS* possible. Thunderbird knows how to do this. So my migration path will be use Thunderbird to migrate my data from MS Outlook to Thunderbird; then move this data onto Linux (hoping the data is platform independent) and from there pick a decent e-mail client.

      Mark

    10. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by Timesprout · · Score: 1

      I have no trouble with people who present facts, the post I was responding to presented no such facts though. I know what he meant but come on, how hard is it to find the right link.

      My issue is really with the irreparable part or the original troll though. The 2 GB wrap around was a long identified issue, was preventable (does no one use the archiving and compression tools or monitor the size of their pst file?) and quite frankly tough shit if you ran into it, but as you noted Outlook behaves differently now. Also should you should you run into it most of the data is still (yes you will lose some) recoverable so the damage is not irreparable. The mail that gets deleted during the recovery process though is the newest mail so its likely whoever sent it still has a copy so it might be embarassing to ask for another copy but again not irreprable. Some of the oldset mail may have been overwritten but if it was important and you did not archive or backup then it serves you right.

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    11. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by scupper · · Score: 1

      Im in troll mode this morning dammit, I don't care. I'm gonna go off about this article.

      First, this article is gdamn stale! I spotted on it both on digg and the newsforge daily email 2 weeks ago. Old! boring........

      Second. BFD! WTF? No discussion about the different features? What about getting into comparing enterprise extensibility???????

      Outlook/AD/Exchange vs. Evolution/Evolution Connector/SuSe SLOX?

      Third, I've seen what each of these looks like, whoopti f-ing doo! Shocker----Their GUIs are identical. They've been so for a while. C'mon man, we get a chance to check out a good article shootout between Outlook/Exchange and Evolution/SuSe Slox and it just shoots blanks.

      Argh, I need more coffee.....

    12. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by canuck57 · · Score: 1

      A comparision side by side of the features of all these programmes. Can I handle my 2 Gb of PST files with Evolution and Kontact? If not, then I'm not interested. Can I search pretty quickly? If not, forget it.

      I use IMAP files, more portable and easier to back up as it puts everything in my home directory. I have some big files and haven't had searching issues with it even when using Outlook Express. And because it is IMAP based I can also use SquirrelMail for web access. (Ya, I know you can use OWA but I didn't want to buy it and it doesn't run on Solaris, Linux or BSD).

      Can I connect to POP3 / IMAP / Exchange / Notes servers? ...

      I believe the answer is yes. Will know for sure in a month as my next work portable is being ordered with Linux/VMWare. I convinced management instead of giving me a machine for each OS to test software with (Linux, Solaris, W2000, NT4, W2003, XP, XP2, XP/Home) I could use VMWare with Linux instead.

    13. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      These days, Outlook recognises the fact it's done it and tells you. Previously it just happily went around overwriting data.

      So there was a software bug that has been fixed (yes I know bugs don't exist in Linux la-la land). Get over it.

    14. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by justsomebody · · Score: 1

      I have no trouble with people who present facts, the post I was responding to presented no such facts though. I know what he meant but come on, how hard is it to find the right link.

      Question here. Do you talk about self here or what? All your posts could be translated to: "Lalalalalala, can't hear you, it works for me"

      My issue is really with the irreparable part or the original troll though. The 2 GB wrap around was a long identified issue

      Yes, and so is data corruption of PST files in this case.

      In my personal repair logs, PST corruption would account for about 3% of repairs. And take it to consideration that more than 50% of users migrated of Outlook, to either Evolution on Linux or Thunderbird on Windows.

      Is preventable

      ????? How? If you have one computer this is possible, but if you take carefor about 250 computers that is not so easy to achieve.

      The mail that gets deleted during the recovery process though is the newest mail so its likely whoever sent it still has a copy so it might be embarassing to ask for another copy but again not irreprable.

      Let me tell you one little fact. Some people are not home users. Do you even know how many e-mails one PR person can have per a day? How do you know which 1000 e-mails did you get this week, and how long will you ask people to send e-mails again?

      You were asking about Exchange/IMAP/POP/Notes before

      Yes, and facts.
      POP. C'mon, could it be called mailer if it wouldn't support this one?
      IMAP. Do you know how slow Outlook is on IMAP comapring it to Evolution and thunderbird?
      EXCHANGE. Does work when OWA is enabled.
      GROUPWISE. Yes.
      OGO. Work in progress.
      NOTES, I don't have Notes server to test against so you'll have to ask somebody else

      --
      Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
    15. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by cahiha · · Score: 1

      My issue is really with the irreparable part or the original troll though.

      The troll here is you: you posted challenges that you full well knew were not satisfiable because Microsoft keeps their protocols proprietary.

      The 2 GB wrap around was a long identified issue, was preventable (does no one use the archiving and compression tools or monitor the size of their pst file?)

      If we needed any clearer demonstration of why Outlook cannot be trusted, you just gave it: it's this kind of mindset. And whether the PST bug has been fixed or not (it recently killed the mailbox of a user here), the mindset that allowed Microsoft to ship this sort of crap is still alive an well.

    16. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by cahiha · · Score: 1

      You seem to have trouble distinguishing between 'stops accepting data' and irreprable damage, let me guess, your cup explodes as well if you fill it to the brim with coffee, and I just dont want to be anywhere near you when you fill your car with gas.

      Well, you posed the challenge whether Evolution or Kontact could handle your 2G mail, and the answer is "yes", while Outlook actually reaches a limit around that size.

      Now, you get all worked up about "irreparable damage". The fact is that Outlook has had such a bug for so long that several companies sell heuristic programs that attempt to recover mail messages. The fact that Microsoft shipped and kept such a version of Outlook in circulation for so long shows you what disregard they have for data integrity and safety.

      Outlook is simply not a reliable or heavy-duty mail client. Even if Microsoft eventually gets around to fixing individual bugs, they have not demonstrated that they are putting any more effort into reliability or scalability now than they ever did.

    17. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      If you make a sweeping comment in a forum, you should be willing and able to back it up with documentary evidence. If you dont or cant, why should we listen to you?

    18. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by X.25 · · Score: 1

      A comparision side by side of the features of all these programmes. Can I handle my 2 Gb of PST files with Evolution and Kontact?

      Your question is in the same league as this: Can Outlook handle my 1.4GB of MH mails?

      Don't use stupid examples.

    19. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by the_weasel · · Score: 1

      Outlook is simply not a reliable or heavy-duty mail client.

      Thats insane. I posit that you know NOTHING about heavy duty mail handling if thats what you think.

      I have yet to see anything come even close to the elegance or flexibility that outlook gives me when handling mail.

      I handle a staggering amount of mail. Outlook is certainly up to the task.

      --
      - sarcasm is just one more service we offer -
    20. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by toofast · · Score: 1

      If you make a sweeping comment in a forum, you should be willing and able to back it up with documentary evidence.

      Do you have evidence to back up this claim?

    21. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by bluGill · · Score: 1

      Exchange is big, I will grant you that. However it is not everything. Most home users do not have Exchange, could not afford it if they wanted it, nor could they administer it if they had it. ISPs generally cannot afford to provide exchange for all their customers.

      I use KDEPIM all the time at both work (We are too small for a corporate exchange server) and home. It does what I need - but I don't need much. This is the market that open source coveres better than outlook.

    22. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by cahiha · · Score: 1

      I have yet to see anything come even close to the elegance or flexibility that outlook gives me when handling mail.

      Well, it's not surprising that you haven't seen anything come close--you already told us that you aren't interested in anything non-Microsoft.

      I handle a staggering amount of mail. Outlook is certainly up to the task.

      Maybe you are staggered by the amounts of mail you deal with, but it's still less than 2G, in your own words.

      Besides the size limits and bugs, other problems with Outlook/Exchange are performance problems with large mailboxes and slow search.

    23. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by grcumb · · Score: 1

      "Can I handle my 2 Gb of PST files with Evolution and Kontact? If not, then I'm not interested."

      If you want things to be interoperable, why are you using proprietary formats? If you're happy with your proprietary solution, why are you complaining?

      HTH, HAND

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    24. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by pmc · · Score: 1

      Actually Outlook 2003 is now 33TB for a PST, and you can obviously have multiple PST files (even in the old versions). So if you organise your mail properly there is no problem having petabytes of mail...

      I think that is a staggering amount.

    25. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you believe that merely upping the theoretical limits on the file format means the software can all of a sudden becomes heavy-duty, I have a bridge to sell you...

    26. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by tetrode · · Score: 1

      What I meant to say is that I have tried thunderbird and although it could import my PST file (very good) It could not handle the total size of my e-mails. It became slow, unresponsive - it did not work. It works very well at home, however (but perhaps this is due to the fact that it is running on Linux there?).

      As has been described above, some people get more mail than other people. When I delete all spam and mailing lists (which I do), I get up to 80 e-mail daily, roughly around 1-2 Mb a day. So in a year, this adds up to 350 Mb. And in 4 1/2 year this is 1,6 Gb of e-mail that I have gathered.

      Outlook handles this rather well, until now. So when there is a migration path from MH to PST your mails could be handled in Outlook. But I don't think you would want that. Well, I fully agree with you, and I'm actively looking for a replacement of Outlook - but I have some prerequisites, listed above.

      So it is not a stupid example. I may have worded it provocatively, but most corporate people will need an e-mail client that has an Outlook upgrade path and one that can handle loads of data.

    27. Re:No information - what I would like to see is by tetrode · · Score: 1

      Yes, I want things to be interoperable.
      No, I am not happy with my proprietary solution

      I am forced to used proprietary formats because until now I don't see a valid e-mail programme that can handle huge amounts of data. I may have worded it provocatively, but most corporate people will need an e-mail client that has an Outlook upgrade path and one that can handle loads of data. And I haven't seen this yet.

      I have tried thunderbird and although it could import my PST file (very good) It could not handle the total size of my e-mails. It became slow, unresponsive - it did not work. It works very well at home, however (but perhaps this is due to the fact that it is running on Linux there?).

  12. Eudora by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1

    If you're stuck on Windows still, then Eudora is probably the best way to go. I'd pay for a Linux version if they had one. Though many others I know also like Thunderbird

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  13. A nice joke... by xtracto · · Score: 3, Funny

    A young man goes into a computer games shop. He says to an assistant
    "I want a challenging computer game with lots of graphics. It should be
    difficult, confusing and have plenty of contradictions to keep me busy".

    The assistant replies "Have you tried Windows XP?"

    --
    Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    1. Re:A nice joke... by wheany · · Score: 1, Funny

      You know what's funnier than that joke?

      Leukemia.

    2. Re:A nice joke... by uncl_bob · · Score: 0

      blabla...

      The assistant replies "Have you tried Windows XP?"

      "Yes", the young man answered.

      "Excellent", the assistant said. "Because without it there is no way you can play all the latest and coolest games out there."

    3. Re:A nice joke... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A young man walks into a computer shop, and says to the salesperson, "I'm too stupid to use a computer."
      The sales person replies, "Have you tried a Mac?"

    4. Re:A nice joke... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Advocating Windows because it is the only way to play the "latest and coolest games" is like advocating slavery because it is the only way to get food.

    5. Re:A nice joke... by X.25 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The assistant replies "Have you tried Windows XP?"

      "Yes", the young man answered.

      "Excellent", the assistant said. "Because without it there is no way you can play all the latest and coolest games out there."


      Damn. Didn't realize Playstation 2 was running Windows XP...

    6. Re:A nice joke... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Time for a reality check, kiddo. These are slashdot comments and mods. You're a karma whore. There is a recovery group somewhere for you.

  14. it's the law by cahiha · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Simple: it's the law. The specific appearance of the iPod can be protected by design patents and its wheel thingy has a device patent on it. In contrast, the general arrangement of buttons and menus in an application cannot be protected.

    Having said that, it doesn't bother me in the least if other companies clone iPod in any way they like.

  15. there is no problem by cahiha · · Score: 1

    The problem is that there are two groups arguing here

    There are plenty of innovative user interfaces in open source in general, and open source mail readers in particular.

    This particular article happens to focus on two open source systems that have a goal of being intuitive to Outlook users, but there are plenty of other systems.

    Group A can get it's way when

    Group A and Group B aren't in conflict. They both get their way whenever they want. Each group develops what they think is important and users choose.

  16. you're kidding, right? by cahiha · · Score: 1

    God forbid anyone thing that Open Source authors learn something about design instead of functionality. That's the difference between Software Engineers and Code Monkeys.

    You're confused about the role of a software engineers; they don't know anything about (user interface) design.

    But these carbon clones of Outlook aren't helping me as a software consumer, which means there is virtually no incentive for me to switch to Open Source.

    What makes you think that anybody cares whether you use open source software?

    1. Re:you're kidding, right? by ciroknight · · Score: 1

      A) I use myself as a predicate; if "I" don't want to use it, and I'm a typical user, then what does that say for other typical users? Exactly.

      B) Software engineers are exactly that, engineers. An engineer's job is Design, Supervising Construction, and Redesign once the product is complete. Software engineers are no different than Automotive Engineers except in the medium they work with. Automotive Engineers look at the aspects of everything that goes into a car, not just the chassis, the engine and the steering. Now, that isn't to say they aren't helped by anyone; there are concept artists and fabricators who draw and sculpt and build prototypes, but its the engineer's job to see what works, what doesn't, what is economical, and what is luxury.

      Apply this same outlook to software engineering. Look at what's out there. See what's wrong with it, what it does good. Design your application to do all of those things well. Construct your application. Sell your application, then go back and take a look at it. Find what's wrong, what's right, what makes it better than anything else. Design your application to do all of those things well. Sell your application, repeat the loop again.

      Modern Engineers have a good idea of how to do most of the steps. But it seems nobody teaches how to look at something that exists, and see what's wrong with it. My software engineering classes as of yet have all been about writing code and solving problems. Very few (only one class period IIRC) have been about looking at which does a job better and why (and it was a logic design class).

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
  17. I use Mutt... by killpog · · Score: 1

    Because none of the others can do what I want them to do.

  18. Evolution is for janitors by the_olo · · Score: 1

    From the contact management screenshots ("new contact"), it looks like one would mainly use Evolution for keeping in touch with janitors.

    Possibly "with other janitors" (the user is a janitor), or at most managing them.

    1. Re:Evolution is for janitors by the_olo · · Score: 1

      Same for configuration screen for Evolution.

      A janitor and his blonde girlfriend. A janitor's badge. Evolution gives a janitor all he really needs.

  19. Nitty Gritty! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The screenshots delve in to the nitty gritty details and should help in making an informed choice, if nothing else

    No the screenshots show some dude with one email account and one contact.

    Even if this is to be just a UI comparison, there isn't much here to compare, really is there?

    Given it (as advertised) only scratches the surface, and from the surface they all look pretty much the same... the screenshots hardly allow for an informed decision.

    I've looked into all of these in some detail, although to be fair none of OSS offerings in some time. I hate to say it, but when you have 1000s of contacts, a pile email accounts (of both imap and pop), and the shit hits the fan (ie, bad server, bad connection, heavily loaded client machine).. ...Outlook somehow manages to shine compared to the other two.

    At the last indepth trial of non-Outlook groupware I just kept finding things missing from the other applications. Usually little things, like being able to group email a certain way, or create filters for one thing or another. Stupid little things I'd admit, things I normally wouldn't care about, but to be honest 100% of my usage for this sort of thing is for work.

    That said, when all is going well, and the server is fine, and the connection is fast, somehow, outlook manages to shit it pants at random though infrequent intervals. To be honest, Outlook's ability to import and export to / from other sources is a bit weak and possibly worring (how will I get all these email attachments back out when I finally jump ship)

    I'd be happy to switch to another system provided it did a better job than Outlook (*shudder*) I feel so dirty.

  20. big blank screens. by torpor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    umm .. sorry, but SO WHAT?

    would it have been so hard to have actually used each one of these programs a bit first? a visual comparison is USELESS without DATA!

    those screenshots are mostly whitespace. beh!!

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  21. Aargh ! by alexhs · · Score: 1

    One (and only one) thing seems obvious to me from the screenshots :
    Windows is the more eye-catching with it's bright, saturated blue.

    Are screenshots using gnome and kde current versions default looks ? I have debian gnome 2.8.3 and KDE 3.3.2 so I haven't the same defaults - however I've switched kde look to "plastic", that's the default in 3.4 and less widows-ish/ playskool-ish than kde previous default.
    Gnome and KDE pastel colors are easier on the eyes.

    Now about the applications... From the thumbnails, they're all the same with different skins, right ? ;)

    --
    I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
    1. Re:Aargh ! by m50d · · Score: 1

      Yep, those are the default looks. Kind of funny that kde has moved away from shinier defaults at the same time windows moved to its current fluorescent appearance.

      --
      I am trolling
    2. Re:Aargh ! by dougsk · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure those are the Ubuntu Hoary defaults.

    3. Re:Aargh ! by m50d · · Score: 1

      I'd be surprised since ubuntu doesn't include kontact.

      --
      I am trolling
    4. Re:Aargh ! by dougsk · · Score: 1
  22. Yoda says... by HerculesMO · · Score: 1

    Screenshots make not a review young padawan.

    That said... can we have a REAL review of speed, features, functionality? Screenshots just show me that I can get something that LOOKS like Outlook without paying for it -- but how good is it? I stopped using Outlook since I got gMail, but I'd still like to know.

    --
    The price is always right if someone else is paying.
    1. Re:Yoda says... by BenjyD · · Score: 1

      I think it's reasonably hard to write a decent review of groupware clients: certainly, most of the magazine-style reviews are worthless. It's very much a matter of personal usage pattern, long-term stability and your environment (servers, other users etc).

      Personally, I use Thunderbird: I found Evolution too slow and unstable and I prefer Thunderbird's UI. But then I don't have much need for groupware and Tomboy notes are good enough for my calendaring needs. I've used Outlook 2003 a bit, and I quite like the mail display mode. KMail's UI annoys me too much to use it.

    2. Re:Yoda says... by HerculesMO · · Score: 1

      Because it's hard, nobody should attempt it? I would do it myself, but I'm a poor judge on these things and I don't use them enough to give a proper review. That's why we have review sites out there.

      At least on a site called "Open Source Versus" they could have TRIED to tell me why the OS counterparts of Outlook are any good.

      --
      The price is always right if someone else is paying.
    3. Re:Yoda says... by BenjyD · · Score: 1

      I didn't mean to suggest that nobody should try, I was just trying to explain the lack of reviews. It would be fantastic to have a source of software reviews that actually spent serious time using and testing the software, but few people seem prepared to do that.

      As it stands, we get reviews of Linux distros and software that barely scratch the surface of the functionality and completely omit most of the important issues (reliability, update schedule, security releases etc.).

  23. Unfortunately I disagree. by Big+Sean+O · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >>Stealing the interface of an iPod is stealing the iPod.

    Stealing the interface of Outlook is stealing Outlook.

    I have a lot more respect for Apple (for Address Book and iCal) and OSAF (for Chandler) for their attempts at an "Outlook Killer" than I do for these two examples.

    In the late 1990s, I was using Day Timer Organizer. It was essentially an electronic version of their paper organizer. For what it was, I thought it rocked... I switched to Outlook because of the integration between contacts and email (and it was on my new computer). In other words, I switched for a functionality.

    >>most Open Source coders look at something that already exists, and try to mirror its functionality.

    I think your comment does a disservice to Open Source coders that _don't_ do that. The real heroes are the ones that create an entirely new take on an existing problem. They're the ones who are pushing the envelope and they get my respect, open or closed.

    --
    My father is a blogger.
    1. Re:Unfortunately I disagree. by cortana · · Score: 1

      The problem is this:

      It's easy to sit down and say "let's clone the interface of Outlook", because everyone working on the UI then has something to work towards. It's a lot harder to write out an interface specification instead, and even harder again if you want to come up with an original interface/workflow design.

      The other problem is that, if the coders do come up with an original take on, say, the email problem, they will be berated for not precicely copying Outlook's interface. There was a story on Openoffice.org on this site yesterday, one comment from which stated that Openoffice.org should use the same, blue 'W' icon that MS Word does, otherwise users would be too confused to even launch it!

    2. Re:Unfortunately I disagree. by temcat · · Score: 1

      Before all, you may want to ask yourself, why exactly you don't want to copy Outlook interface. I can think of two valid reasons: it's protected by copyright and/or you can produce an interface that is better. If none of these are the case, then copying IS good and justified. All the whining about stealing is just bullsh*t. After all, your hypothetical app can have a better backend, support more platforms or sport some new features that Outlook lacks.

    3. Re:Unfortunately I disagree. by macjohn · · Score: 1

      I don't think they need to use the blue W, but I think they could get away with calling the product "OO Word", and that would be a good thing. Microsoft can't possibly own the word "word".

      --
      --Hi. I'm in Portland and it's raining. This appears to be a permanent condition.
    4. Re:Unfortunately I disagree. by uberdave · · Score: 1

      Microsoft can't possibly own the word "word".

      Don't count on it.

  24. Sploit by eneville · · Score: 2

    Have they by any chance done a tabular list of the exploits for each? This would be quite useful for comparison also.

  25. Best Mail Client Ever.... by imcclell · · Score: 0

    I wish Lotus would release it's notes client as an option. I use Thunderbird at home but would much rather have a notes client with designer.

    I find the security & features blow away any other email client on the market.

    Sadly, this is not to be the case any time soon.

    1. Re:Best Mail Client Ever.... by freeplatypus · · Score: 1

      Oh YES! Lotus Notes 6.x is great, but only trial version is available for mortals.

  26. Outlook 2003 and Thunderbird by timmyf2371 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I use Outlook 2003 myself for the simple reason that it handles mail in a sensible way and also integrates with Norton Antivirus. I don't get spam since I effectively manage my email addresses and each site I sign up to gets a unique address at my domain name and can easily be filtered if they step out of line.

    I've used applications such as Evolution when I used Linux in the past but in reality it felt to me just like a cheap clone of Outlook with fewer features.

    Recently however, I have been using Thunderbird on one of my systems as I am loath to purchase two licenses for MS Office and I've come to like it quite a lot and for someone who isn't looking to spend any more or for whatever reason requires free (as in speech) software I think it's an ideal application. It has junk mail handling which while I haven't had to use it myself, have read it can be quite effective. My one gripe with it is that setting up rules and filtering doesn't seem to be as easy as with Outlook and the user has to enter in any filters manually - ie, I can't click a few buttons to have mail from a certain email address go into a specific folder the way I can in Outlook, or at least if you can I've not found it yet.

    --

    Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
    1. Re:Outlook 2003 and Thunderbird by flend · · Score: 1

      To quickly create a filter, right click on the From text in blue on the message header and go for Create Filter From Message...

    2. Re:Outlook 2003 and Thunderbird by Grayraven · · Score: 1

      Open a mail, click on the from link and select 'Create filter from message'.

      --
      "Source... The Final Frontier" -- keepersoflists.org
    3. Re:Outlook 2003 and Thunderbird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you need Norton Antivirus because???
      Instead of fixing the original problem windows users have mindset that splapping together some hack to make the system usable. You should not need 3rd party tools to have a secure and usable system.

  27. Evolution by svin · · Score: 4, Informative

    You should have a look at Evolution:

    Built-in Microsoft Exchange Support
    Users can communicate directly with built-in WebDAV support, eliminating the need to maintain separate IMAP e-mail server access to support Linux and UNIX users.

    From within Novell Evolution, users can view, edit and update e-mail, address books, calendars and task folders on the Exchange server.

    Using existing global address lists, users can access names, addresses and contact information from the Exchange Global Address List.

    Public folder support allows users to share documents and files in existing Exchange public folders. They can also create new public folders for collaboration.

    Through the Manage Permissions feature, users can control access to personal and public folders, calendars and task lists.

    With the proper authorization, users can open other users' calendars or shared folders.

    The Out-of-Office Assistant helps users create custom vacation or notification messages that run on the Exchange server.

    Through the Calendar Delegation feature, users can set permissions to allow others to view their calendars. Users can also delegate permission to a colleague (for example, an administrative assistant) to accept and schedule meetings in their calendars.

    Direct resource booking reserves resources such as conference rooms or vehicles for your meetings and appointments.

    The new mailbox- and folder-size features display Exchange server quota notifications to keep mailbox sizes down.

    Taken from http://www.novell.com/products/desktop/features/ev olution.html

    As for question 1 & 2 I'm not quite sure, but a colleague uses it, and it looks like he accesses his mail without trouble (And accepts meeting requests, Accesses public folder, etc.).

  28. Is it just me by bitswapper · · Score: 2, Interesting


    Or does Windows not do any anti-aliasing? Looking at the screen shots side-by-side, it doesn't look as though anti-aliasing is turned on for windows. On the windows box I use at work, I've tried turning on 'font smoothing', and it in many cases makes fonts look worse. Has anyone else noticed this?

    That said, it would have been nice to see a features side-by-side. Also, one thing Outlook has on its side is how many things out there syncronize with it, like yahoo contact/calendering, for example. Does Evolution syncronize with palms? Just curious.

    1. Re:Is it just me by daern · · Score: 1

      Is it just me...or does Windows not do any anti-aliasing?

      It's optional. Windows *does* do text smoothing:

      Right-click desktop, properties, appearance, effects, select "cleartype" from the options...

      Works great here - have you got enough colours on your desktop?

    2. Re:Is it just me by bitswapper · · Score: 1

      I've had 32-bit colors turned on with font smoothing turned on, and various screen resolutions. In all cases, I can see windows trying to smooth fonts. It just does a poor job, particularily with letters which have slanted lines. Jaggies are still very obvious. In addition to jaggies, the subpixel hinting for vertical and horizontal lines appears much more inconsistant in the same letters from place to place than in OSX and Xwin, especially with smaller fonts, but noticable in all font sizes.

      What I've done to improve windows font smoothing is to install bitstream vera, and configure windows and outlook to use that font. For whatever reason, in windows font smoothing for that font is almost as good as font in smoothing in general in OSX or Linux Xwin.

      That said, I think in the screen shots in the article, XP doesn't have font smoothing turned on, and its either turned on for the XWin shots, or they're just using a better looking font than the default for windows. That is the other problem with the windows interface, especially in outlook. You can install a good looking font like Vera, and then set up windows and outlook to use that font - except for RTF messages received in outlook. Back to irritating fonts, with windows noticably poor job of smoothing.

      I guess if you're used to decent fonts and decent font smoothing, using windows will just be irritating.

  29. We need some sort of Godwin's law for this by ElMiguel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... and this is why Linux is years from the corporate desktop.

    1. Re:We need some sort of Godwin's law for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why, so that no one dents your firmly held belief that Linux is going to rule the world, despite a total lack of evidence?

      The OP is right. Outlook isn't just an email client and Exchange is not just an MTA. Companies rely heavily on the features Microsoft Echange & Outlook provide. No Open Source client comes close, becuase no Open Source developers seem to understand what Outlook is.

  30. Evolution is rubbish by Caspi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think evolution is a stone-age Email client. I am actually a KDE user but since using ububtu I decided to give gnome a try and was very impressed, until I migrated all my mail to evolution. I did this because I wanted a PIM suite that will allow me to sync with a mobile at some stage in the future.
    Anyway, swicthing from KMail to Evolution really is taking several large steps backwards. Here's why:
    a) Evolution is slow. There is a 3 second pause on my computer between clicking "New Mail" and the window appearing. This is not the case when the same machine is using KMail or Outlook.
    b) There is no *simple* way of changing the date format (mm/dd/yy -> dd/mm/yy which europeans prefer). I believe it can be done via shell variables, but come on, Evo is supposed to be a proper GUI application.
    c) There is no sensible simple mail notification. There is a "beep" option which is inaudible and some other useless / highly complex hacks. In Kmail you can specify whether new mail triggers a notification *per folder*, all via the GUI and without obscure shell scripts.
    d) The junk mail filter is crap. I trained it on a folder of 1000 spams but still it doesn't seem to recognise half of them. And I have "external check" enabled. KMail uses external spam filters in a transparent way.
    e) Spell checking: almost all modern spell-checking applications offer suggestions in a context menu when opened over a misspelt word. In Evo you have to open an extra window.
    f) New Junk is not marked as unread. This would be nice so that you know what junk you've checked for false positives and which you haven't.
    g) Sending a mail twice takes a whole load of inelegant cutting and pasting. See KMail for the elegant solution.
    i) There is no way to automatically fetch mail immediately after startup. See KMail and Outlook.
    j) You HAVE to specify a mail server in the Evo startup wizard. There is no way of getting around this. Very annoying.
    k) The calenders feature is not too hot either. I only ever use the whole-month-view and when I scroll through the months it takes ages. Outlook was 10 times more responsive. And the default colour scheme means that looking for today's date is a real eye strainer.
    These are just my views on evolution. I had always heard that it was such an excellent PIM suite and am dissapointed that it simply doesn't live up to the hype.

    1. Re:Evolution is rubbish by Gilesx · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think maybe you've been a little harsh on Evo, which is generally a very nice and solid email client. I'll look at a few of your points here.

      "There is a 3 second pause on my computer between clicking "New Mail" and the window appearing."

      Yes, the first time you click the new button, there can be a small pause. However, it is near instantaneous with every subsequent click.

      "There is no *simple* way of changing the date format (mm/dd/yy -> dd/mm/yy which europeans prefer)"

      I have it dd/mm/yy as default on my system. Might I suggest looking at your country settings? I have a feeling that you might be running American localisation.

      "There is no sensible simple mail notification."

      This is correct. However, as you are using Gnome, there are a myriad of new mail applets that you can use to help fill this gap.

      "The junk mail filter is crap."

      This seems odd. IIRC, Evolution uses spam assasin which is very highly regarded in the open source community. I have had excellent results after a week of training it. Are you remembering to tell it what is and isn't spam?

      "almost all modern spell-checking applications offer suggestions in a context menu"

      This is just design ethos. I actually think the window works a little better as it offers more flexibility with the spell checking - for example, I can choose to use a different directory to look at the offending word if I need to.

      "New Junk is not marked as unread."

      Junk is junk, and goes in the junk folder. Surely you delete junk from the junk folder after you've checked it for a false positive? I'm not sure why you would want to hold on to reams of spam - perhaps the problem here is the way you use email rather than the client itself.

      "Sending a mail twice takes a whole load of inelegant cutting and pasting."

      No it doesn't. Locate the email in your sent folder. Double-click it. Choose "Edit as new message" from the actions menu.

      "There is no way to automatically fetch mail immediately after startup"

      This is correct. However, if you set your email to automatically check every minute, you get your email automatically just 60 seconds after startup. Besides, you've manually intervened to start Evolution up in the first place, so why not take the extra step of clicking "Send/Receive"?

      "You HAVE to specify a mail server in the Evo startup wizard."

      Duh! Where else is your email going to come from?

      I hope that a few of my suggestions will help you reevaluate Evolution. I am forced to use Outlook on a daily basis at work, and believe me, Evolution knocks it into a cocked hat, especially for the power user!

      --
      Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
    2. Re:Evolution is rubbish by adrianbaugh · · Score: 1

      >Besides, you've manually intervened to start Evolution up in the first place, so why not take the extra step of clicking "Send/Receive"?

      Perhaps he has it start automatically on login?

      >>"You HAVE to specify a mail server in the Evo startup wizard."

      >Duh! Where else is your email going to come from?

      A local mailbox?

      --
      "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
      - JRR Tolkien.
    3. Re:Evolution is rubbish by Clansman · · Score: 1

      >>Duh! Where else is your email going to come from?

      >A local mailbox?

      Well, in that case, just select "standard unix mbox spool or directory" from the drop down box when setting up your account. Easy. Is a feature of outlook also?

    4. Re:Evolution is rubbish by lubricated · · Score: 1

      what a bunch of lame excuses. Kmail too has it's problems but at least the functionality is there.
      Here's a list of kmail's problems.

      It's go that completly unessesary "html message" bar on the side of every message.

      By default it doesn't automatically check your mail. You have to enable "interval mail checking", It should be called "check mail every x minutes" where x is an adjustible box.

      It's got that stupid box at the bottom of every message showing stuff noone cares about.

      You can't rearrange your folders. Local folders are always at the top of the list. These folders are pointless for an IMAP user.

      One more gripe about evolution.

      It doesn't let you use an imap folder as an address book or calendar.

      None of these graphical applications allow you to store the preferences on an imap server. Pine has this feature.

      --
      It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
    5. Re:Evolution is rubbish by eviltypeguy · · Score: 1

      Most of your edvidence is subjective, for example:

      a) Evolution is slow. There is a 3 second pause on my computer between clicking "New Mail" and the window appearing. This is not the case when the same machine is using KMail or Outlook.

      It's nearly instantaneous for me, certainly not three seconds.

      b) There is no *simple* way of changing the date format (mm/dd/yy -> dd/mm/yy which europeans prefer). I believe it can be done via shell variables, but come on, Evo is supposed to be a proper GUI application.

      At last check it looks at your system's date format to determine what it should use. I'm fairly certain the last time I set GNOME to a different locale, Evolution switched accordingly.

      e) Spell checking: almost all modern spell-checking applications offer suggestions in a context menu when opened over a misspelt word. In Evo you have to open an extra window.

      That's funny, I've seen lots of "modern spell-checking applications" that offer it in a extra window. Again, subjective.

      f) New Junk is not marked as unread. This would be nice so that you know what junk you've checked for false positives and which you haven't.

      gmail does the same thing. However, unlike gmail, I was able to setup a rule to set mail in the Junk folder to be automatically "read".

      I had always heard that it was such an excellent PIM suite and am dissapointed that it simply doesn't live up to the hype.

      Though I honestly can't say what could viewed as hype, it sounds like you're just a troll really. I've been using Evolution almost every since Ximian first released it. I used to use Outlook exclusively.

      Half the stuff you complained about is a matter of personal preference. Even as a previous long-time Outlook user I felt right at home in Evolution.

    6. Re:Evolution is rubbish by eviltypeguy · · Score: 1

      None of these graphical applications allow you to store the preferences on an imap server. Pine has this feature.

      Because it isn't a reliable way to do things.

    7. Re:Evolution is rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just for the record KMail has some dumb defaults here's a way to fix the two biggest offenders. After all I wouldn't want anyone to be unhappy with the greatest email reader there is, KMail!

      It's go that completly unessesary "html message" bar on the side of every message.

      To turn that off Settings -> Configure KMail... -> Appearance -> Layout -> uncheck "Show HTML status bar"

      It's got that stupid box at the bottom of every message showing stuff noone cares about.

      To get rid of that stupid box (Message Structure Viewer) Settings -> Configure KMail... -> Appearance -> Layout -> select the "Show Never" radio button from the Message Structure Viewer box.

    8. Re:Evolution is rubbish by Rysc · · Score: 1

      I actually think the window works a little better as it offers more flexibility with the spell checking - for example, I can choose to use a different directory to look at the offending word if I need to.

      A seperate window is unquestionably better and more powerful, but it's also slower. I often mis-type a word and don't bother to backspace and retype it because I know that a simple rightclick, click will fix it just as well.

      I'm not sure why you would want to hold on to reams of spam - perhaps the problem here is the way you use email rather than the client itself

      This attitude is a major problem I have with GNOME users, developers and advocates. If you don't like the program it's because you are a failure, because your way sucks, because you haven't converted to the One True Way of doing business. What presumption! I keep all of my junk. I like it that way. I have good reasons. I'd rather it be marked unread, since it's new. But I am not welcome in GNOME, because the developers think I shouldn't do that, so I am not allowed to play.

      This is correct. However, if you set your email to automatically check every minute, you get your email automatically just 60 seconds after startup. Besides, you've manually intervened to start Evolution up in the first place, so why not take the extra step of clicking "Send/Receive"

      When I start Mozilla I get my email right away. It opens, I am prompted for a password, and my email arrives.. Maybe getting it in 60 seconds (or whenever; I have my mail check interval at 15 minutes) would work, but why should I have to wait? It's my computer and my mail and I want it right away on startup. But no, Evolution developers have decided that is not what users should do with email, so I am left with no recourse but to not use Evolution.

      And people wonder why the supposedly messy and hard to use KDE is still popular. A system that lets you do it your way is by definition not hard to use.

      Evolution is a fine program, with some deficiencies. If the developers would recongize the faults as faults and not try to convince users that they are the problem then we'd all be much better off.

      --
      I want my Cowboyneal
    9. Re:Evolution is rubbish by lubricated · · Score: 1

      thankyou that is sooooo much better.

      Now if only junk mail worked like it does in mozilla-thunderbird. Where you could get it to just mark a message as junk, and not do anything else.

      --
      It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
    10. Re:Evolution is rubbish by lubricated · · Score: 1

      > And people wonder why the supposedly messy and hard to use KDE is still popular. A system that lets you do it your way is by definition not hard to use.

      It's funny. I used kde before 1.0 came out. Then I used gnome since before gnome 1.0 came out(.95 or somethng). This statement in the early days would have been reversed. Recently I switched to kde because it's faster, and unlike gnome the file manager is good and always has been. Nautilus sucked when it first came out and it continues to stink. It's a slow turd.

      --
      It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
  31. MUA != calendar by Neil+Watson · · Score: 1

    I don't understand why managing email should be linked with a calendar. I beleive they are two separate functions. If you try to do both at the same time you loose productivity. Try using mutt versus any other MUA. I've found nothing faster for managing large amounts of email. Now if only I could find a calendar system that is just as efficient.

    1. Re:MUA != calendar by NineNine · · Score: 1

      The *are* two separate functions, but they are *related* for most people (ie: you get an email about a meeting, etc.). Also, you can't "loose" productivity, but you can "lose" it.

    2. Re:MUA != calendar by SenFo · · Score: 1

      You have a valid point. But can I ask you if you work for a company or if you're still in school. And if you do work in a company, do you schedule a lot of meetings and put together a lot of group activities? The reason I ask is because (when used for these purposes) the two are so commonly used side-by-side, that it would make sense to include the functionality of both into a single program. And I rarely argue that two functions should be included in a single piece of software because, like you, I come from a Unix background where software is most often designed to do one thing and to do it well.

  32. Silly by EarwigTC · · Score: 1

    Great help for the savvy grandma in picking a mail client. Unfortunately, the rest of the computing world who deals in business has to choose based on functionality and interoperability, and no ammount of smooth GUI trumps connecting to Exchange.

    OS groupware will continue to be mostly fruitless until some real focus is placed on that goal. I could actually consider an Outlook alternative, even lacking some of Outlook's foofoo features, if it played well with Exchange.

    --
    Promote civility: mod down any post starting with 'ummm'.
  33. Re:why these ugly GUIs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll stick to the productivity setup of xterm/rxvt, fluxbox, vi/vim, elm/mutt, lynx/elinks.

    Wow! I bet you're a KNOCKOUT with the ladies!

  34. Just screen shots? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    What sort of useless garbage is that? No functional review? No comments? Nothing?

    If you choose your applications purely on 'eye-candy' value, you are an idiot.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  35. Re:why these ugly GUIs by temcat · · Score: 1

    why does everyone want to make everything GUI look like MS Win, when there is an opportunity not to?

    If there is a proven way, why bother? I'd personally choose familiarity and conveniency over "innovation". Besides, as a coder, you can copy GUI design and concentrate on the things you like - namely, coding ;-) And yes, I think that copying IS good.

  36. Gnome by yourexhalekiss · · Score: 1

    I know this sounds trollish, but... About all this "review" showed me was that Gnome is ugly as hell. I read TFA, and I agree with someone earlier: "screenshots do not a review make."

    1. Re:Gnome by mdew · · Score: 1

      oh please, Evolution looks a lot cleaner than Kontact.

      --
      http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/
  37. Not Available Here !! by Qwavel · · Score: 1


    Hey, what about the fact that both OS clients are available to only a tiny portion of the market?

    All those people who need an alternative to Outlook are using Windows.

    It's great that these free programs look like Outlook - this will make it much easier and more comfortable for Outlook users to switch - but please port them to Windows.

    1. Re:Not Available Here !! by delire · · Score: 1

      "Hey, what about the fact that both OS clients are available to only a tiny portion of the market?"

      What a silly thing to say. What is the 'market' you speak of, Windows? Windows isn't a market, it's an Operating System, well kind of, it operates some of the time. I could equally complain about this atrophic review on the basis that Outlook isn't available for my operating system, but the 'article' isn't about that.

      This is a visual comparison of three popular clients, not a provision of options for the Windows user.

      If you like what you see try Linux.

  38. Visual Comparisons by darealpat · · Score: 1

    As a user of both Outlook and Evolution, I am already familiar with the lengths the designers of the latter went to make windows users comfortable visually with their product. Home users will care less about Exchange (assuming they know what it is) than being able to jump in and start using it, especially from scratch on a new machine.

    As an Evolution user, I am personally saddenned by the demise of the one thing that it had over Outlook (to me), and that was its start page in version 1.4.x. Configuring it to give me an overview of Linux Today, /., and other feeds, plus mail views and tasks... gone are those days, and don't tell me about rss feeds and tickers: they don't have the same impact.

    --
    For every present, there is a past
  39. Evolution 2 sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They screwed up an otherwise very usable UI in Evo 1.4 by getting rid of the shortcuts window and wasting way too much real-estate on useless crap. I tried upgrading to Evo 2 and was pissed off in 2 minutes. Didn't anyone do any usability testing?

  40. A simple feature I've only found in OLK so far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why can't other progs do this? I can do this in Outlook XP/2003. - drag an email to my calendar and create an appointment that includes the body of the email. - drag an email to my tasks section and create a task that includes the body of the email. Lots of this drag one item type to another exists in Outlook. It saves a lot of typing.

  41. Re:Where is Gmail on the list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anybody actually use these 3 programs?

    No, the entire world switched to Gmail three weeks ago.

    Seriously, get the fuck over your Gmail fetish. You're using a fucking web browser to manage your email. Do you use your browser as a word processor and CD burner, too?

    Gmail: It's webmail, but it's better than Yahoo! I can't figure out why I'm not excited at the idea of trying to manage my email on a remote server hosted thousands of miles away via. a platform that wasn't designed to do it instead of just using an email client. Call me crazy.

  42. Outlook - there is no alternative on Windows by galaga79 · · Score: 1

    Having spent the last couple of months researching and implementing a groupware solution, by way of Toltec Connector for Outlook, I've come to conclusion that right now there is no alternative to Outlook - at least on the Windows platform.

    Sure Thunderbird is great, I use it both at home and work, but it has no calendaring support aside from a plugin and Sunbird but they are not mature yet.

    Outlook 2002 is terrible because of the 2GB PST file limit is the bane of my existence but Outlook 2003 is a major improvement, both visually and behind the scenes.

    Contrary to popular opinion using Outlook doesn't have to equate to buying an Exchange server. There are plenty of commercial plugins like Toltec Connector, Bynari etc that let you use an open source server for the groupware component. Right now I am heading my bets on version 2 of Kolab, which hopefully will let different clients share calendar data.

  43. Nitpicking by DavidD_CA · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This may be nitpicking, but it's clear that Outlook is still far more evolved than the other two shown here.

    On the surface, the screenshots look identical. But, being an Outlook user for over 5 years now, I can tell you a few things that appear to be missing from those competitors that are reasons I love Outlook.

    1) I don't see Notes or Journal options in Evo.

    2) I see no evidence that Evo or Kontact let you group your folder items by from/date/sender/subject/etc.

    3) Can you automatically format items based on rules? What if I want emails from my boss to show up in red?

    4) Is there a rules manager so I can also automatically do things with incoming emails? Delete them, send a reply, file in a folder, etc?

    5) I don't see that you can just straight to a contact from anywhere in the program by typing their partial name in the toolbar.

    6) I'm sure Kontact has HTML email editing, I just don't see the toolbar buttons.

    7) Contacts don't appear to let you add your own fields (corporate users love this!). Nor do I see a gigantic Notes field or support for Journaling.

    8) I cannot tell if, in Calendar, you can configure the times to display multiple time zones when you are travelling.

    9) It does not look like you can assign colorful labels to your Calendar events. This feature is priceless!

    10) Do the other programs let you view multiple Calendars (like that of another user) side-by-side?

    11) Can you schedule appointments with other users at all? If you can, I don't see the field to do it, and I certainly don't see how you can see their schedule.

    12) The implementation of Recurrening Appointments on Evo would drive business people insane.

    13) It doesn't look like Evo has enough fields to support a proper ToDo list. I don't even see a Due Date field.

    14) Can you assign Tasks to other users? Get progress reports?

    15) None of the screenshots demonstrate how configurable either program is. Sure, you can edit the source, but I'm talking about the Average User. Outlook is right-click customizable like crazy.

    Maybe these things are not missing, but I couldn't see them from the screenshots.

    Further, the screenshots only show the things that are nearly identical in all three versions. That is pretty low. There isn't even any sample data to show how things like Contacts are formatted in the Contact View. It's as if the author knew of the shortcomings in those programs and didn't want to display them.

    --
    -David
    1. Re:Nitpicking by Cyclops · · Score: 1
      2) I see no evidence that Evo or Kontact let you group your folder items by from/date/sender/subject/etc.
      Ever heard of threading? Much more useful for tracking email discussions. Need to sort by sender? Just keep threading and click on 'From'...

      3) Can you automatically format items based on rules? What if I want emails from my boss to show up in red?
      Rules on incoming e-mail pre-date Outlook by many years... specially if you add reliability to the equation.

      4) Is there a rules manager so I can also automatically do things with incoming emails? Delete them, send a reply, file in a folder, etc?
      On evolution and if you're on a GNU/Linux box, you'll most likely have procmail, which can do many much more powerfull things with incoming email, even before they get to evolution.

      6) I'm sure Kontact has HTML email editing, I just don't see the toolbar buttons.
      This feature (html email) should just die die die...

      7) Contacts don't appear to let you add your own fields (corporate users love this!). Nor do I see a gigantic Notes field or support for Journaling.
      More fields? Ok, custom fields could b useful, but what the heck? How do you keep that straight with other people when you send vcf files?

      9) It does not look like you can assign colorful labels to your Calendar events. This feature is priceless!
      You can do that with multiple calendars.

      11) Can you schedule appointments with other users at all? If you can, I don't see the field to do it, and I certainly don't see how you can see their schedule.
      Yes you can schedule, by sending standard vcal (or is it iCal?) files.

      12) The implementation of Recurrening Appointments on Evo would drive business people insane.
      All it lacks would seem to be guessing without user input.

      13) It doesn't look like Evo has enough fields to support a proper ToDo list. I don't even see a Due Date field.
      As you noted, screenshots can't follow every single feature...

      Maybe these things are not missing, but I couldn't see them from the screenshots.
    2. Re:Nitpicking by Lobo_Louie · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you should actually evaluate Evo before trashing it. What a concept!

    3. Re:Nitpicking by DavidD_CA · · Score: 1

      I think the same could be said about the original author's article about Outlook.

      But at least I admitted to never having used Evo first, and only going off the screen shots.

      Which is exactly what he wanted his readers to do.

      --
      -David
    4. Re:Nitpicking by nosefish · · Score: 2, Informative
      I can only speak about Evolution, because I'm playing around with that at the moment. Maybe someone else can do something like this for Kontact.

      1) I don't see Notes or Journal options in Evo.
      I think you're right here, it doesn't have any.

      2) I see no evidence that Evo or Kontact let you group your folder items by from/date/sender/subject/etc.
      Evolution supports virtual folders that can do this.

      3) Can you automatically format items based on rules? What if I want emails from my boss to show up in red?
      Yes, just create a new filter rule, filter for your boss being the sender, and as the action to perform select "assign color".

      4) Is there a rules manager so I can also automatically do things with incoming emails? Delete them, send a reply, file in a folder, etc?
      Yes.

      5) I don't see that you can just straight to a contact from anywhere in the program by typing their partial name in the toolbar.
      Correct.

      6) I'm sure Kontact has HTML email editing, I just don't see the toolbar buttons.
      As I've said before, I can't speak about Kontact. Evolution has those buttons, but I don't know anyone who'd want to receive HTML email...

      7) Contacts don't appear to let you add your own fields (corporate users love this!). Nor do I see a gigantic Notes field or support for Journaling.
      You're right, this neat feature is missing. There's a "notes" field, though, but it's well hidden on the bottom of the "Personal Information" tab.

      8) I cannot tell if, in Calendar, you can configure the times to display multiple time zones when you are travelling.
      Correct, Evolution supports only one time zone at a time.

      9) It does not look like you can assign colorful labels to your Calendar events. This feature is priceless!
      Correct. This feature is missing. Makes me wonder why, since it should be easy to implement...

      10) Do the other programs let you view multiple Calendars (like that of another user) side-by-side?
      Yes.

      11) Can you schedule appointments with other users at all? If you can, I don't see the field to do it, and I certainly don't see how you can see their schedule.

      You can certainly do it. I've never used this feature, as I use Evolution only at home.

      12) The implementation of Recurrening Appointments on Evo would drive business people insane.

      I Agree with you, the implementation is somewhat lacking. E.g. you can only define exceptions on a per-day basis, which is really annoying.

      13) It doesn't look like Evo has enough fields to support a proper ToDo list. I don't even see a Due Date field.

      Of course it has a due date field, and a start date field, too, and plenty of others. Which other fields are you missing?

      14) Can you assign Tasks to other users? Get progress reports?
      I think so. A comment field in the status tab might come in handy, there's only a status, percentage completed, and priority. But you can enter a link to a website and (ab-)use that for additional comments.

      15) None of the screenshots demonstrate how configurable either program is. Sure, you can edit the source, but I'm talking about the Average User. Outlook is right-click customizable like crazy.
      You can't customize very much in Evolution. It's a gnome program after all, and as we all know the gnome people don't believe in customizability of every tiny aspect, but concentrate on usability out of the box.

      Maybe these things are not missing, but I couldn't see them from the screenshots.
      I think we all agree that screenshots alone are not a good means for comparing programs. They give far too little information.
      If that was your point, you could have said that in less words. And if you wanted to tell us how far superior Outlook is, you should have done at least some research about the alternatives. While I agree that there are still many features missing, you were wrong on a substancial number...

  44. No by Tharald · · Score: 1

    Sorry to be an ass, but I want to correct you a bit.

    First, copying an stealing is NOT the same. However much people compare them it is not the case. There are two different word for the two actions because they are different. An example: I make a cool shirt, and you copy it. This incident is WAY different than the case where I make a shirt and you steal it. I hope you can see the difference. I know that you talk about stealing the "business concept", but it is not stealing.

    I would also like to comment on your last paragraph. I agree that the real heroes are the OS coders that dont mirror existing functionality. But the ones that do are just as much heroes. The people that make OpenOffice are doing just as much good, if not more, than the people that make innovative apps. They give us something we need. There are several reasons to "copy" functionality. First it is a shortcut towards making something that does a job well. Second, it makes it easier to switch/use the apps. These are both good reasons to copy, and it gives us (society) benefits.

    Like you say, there are OS coders that do not just mirror other apps, and I think its is pathetic to parrot the claim the OS does not innovate. There are more than enough examples of open source innovation to totally obliterate the claim that OS dont innovate. I would claim that OS innovates more than proprietary sw, because people add the features they want / think is good, and are not constrained by the business side of it. Then the best functionality survives. Its evolution and it works.

    1. Re:No by Big+Sean+O · · Score: 1

      Point taken.

      I guess I was commenting on parent poster's claim that copying the iPod interface is 'wrong' and copying the Outlook interface is 'okay'. I frankly don't see that much of a difference.

      I guess I have a problem with the whole point of the article: "Look, Evolution and Kontact look so much like Outlook therefore they must be just as good".

      I don't mind people implementing functionality, even in a manner similar to the 'original' (because after all, the original MS Word program copied from MacWrite). The last 20 years have pretty much proved that all word processing programs will look kinda similar. OpenOffice will be a success not because it looks just like MS Word, but because it beats MS Word on price, functionality, and performance.

      Outlook is pretty good, but it's not the 'be all and end all'. Evolution is so similar to Outlook (ie: the navigation bar) that you might as well call it "Convergent Evolution". I'm not familiar with either Evolution or Kontact. Is there a side-by-side breakdown by functionality and not screenshot? That's a more useful article and worth slashdotting... :-)

      --
      My father is a blogger.
  45. Re:Where is Gmail on the list? by Anamanaman · · Score: 1

    Yep, the thread view of emails has made my life much better. Its sad I have to use a webbased mail for my primary company account, but I was getting 50 emails a day in about 10-15 threads. In outlook I had to dig through all the emails. In Gmail, its laid out beautifully and I can make sure to respond to everything.

    Yes, I've tried the "view by thread" in Outlook 2003. It sucks

    I just wish they'd port Apple Mail to windows. Until then I'll be using Gmail

  46. Re:Where is Gmail on the list? by carcosa30 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Yeah, the problem with any webmail is obviously the fact that you don't control the server it's on, etc etc.

    It's a double-edged sword, though. Which is more stable, your personal network or Google's? I do forward my mail from gmail to my local machine where it gets backed up. And all the browser is is a user interface.

    Seriously, get the fuck over yourself.

    --
    Intolerance for ambiguity is the mark of the authoritarian personality.
  47. Zaurus Sync by Stephen+Chadfield · · Score: 1

    The choice is simple for me. I can sync the calendar, todos, addressbook and notes on my Sharp Zaurus with Outlook but not with Kontact or Evolution.

    If my Zaurus is lost or stolen I can purchase just about any PDA or smartphone on the market and you can be sure it will sync with Outlook and I will be back in action with minimal hassle.

    Outlook wins.

  48. Thunderbird is NOT an Outlook replacement by bogie · · Score: 1

    Its and Outlook Express replacement. Sorry for the shouting but Thunnderbird offers absolutely nothing for Outlook users. Saying Outlook users should try Thunderbird is like saying MS Word users should use notepad, they both kind of do the same thing but they are in completely different leagues and vastly differ in capability. Evolution is an Outlook replacement, Thunderbird is not.

    I highly suggest OE users switch to thunderbird today, but for Outlook users Thunderbird is not a drop-in replacement and should not be suggested as such.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  49. OSS Usability... by benjamindees · · Score: 1

    How about sitting down and trying to make the best email app there is instead of just trying to copy existing ones down to their cosmetic features.

    That's been done, plenty of times. Just look at the GIMP. And what do the GIMP developers get for their "innovative interface"? Ridicule and scorn to the effect of "make it look like Photoshop!"

    The fact is, people don't want to learn a new interface, even if it's better. They want something that is basically like the interfaces they are used to.

    Why do you think VCRs all have the same arrow on the play button? Why do you think the keypad on my Audiovox cell phone has the same buttons on it as my old Nokia?

    I had a user tell me last week that the OpenOffice Save button didn't do the same thing it did in Word. He said that Word had a "Save As" button instead, that give you a dialog and a chance to choose a filename. After walking into the next room to show him that Word did, in fact, have the exact same Save button, I switched his button on OpenOffice to have "Save As" instead.

    OSS apps can be whatever people want them to be. Most people want them to be similar to the apps they are used to on Windows, even if they don't quite know what that is exactly. In fact, most OSS apps started out with completely different interfaces, and have gradually become more like their Windows counterparts due to exactly these issues.

    --
    "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
  50. EXCELLENT!! by Halvy · · Score: 0

    says the young man.. but I *had to* burned my copy of XP out of frustration because I couldn't get it to play all those cool games you are telling me about!! (as the young man starts to become impatient)


    Do you have a copy of that new fangled *Linux* OS so I can run that incredibly qool *Tux-Racer* game??


    assistant: (grumbles.. as he goes back to the stock room to look for Tux..)

    --
    I will gladly loose all of life's battles.. in order to win the war..
  51. Distributions by abulafia · · Score: 1
    Windows isnt a "distribution" and comparing it to a linux one is just ridiculous

    Hm, that's interesting. Are you asserting they are in different markets? 'Cause, see, they aren't.

    Are you asserting that Microsoft's non-distribution doesn't bundle things in to the non-distribution when they want to compete with other software? 'Cause, see, they do.

    Sure, 'Linux' means the kernel. There are not, however, very many people who bootstrap their boxes and build their own environments. The market here is for 'software I stick on a box and then the box is useful for something'. Microsoft clearly understands this exceptionally well, and I find it amusing that apologists for them claim not to.

    --
    I forget what 8 was for.
    1. Re:Distributions by Lord+Kestrel · · Score: 1

      quote
      Sure, 'Linux' means the kernel. There are not, however, very many people who bootstrap their boxes and build their own environments.
      /quote

      You've never seen Gentoo then :) Very nice distro, and you get to choose what gets installed, and compile the whole thing yourself. You literally start out in a chroot of your / partition, and bootstrap it. Quite fun, even if it does take a full day to get X/Mozilla/KDE compiled.

  52. Major flaw in Kontact by AaronW · · Score: 1

    Since my employer downgraded to Exchange we have had a major problem with calendar support. Most of the engineers on my floor run Solaris, which vastly limits us in terms of clients compared to even Linux.

    Evolution is out of the question. We can't get modern versions of gnome to even compile since some of the required libraries seem hell bent on requiring the X Render extension (which is not supported in the version of Solaris [2.8] we run) and trying to figure out the dependencies seams near impossible.

    While I have successfully compiled KDE for many years on Solaris, I had hoped that Kontact would be a good client for Exchange. It is barely functional.

    For one, it is unable to pop up a dialog when an event occurs or even make a sound. Apparently this feature only works for locally stored events, not events stored on a remote server, i.e. Exchange.

    Second, it cannot properly create new meetings and add other people. When using Outlook or the web interface, calendar events have an embedded URL which is needed for people who do not use Outlook. This is missing in events created by Korganizer. Also, for some reason Outlook does not seem to properly recognize the emails as calendar events.

    Third, Korganizer frequently locks up, getting in an endless loop.

    These bugs have been reported a long time ago, yet no effort has been made to fix them. I don't see Korganizer gaining wide spread use in the enterprise until Exchange interoperability is fixed. As much as Exchange sucks, it's here to stay.

    The address book also seems to have problems with the Exchange LDAP server whereas Thunderbird works.

    What is worse for Exchange is that the web interface is not all that useful either, since many operations will only work with Internet Explorer. Many features do not work with Firefox or Konqueror.

    I would love these features to be fixed... the most pressing ones being the lockups and popping up a dialog and/or playing a sound when an event occurs (korgac does this, I think).

    I will commend the KDE team on the excellent progress they are making on Kmail. While there are still a few areas that need work (i.e. a more integrated spam filter), it has come a long ways.

    -Aaron

    --
    This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    1. Re:Major flaw in Kontact by The+Conductor · · Score: 1
      What is worse for Exchange is that the web interface is not all that useful either, since many operations will only work with Internet Explorer. Many features do not work with Firefox or Konq


      Make sure you have javascript pop-ups enabled. The Exchange web interface relies on them.

  53. Re:Where is Gmail on the list? by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 1

    I agree that Outlook's "Group by Conversation" view really, really sucks. There's a big, ugly, grey "Group Header" above each thread, which means that if you have a single message, it takes up TWO lines of precious screen space.

    Every time I talk to some Outlook guru I ask about this, and they stare at me with a dumb look on their face and ask why would I want to view message threads. !!! They don't even know what they are missing.

    What's ironic is that Outlook Express does this correctly. Outlook does not.

    This is my #1 complaint about Outlook.

  54. Worthless Biased Site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So comparing Windows XP (2002) to SuSE 9.3 (2005) to Ubuntu 5.04 (2005) is fair?

    Why not compare it to SuSE from 2002?

    I also like the headline "Windows rapidly approaching desktop usability". Nope, no bias on this site.

  55. This site sucks..it doesn't compare by meburke · · Score: 1

    This site totally sucks. Screenshots don't give a good functional comparison, only a look and feel comparison. It's a troll site designed to provide adspace aimed at people who are dumb enough to come here. It doesn't work well in Firefox, it's best seen in IE (you might see blank spaces or links in Firefox). Don't waste your time going to this site.

    --
    "The mind works quicker than you think!"
    1. Re:This site sucks..it doesn't compare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the site doesn't claim to compare functionality.. they said it was a 'basic visual comparison' and that's what you've got. sites like this will help bring some afraid of open source into open source.

  56. I find Evolution very unstable. by blcss · · Score: 1

    I started with 1.0, then upgraded to 1.2.2. The thing often hangs when fetching email. I get "the email component has unexpectly quit" a lot. Also it takes a very long time to load and the status bar says it's reading in all my stored mailboxes before I've even thought of opening one. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

    --
    We don't need yet another new programming language. Let's just pick an existing language and fix its flaws.
  57. Opera too? by Lotharjade · · Score: 1

    They should have done the Opera webrowser, the QUASI-opensource program. It is a commercial company but has an opensource like community (especially cause you can use for free).

    As an aside, it would be interesting if Opera went fully opensource someday.

    --
    Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
  58. Try GIMPshop by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1


    Try GIMPshop, GIMP with PhotoShop menus.

    1. Re:Try GIMPshop by swillden · · Score: 1

      Try GIMPshop, GIMP with PhotoShop menus.

      No thanks. I much prefer the GIMP's interface. On X11, of course.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  59. We swapped here by phorm · · Score: 1

    The first complain I got when swapping Eudora users to Thunderbird (due to an issue Eudora has where it downloads messages from the POP3 server and eats them somehow) was that things were "different." Some of the VP's refused to switch. If they'd been outlook users switching to Evolution, etc it would have been easier because Evolution looks enough like Outlook that they don't have to bend their brain around it.

    A lot of people argue that interface copying is a lack of originality. I find that you can make a snazzy interface, but even if it's easier to use for a newbie the existing users are going to bitch and complain that the "F5 key works differently and doesn't do what I expected"...

    Innovative, featureful, and easy-to-use interfaces are great to attract newer users.

    Interfaces similar in function and design are more useful in grabbing existing users set in their ways. Being that a larger portion of the market uses MS products (either in-company or from users with home experience, or both), quite often they are the ones targetting in UI design.