Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Outlook, Evolution and Kontact Side-by-Side

Posted by Zonk on Sat May 28, 2005 05:31 AM
from the looking-them-in-the-eye dept.
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."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Windows and Linux (Score:5, Informative)

    by tehshen (794722) <tehshen@gmail.com> on Saturday May 28 2005, @05:36AM (#12663148)
    These guys also did Windows and Linux [opensourceversus.com] comparisons which make for good viewing.
    • 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?"
        • 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...
    • by xtracto (837672) on Saturday May 28 2005, @06:42AM (#12663302) Journal
      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...)
      • Re:Windows and Linux (Score:4, Informative)

        by toofast (20646) * on Saturday May 28 2005, @07:36AM (#12663452) Homepage
        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.
      • 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
        • Re:Windows and Linux (Score:4, Informative)

          by vrt3 (62368) on Saturday May 28 2005, @08:47AM (#12663671) Homepage
          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 [sourceforge.net], one for GTK and one for The GIMP, and you're ready.
            • by YrWrstNtmr (564987) on Saturday May 28 2005, @09:10AM (#12663773)
              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.

      • by smchris (464899) on Saturday May 28 2005, @09:07AM (#12663761)
        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.
          • Re:Windows and Linux (Score:4, Interesting)

            by swillden (191260) * <shawn-ds@willden.org> on Saturday May 28 2005, @09:13AM (#12663780) Homepage Journal

            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.

          • Re:Windows and Linux (Score:4, Informative)

            by Stween (322349) on Saturday May 28 2005, @10:09AM (#12663994)
            I think gaim-vv [sourceforge.net] 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.

  • 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?
    • 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. Li
      • " 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 be
        • 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.

      • by Big Sean O (317186) on Saturday May 28 2005, @06:47AM (#12663315) Homepage
        >>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.
    • 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.
  • Choice? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Zonnald (182951) on Saturday May 28 2005, @05:38AM (#12663152)
    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? (Score:3, 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.
      • Re:Choice? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ciroknight (601098) on Saturday May 28 2005, @05:46AM (#12663176)
        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.
      • and who says that open source isn't innovative [slashdot.org]... oh wait, now it's a good thing...
      • Re:Choice? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by xtracto (837672) on Saturday May 28 2005, @06:29AM (#12663269) Journal
        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.
  • 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.
    • So you actually saying that Eudora is not enough like Outlook for you.
      • 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).
  • Pretty (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Tim C (15259) on Saturday May 28 2005, @05:40AM (#12663161)
    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)
    • Evolution (Score:4, Informative)

      by svin (803162) on Saturday May 28 2005, @07:10AM (#12663360)
      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 [novell.com]

      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.).
      • 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 unde

  • 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?
  • by tetrode (32267) on Saturday May 28 2005, @05:54AM (#12663187) Homepage
    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.
    • 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
    • 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
  • 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.
  • Nitty Gritty! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    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 b
  • 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.

  • by Caspi (887752) on Saturday May 28 2005, @07:22AM (#12663407)
    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.
    • 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
  • Nitpicking (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DavidD_CA (750156) on Saturday May 28 2005, @11:12AM (#12664260) Homepage
    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.
    • by krymsin01 (700838) on Saturday May 28 2005, @05:44AM (#12663170) Homepage Journal
      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 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 somethi
      • 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 ch
    • 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 reve
      • by ciroknight (601098) on Saturday May 28 2005, @05:53AM (#12663186)
        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.
        • 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 thin
        • 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 soft
          • 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
    • 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? :)