The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by MaX on Friday 28/Jan/2005, @13:29
|
In KDE 3.4 Kontact features Exchange support as well. Furthermore a port of Kontact to Windows should be much easier and faster to do than porting Evolution to Windows for various reasons (Actually some parts of Kontact have already been ported to Windows).
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by U on Friday 28/Jan/2005, @14:35
|
"Furthermore a port of Kontact to Windows should be much easier and faster"
Sounds good in theory, but we all know this will never be done.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Right you are
by Morty on Friday 28/Jan/2005, @15:32
|
Since most of KDE already runs on windows. Like this.
http://kde-cygwin.sourceforge.net/kde3/screenshots.php?img=kmail.png
And the goal is to do it even better.
http://kde-cygwin.sourceforge.net/qt3-win32/features.php
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Right you are
by me on Friday 28/Jan/2005, @17:03
|
Using Cygwin, you must be joking! I don't think that KDE apps are easier to port than gtk+ apps, eg GIMP works just fine on Windows.
If I remember right, there are also issues with Qt on Windows, doesn't this require licensing costs?
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Right you are
by Morty on Friday 28/Jan/2005, @17:57
|
The first link shows it works NOW, with Cygwin. As are more than you can say about the alternatives. Except Athera who actually uses the a modified KOrganiser as callendar part:-)
As for porting to windows, you have to compare KDE to Gnome and Qt to gtk+. Then let the numbers speak, Qt applications clearly outnumbers gtk+ ones.
Had you actually tried the links, the second link would have shown you a working port of the GPL Qt to windows. Already used to port applications, not simple ones at that.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Right you are
by blacksheep on Monday 31/Jan/2005, @13:00
|
I think "me"'s point is that it is as easy to port a GTK or Qt application with Cygwin.
The real issue is when making a native binary port without using some sort of virtual machine environment.
Compiling a native binary of Kontact in Windows would require Novell to buy Qt licenses and that's probably why they have followed the path of using Evolution, even if it is harder. The issue is not technical, it's practical, that's "U"'s and other's points.
Anyway, personally, I couldn't care less about free software being ported to Windows.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Right you are
by Kevin Krammer on Monday 31/Jan/2005, @14:02
|
<i>Compiling a native binary of Kontact in Windows would require Novell to buy Qt licenses</i>
That would be the fastes way, another option would be the route they are taking with GTK+, porting Qt/Free to Windows, or more accurate, finishing the ongoing portin effort.
After all the current cygwin stage is only considered an intermediate step towards a fully native Win32 port of Qt/Free.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Right you are
by Morty on Monday 31/Jan/2005, @17:58
|
The work in porting to Cygwin is not in the GUI part in any case, so the toolkit does not really matter. The fact is that the Qt port is already functional.
If the problem are for Novell to buy a few Qt licenses for their developers, you are right the issue is not technical. But it's also far from practical, it's political. In this case tho, I'll guess this is more like some kind of backroom program than a Novell strategy, since Novell already have a successful Groupware solution on windows.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by Kevin Krammer on Saturday 29/Jan/2005, @04:11
|
> Sounds good in theory, but we all know this will never be done.
The PIM developers seem to think different:
http://dot.kde.org/1106179379/1106206796/1106211548/
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by U on Saturday 29/Jan/2005, @08:31
|
>> Waste of time. Kontact/KMail etc. are KDE integrated apps.
What does that supose to mean?
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by Kevin Krammer on Saturday 29/Jan/2005, @09:20
|
No idea, I was referring to Ingo's posting.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by Felix on Saturday 29/Jan/2005, @02:18
|
I do not understand why Novell does not buy Trolltech and make Qt LGPL for Linux.
I think this would solve many problems because as far as I read is Qt technical much mature and better crossplattform than GTK+.
So instead of tinkering with GTK+ for other platforms they could save time and could concentrate their efforts on developing Kontact and port it with less effort to Windows.
And maybe this would also attract more developers developing applications in C++ for Linux instead of using C with GTK+.
OK - maybe I'm a bit offtopic now.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by Kevin Krammer on Saturday 29/Jan/2005, @04:14
|
> I do not understand why Novell does not buy Trolltech
Maybe because Trolltech has currently no interest in being bought?
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by David on Saturday 29/Jan/2005, @05:21
|
Evolution is as buggy as hell, and has got more so over the past three or four years. Porting the thing to Windows is rather pointless and will create an absolute ton of new work and bugs. I don't think they realise how much work it will be. It also raises serious questions as to how Novell's desktop migration to Linux is going.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by U on Saturday 29/Jan/2005, @08:26
|
" Evolution is as buggy as hell"
Then you should check your distro or pc, my Evo installation is rock solid and is fast.
Kontact by the other hand keeps crashing on me, I dont really care cause I don't find it mature enough to using at work anyway.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by ac on Sunday 30/Jan/2005, @09:01
|
Your comment shows that you haven't understood at all what Kolab and Kontact are about. And if Evolution is really that cool, it should be easy to provide support for the Kolab server beside of the Exchange suppport.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by U on Sunday 30/Jan/2005, @21:08
|
I don't know, they are already to busy with the Novell Groupware.
And I know what Kolab is and what is pretending to do, but honestly, I dont think it will be successful, why? simple, it is QT based, that mean, if you want to implement, lets say, a pluging for it in your own enterprice you have to pay to Troll Tech for the developers tools, and that's at least $1,500, and no, not every enterprices like to opensource they technique, and even so, according to QT licence you must pay if you are getting benefits of QT in your enterprice, that's why I think it won't be adapted, not for enterprices and surely not by countries.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by Anonymous on Sunday 30/Jan/2005, @23:35
|
First, it's written "Qt". Then, assuming you talk about the client side who forces you to write your plugin with Qt?
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by U on Monday 31/Jan/2005, @05:17
|
That's why is not a viable solution, if I have to use a third party tool for writing plugins for it, I don't see the point of using it at all, if I use the Qt tool kit, then it is at least $1,500, those are two big showstoppers for Kolab.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by Kevin Krammer on Monday 31/Jan/2005, @05:58
|
I guess you are mixing Kolab and Kontact here. Kontact is Qt based, but as far as I know there is no Qt requriement when developing a Kolab client.
> not every enterprices like to opensource they technique
They don't have to distribute their code as long as they use is purely internally
> and even so, according to QT licence you must pay if you are getting benefits of QT in your enterprice
No, you are mixing that with the Qt/non-commerical licence for Windows.
Qt/Free as available on Unix/Linux and OS X is at least licenced under GPL and GPL does not allow such a restriction.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by U on Monday 31/Jan/2005, @09:53
|
>> No, you are mixing that with the Qt/non-commerical licence for Windows.
Exactly, and since 90% of the world pc users use Windows, they are atached to this license, that's the big problem.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by Kevin Krammer on Monday 31/Jan/2005, @10:03
|
I fail to see the problem.
Kolab runs on Unix/Linux systems, the communication with the server does not require Qt, so there is no need to use Qt on Windows if you want to access the Kolab server.
Very likely the most used Kolab client under Windows is currently Outlook with one of the connector plugins.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by U on Monday 31/Jan/2005, @10:16
|
>>> Very likely the most used Kolab client under Windows is currently Outlook with one of the connector plugins.
That's the answer I needed, thank you.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by blacksheep on Monday 31/Jan/2005, @12:55
|
> Very likely the most used Kolab client under
> Windows is currently Outlook with one of the
> connector plugins.
You've just reached his point. :D
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by Kevin Krammer on Monday 31/Jan/2005, @13:57
|
How so?
His point is that Kolab can't be successful because he thought it would put a Qt dependency on its usage, which it does not as I explain and what he acknowledge.
So this means we have reached the point where we both agree that Kolab is going to be successful because it can be used by a number of different clients on different systems, even allowing the use of already deployed clients and just changing the PIM server.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Evolution is better for enterprices...
by Carlo on Tuesday 01/Feb/2005, @07:59
|
if you want to implement, lets say, a pluging for it in your own enterprice you have to pay to Troll Tech for the developers tools, and that's at least $1,500
They won't have to pay. If you use the plugin only in your company, you don't have to realease the code. Read the GPL.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
