Evolution installer for Win32 Released 208
markybob points out that an unofficial Win32 installer for Evolution has been released, writing "Of course it's GPL, so have fun and spread it around!" From the site: "Evolution is an incredibly versatile email/calendar/PIM that took the Linux world by storm a few years ago. It has been called an 'Outlook replacement' by every tech site from ZDNet to InfoWorld. Evolution played a major role in allowing the Linux desktop to move into the enterprise by giving being able to connect to Microsoft Exchange Server and schedule/accept Microsoft Outlook Meetings. Here's a screenshot of how it handles meeting invitations sent by Outlook."
Not gonna beat Google Calendar (Score:4, Informative)
Cant Sync (Score:5, Informative)
Considering I need to buy into the whole google calendar, with gtalk to get reminders, it just is not worthwhile compared to a real PIM manager aka Outlook or Evolution.
YMMV. BOCTAOE.
Re:It still doesn't replace outlook... (Score:4, Informative)
I would like to point out that they actually use iCalendar. This is almost the de facto standard, well for everyone but M$ who seem to think keeping their stuff locked out of standards is a good thing (well it is for their bottomline at least). I never expect this to be a full out Outlook replacement. I am sure the second it becomes one, M$ will change Exchange Server to break it again, but for home users who use outlook this is about the only PIM replacement there is for Palm devices, short of using that ghastly Palm desktop tool.
Re:Does it work with Kolab2 yet? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:CALs? (Score:5, Informative)
Yes. Microsoft licenses Exchange servers on a per-server basis. Client access licenses are licensed on a per-user or per-device basis. They are "access licenses", not software application licenses. There is no requirement to actually use Microsoft software to access the Exchange server, but the access itself is licensed. Even if you use Outlook Web Access you still have to have a device or user CAL for Exchange.
The question of licensing Outlook or Office is completely separate.
To the person who claims that "just because it's in the EULA doesn't make it so", they are only half correct. This isn't an issue of what is in the EULA though. What is at issue is how the software licenses are sold. And if it should come to pass that MS can't legally require you to buy a CAL to access Exchange if you use Evolution, then you wouldn't legally be required to buy a CAL if you use Outlook either. In that sense it is a question of whether CAL-based licensing is legal, not whether or not the use of Evolution circumvents the need for a CAL, and it is therefore irrelevant to this discussion.
Re:CALs? (Score:5, Informative)
Not true. [microsoft.com] No matter what type of client you use to access a mailbox, it requires a seperate CAL for each user, unless you go the route of device CALs, in which case you'll need a seperate CAL for each piece of hardware, regardless of what type of client is used.
The fact that each CAL inclueds a license to use Outlook just makes it more attractive for people to use Outlook for their other mailboxes.
Re:It still doesn't replace outlook... (Score:4, Informative)
Regarding public folders, they say that you can. I haven't tested it yet, but that's mainly because at my company (400+ users) we don't use public folders. I suspect that we are not the only ones.
Regarding delegate rights on inboxes, I haven't seen that. In some places that I have worked that is a pretty critical ability. But not where I work, and I suspect that we aren't the only ones.
On the third point, I think that you are confusing RPC over HTTPS (a feature that is new in Exchange 2003) with Outlook Web Access (OWA) which has been around since at least Exchange 2000 (not sure if we had it in 5.5). If you are using OWA, then you don't need RPC over HTTPS (which is only supported on Outlook 2003 accessing Exchange 2003). If you need RPC over HTTPS, then I suspect that Evolution won't fit the bill. But since HTTPS and RPC are fairly well known, I suspect that they could manage it eventually.
Re:Excellent for desktop migrations... (Score:5, Informative)
Apperently, several references to C:\program files\ where hardcoded. (It's C:\Programme\ in a German XP, and yes, there are lot's of variables for accessing this. Luckily, Vista will fix this mess.)
Also, it didn't link correctly because i already had a global install of GTK (shuffling around %PATH% solved this, though).
After it started, i tried connecting it to our Exchange 2003 Server. Didn't work. Just gave a nonsensical Error Message.
So i tried to connect it to my private mail account, which is accessible through IMAP. Showed all the folders, but no messages inside. Tried to close this abomination, but that didn't work either, so i killed it using the task manager.
There's still a LONG LONG way to go.
Re:GUI look (Score:3, Informative)
That's just GTK2 with look-n-feel theme installed, that's not using base widgets. Nothing prevents you from using the wimp theme, which uses Windows' native widgets.
On the other hand, Thunderbird doesn't have to look like Windows either - it all depends on your skin. The default styling though, uses Windows services to draw the widgets as well, or at least some of them.
Re:GUI look (Score:3, Informative)
Evolution wasn't an easy port by the looks of it. There were lots and lots of Gnome dependencies that had to be ported to win32 before they could even think about porting Evolution. It really wasn't made to run on anything but Gnome on Linux/Unix, but there's been a lot of demand, and the Evolution porting effort will open the door for porting other GTK2/Gnome applications to Windows.
Thunderbird looks like a native Windows application because they gave it a theme that looked like Windows. In reality it's all XUL, rendered by the same Gecko engine that renders the web pages in Firefox.
Re:That's great! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:GUI look (Score:4, Informative)
Re:That's great! (Score:2, Informative)
and/or
postpath [postpath.com]
are worth looking at.
Missing Redistributable dll (Score:4, Informative)
Not a great start, but the webdav shared calendar support seems quite a bit faster than sunbird, so that's got to be a step in the right direction.
Too bad it doesn't work. (Score:3, Informative)
I saw the article, and got anxious. I told my girlfriend that she can now use the same program that I use for mail. She was anxious too. She has problems with Outlook on occasion, just as any other Outlook user does.
The install went flawlessly, but now Evolution won't start. Her machine is a fairly plain WinXP box, kept up to date fairly regularly (i.e., every night as scheduled)
Too bad it doesn't just work. I'm trying to figure out what it's delima is, but it doesn't make it look like a good thing for an end user. Most people would stop when it doesn't work. I definately can't tell the Windows users "Go download this!", because there may be a number of steps which they may need to do, that are beyond their abilities.
Re:It still doesn't replace outlook... (Score:3, Informative)
Really? Why abuse HTTPS like that when IMAPS is designed for it from the start?
Re:Excellent for desktop migrations... (Score:1, Informative)
The User Profile directory will always be C:\Users, with junctions pointing from C:\Documents and Settings and C:\Dokumente und Einstellungen (if you're using the German MUI Pack) to that folder.
Same goes for C:\Program Files\.
I still prefer the OS X Approach to this Problem (Filesystem ONLY has English names, Metadata tells Applications to Display another Name), but the Vista Solution is MUCH better than what we had in 2k and XP.