faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
thread
|
Re: Focus on Infusion
by Chad Kitching on Saturday 16/Jun/2001, @03:36
|
Yet neither you nor Shawn can say anything other than Aethera is not an Outlook clone, and Evolution is an Outlook clone. The Evolution developers for the most part have admitted that the user interface on Evolution was modeled after Outlook, but maintain that the underlying framework is nothing like it. The people advocating Aethera have not really given any real reason why Aethera should not be considered an Outlook clone.
Now, if you were a developer of a program that received negative comments on some site, wouldn't you feel the need to comment? If you look, he didn't attack Aethera, or any other KDE program, he merely felt the need to correct what he felt was an error, although perhaps he was a little too enthusiastic. On the other hand, we have you and Shawn that are just repeating the same line over and over again about cloning Outlook. From my perspective, you're the troll and Jamin is not.
And you want to know what? Admitting that Microsoft might've actually done things right in "uncool" and "trolling" on Slashdot, too, so I'm going to break the rules, too. I think Microsoft did a wonderful job with the interface on Microsoft Outlook 2000. With a little configuration, it's a highly capable and efficient mail/news/calendaring/contacts/journal program. Many of it's features, such as Auto-preview, save me a great deal of time in helping me sort through the mail I need to read and respond to, and the ones that can be deleted and/or ignored without a response.
Perhaps one of these messages, one of you will say why you feel that Aethera is not a clone of Outlook, just as Jamin did. |
|
|
The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: Focus on Infusion
by Evan "JabberWokky" E. on Sunday 17/Jun/2001, @16:49
|
>> Perhaps one of these messages, one of you will say why you feel that Aethera is not a clone of Outlook, just as Jamin did.
First off, let me say that I am going to try and answer in a very non-trollish way... but AFAIK, no one in the thread has attempted to answer this. Let me also say that I think that Outlook, Lotus Notes, Aethera, Evolution, etc are pretty much interchangeable programs - they are all built to do pretty much the same things, and as such, pull from each other heavily.
Now, having said that, let me try and explore the two things that I am aware that Aethera has that kick it a notch above Outlook. First off, it has a clearly defined, open API for plugins. I developed Outlook objects for about a year, and while it has some functionality in this area, it is limited. Without having really used Aethera, the documentation makes it look like this functionality was designed from the start, rather than being added on, which really is a fundimental difference: but *only* if Aethera plugins take off.
The thing that seems to really seperate it from the other PIMs is a nebulous thing that I freely admit that I don't quite understand. I've asked Shawn to explain it further, because it is *very* tantalizing, but not very well described. The concept is similar to DiBona's LookOut project - all data types are parsed into a common, linkable and indexed format. Thus, all your data is accessable in a structured way, whether it be a note you jotted down, an email, or an image. Each can annontate each other (I gather), and they can be structured into various thought grouping (which is done automatically by access, I believe).
Now, if that works, that's enough to set it ahead for my use. If that makes it more than a "clone", that's up to you. Really, Outlook is a good program, and I don't see any harm in calling something a clone of a good program. I don't normally think "clone" implies that that is all that program will *ever* be... just that it drew heavily in inspiration from one (in this case, good) source.
PLEASE keep all replies to the topic of Aethera features... the "is it or isn't it a clone" is a matter of opinion, and will never be resolved.
--
Evan
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Focus on Infusion
by Chad Kitching on Monday 18/Jun/2001, @05:49
|
"First off, it has a clearly defined, open API for plugins. [...] look like this functionality was designed from the start [...]"
Now this is interesting. Indeed this could be a very powerful feature and "selling point". I'd really be interested to know if they've defined a mail provider interface (much like Outlook uses MAPI providers), and if it's simple and generic enough to be [re]used by other mail applications. There are obviously PIM/groupware servers in the work (such as the Citadel/UX mentioned in the article), and if a fairly common API can be defined, programs could use it as a sort of plugin for non-integrated mail services. I have a feeling more and more servers will eventually pop-up that don't use IMAP or POP3 as their native protocol, or have features that can't be implemented in those protocols, and it'd be nice if the server creators could make a single shared library that could plug into all these different mail clients and just work independantly of toolkit, desktop or anything else.
"The thing that seems to really seperate it from the other PIMs is a nebulous thing that I freely admit that I don't quite understand."
Looks like it's what their website calls PDR... I don't quite get it, either. It'll probably be one of those things that you don't understand what's so great about it until you start using and relying on it.
My problem in all of this was we had two people complaining that their program was not a clone and everyone else's was. I think this is a dangerous attitude to have, especially when you're developing a program. It can seriously blind you to limitations in your program that your "competitions" program doesn't suffer from. Whether any of these programs are a clone of Outlook isn't as important as how well it will do the job it's been designed for.
It will certainly be interesting to see how all the projects evolve over the next year or so. I'm glad someone finally can tell me what differentiates it from the competition other than "look". At least they're all trying to break new ground, Aethera with those plugins and "PDR", Evolution with it's VFolders, and now Infusion with it's support of Citadel/UX. Although, now I'm interested in what's unique about Magellan, despite the fact that they seem to be either way behind schedule, or too busy to work on it (or maybe still bitter that theKompany forked magellan to make Aethera?).
|
[
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)
