On Fri, 2007-02-16 at 09:02 -0600, Peter Van Lone wrote: > On 2/16/07, Patrick O'Callaghan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <snip> > > While I understand the need for an Exchange client > > under Linux, I can't help wondering how much this distracts developer > > attention from the rest of Evo. > > >From the perspective of hoping to drive Linux desktop adoption into > the corporate world, Linux must have an enterprise-ready groupware > client that can replace Outlook with little or no loss of > functionality.
There are several (Zimbra and Scalix come to mind), just that they aren't free if you want interoperability with Exchange. > Evolution has been touted as just that ... but thus far (IMHO) has > fallen considerably short -- and is actually pretty weak. Its poor > showing has cost linux 2 desktop rollouts that I personally was hoping > to assist with. I'm certain that there are many more. No doubt, which is why I said I understood the reasons for wanting this funcionality, even though it's of no interest to me personally or in fact to anyone I work with. I'm in a University and there are no Exchange installations within shouting distance, but we still need good groupware. > There are *many* good/strong personal groupware offerings. I'd vote > for please, distracting the developers from "the rest of EVO" -- so > that we can finally get the product that we need to compete with > Outlook/Exchange. I'd vote for making Evo a strong candidate even without Exchange. Chandler looked interesting for a while but seems to be seriously behind schedule (a release is planned for April I think). Hula went nowhere fast and has been abandoned. There seems to be something fundamentally unsexy about groupware from a FOSS point-of-view. Maybe geeks don't use calendars. poc _______________________________________________ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
