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."

Comments

Choice?

[Zonnald]

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

Re:Choice?

[ciroknight]

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.

Re:Choice?

[xtracto]

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.

Re:Windows and Linux

[xtracto]

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...)

Unfortunately I disagree.

[Big Sean O]

>>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.

Evolution is rubbish

[Caspi]

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.

Re:Windows and Linux

[smchris]

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.