Evolution 2.0 Released, Screenshots

comforteagle writes "This seems to be slow getting out, but since Novell hasn't updated their site ... Evolution 2.0.0 has been released. Most importantly it has built in JunkFilter support with SpamAssassin, web calendars, and NNTP support. Oh, and some bugfixes. I've posted some screenshots today as well."

Re:Mono?

[oxymor00n]

Yeah, rewrite a whole application just for the sake of it. Good idea, really ;)

"Eugenia"

[Gothmolly]

Christ, its like she's Linus or Madonna. OSSpews is just a blog, get over it, and maybe it will get over itself.

Not ready for release?

[linuxtelephony]

I'm really disappointed. It seems they were in such a rush to release 2.0.0 with Gnome 2.8.0 that they left a pretty glaring problem.

From their Known Issues: 2) Alarms don't work properly if Evolution runs past midnight

That's a pretty fundamental flaw for a program that is supposed to be essentially an Outlook replacement.

I commend Novell for their overall Linux efforts, but rushing things to release for the sake of making a date with this type of flaw seems like a dangerous way to conduct business.

It is things just like this that give some people enough pause to NOT deploy open source solutions. What was the earlier /. article about switching from Linux to Windows saying? Problems with programs, support, etc? Releasing a "stable" 2.0.0, exiting the beta 1.5.x series, and having a problem that prevents alarms from working properly if you leave Evolution running overnight certainly doesn't make me very confident.

Hopefully 2.0.1 will be released VERY soon.

Re:Mono?

[noselasd]

Or why didn't they write it in Python ? Or C++/Qt (Which is Novells preferred platform on Linux/SuSE) ?

The question to ask is _why_ should they write it in C# ?! I for one
don't need the extra slowness and memory usage introduced by mono.

But at what cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be great for folks to realize that writing apps cross-platform is one of the single best ways to get TONS of adoption, and ease any eventual transitions to Linux.

Yes, but as OS's (like OS/2 fer instance) found out, having that application compatibility can be a double edged sword. You might ease the transition, but you also potentially negate one of the motivating factors as well as providing your competition (i.e. MS) with a marketing edge (why switch because you can still run your "free" apps on Windows) and (Windows has tons of Windows only apps, PLUS it'll run the open source apps that count).

Re:Remarkably

[Anonymous Coward]

They shouldn't have rested...

What's up with this one screenshot?

here [osdir.com] the text boxes are all going off the little window part??

Re:Needs more cowbell.

[codergeek42]

needs some color to spice it up -- even on the default theme

Not to be rude to the GNOME or GTK+ developers, but why are you using the default theme? Evolution is very well integrated with GNOME and your GTK+ 2.x settings. Use a much better theme and Evolution will look much better.

6 download components?

[simetra]

This is what bugs me about installing Linux apps... the ASSLOAD of separate stuffs you have to download, configure, build/install. Why not just bundle everything up nicely? OpenOffice manages to do this.

BTW., anyone else notice that newegg.com has been dead for a few hours?

Re:Mono?

[Phleg]

Score: 5, Informative?

How is this informative? They didn't rewrite Evolution in Mono because that would have involved rewriting hundreds of thousands of lines of code, for little benefit.

Re:Outlook rip-off

[Phleg]

If I recall, this was innovative when they first came up with the idea several years ago, in order to distance themselves from Outlook. Once again, it would be Microsoft that took the idea, not Evolution.

Re:Mono?

[noselasd]

How is this informative?

Because some C#/mono zealots got modpoints ?

Re:Outlook rip-off

[earlytime]

do you really want to know?

it's beacuse that's how most progress is made, in very small increments. Linux was born to be incrementally better than minix, then made to be incrementally than *ix, then *ix, and so on. Now Linux is arguably the best unix out there (depends on your needs). A good side effect of open source code, is that anybody can make small changes that improve the overall package. Over time, these small moves add up to a huge advance over the original.
Apache is a perfect example, it was not just an incremental improvement, but originally a straight copy of ncsa; take all those little patches, and package them into one tarball. Ok, it's not spectacular, but it's better than ncsa. Continue this process over 9 years, and you have not just the most popular, but an extremely stable, lightweight and portable web server.
It's rare that you see a major development, especially within a specific area. Consider the fact that even software powerhouses like microsoft, sun & orace are all focused on developing new iterations of old ideas ( vms, unix, SQL). These three products/technologies are at least 20 years old, yet they still drive the software industry. Even Intel is milking a 30 year old product, the integrated microprocessor.

refs:
http://www.computerhope.com/history/unix. htm
http://www.economist.com/science/tq/displaySt ory.c fm?story_id=2724348
http://www.apache.org/foundat ion/faq.html#what
http://www.oracle.com/technolog y/oramag/oracle/03- may/o33drdba.html
http://inventors.about.com/libr ary/weekly/aa092998 .htm

Re:Needs more cowbell.

[ad0gg]

I don't know why your post is modded funny. It should be insightful. Flashy interfaces mean a lot to people. How many people buy a car on the way it looks? Simple marketing, flashy interfaces makes product look well built. Same goes with websites.

Re:Outlook rip-off

[spectecjr]

If I recall, this was innovative when they first came up with the idea several years ago, in order to distance themselves from Outlook. Once again, it would be Microsoft that took the idea, not Evolution.

Outlook 95 - released in, unsurprisingly, 1995 - has the GUI that Evolution has today. Evolution wasn't even started until 1999. The first version copied the Outlook 98 GUI down to the letter.

Later versions include the Outlook 2000 Dashboard features.

Evolution 1.4.6 (the version before today's released version) still looks exactly like Outlook 2000. And not at all like the copy of Outlook 2003 that Evolution 2.0 looks like.

1.4.6 screenshot [astcomm.net]

Outlook 2000 with Dashboard [microsoft.com]

Re:Mono?

[k98sven]

I would think that the developers would be hesitant about using Mono/.NET or Java because both of those languages are not Free (read: Freedom).

Mono is a Free implementation of .NET.
For Java there's gcj and others.
That's what Havoc (and I) were referring to.

Of course, the specifications of these languages and platforms isn't Free (as in Freedom).
But: I'd like to recall the fact that GNU/Linux started out as a clone of the non-free Unix system.
(GNU's Not Unix)

Re:Mono?

[BrokenHalo]

I often wonder if Microsoft isn't just waiting for the most damaging time to pull the rug out from under mono developers by slapping them with a suit for intellectual property or copyright violation over .NET.

IANAL, but I have a bit of a tendency to be a bit of a conspiracy theorist... :-)

Re:Mono?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because for the present, Mono is not part of the core Gnome platform. Given the objective of making Evolution a part of Gnome (e.g everything using e-d-s), using Mono is not currently an option.