[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-i18n
Subject:    Re: konqueror components
From:       rupert THURNER <rthurner () edu ! uni-klu ! ac ! at>
Date:       1999-02-16 16:07:02
[Download RAW message or body]

i'm convinced that torben, reggie, simon and waldo propose the best
thing:
parts.

why?
1. parts can be easily changed, and can be used by other applications.
2. a part is mail-reader-part is easier to write than a whole outlook.
3. the user does not notice the underlying technology
   (i.e. if the parts have outlook funcionaltiy you  won't
   notice a difference to outlook)

outlook indeed is a usable program, but its a monster, all in one.
outlook is definitely the best program for manageing contacts and
schedule in a small/medium (small groups) style. BUT, netscape is the
fastest and most usable program for mailing (imap and news is most
mature, if you are interested you can have a list of missing features in
outlook98) and group use in a larger style (with ldap, calendar, ... i
mean they managed to break their stuff down in a nice way), and
staroffice would be the most flexible program for mailing and
newsreading (if you are interested, same offer), if it would be faster
and would not have so many bugs. (restricted to what i know: unix/linux
and windows, no be, no next, no macos programs in this field ... except
netscape ;)) ).

i'm sure that when working on kde-outlook, you also considered some code
and functionality separation. so you already HAVE a something like a
separate mailreader, and a shared tree. if your kde-outlook-mail-reader
has a KOM/openpart interface, it could plug in to the architecture
proposed by simon (correct me if i'm wrong here ....).

rupert.

Teodor Romeo Mihai wrote:
> 
> Waldo Bastian wrote:
> >
> > Teodor Romeo Mihai wrote:
> > > Well, I've been working for a few months now on a Outloook-clone for
> > > KDE, handling mail/contacts/schedule/journal/notes/groups. It is a bit
> > > different from all KDE applications I've seen, being very close to
> > > Outlook in look&feel rather than KMail - which I find unusable.
> > > If you are seriously planning to put mail in kfm, maybe you should
> > > consider some kind of integration with an external mailer, in
> > > Explorer/Outlook style.
> >
> > I'm serious about integrating mail-viewing in Konqueror. (User point of
> > view).
> >
> > I think it is a very bad idea to put mail-reading code in Konqueror/kfm
> > (Developers point of view).
> >
> > Konqueror should be able to display mail/mailboxes by embedding a mail-
> > viewer. This mail-viewer should (in the case of a mail-viewer) be a
> > seperate application from a developers point of view, but should
> > integrate
> > seemless with Konqueror from the user point of view. This application
> > can be kmail, a light version of kmail, or any other application that
> > can display
> > mails and supports this embedded KFM-view idea.
> >
> > The technology to embed the mail-viewer should be something CORBA based.
> > Most likely KOM/Openparts. (Simon, is this correct?)
> >
> > It should also be possible to make this Outlook-thing (does it have a
> > name?)
> > integrate with Konqueror in the same way.
> >
> > I am not sure what outlook is. But I have the feeling that Outlook is
> > the kind
> > of program that wants to do everything itself, and as result, does
> > everything
> > very poorly. (like Netscape Communicator which I use to write this mail,
> > correct me if I am wrong)
> >
> > Konqueror should do it better and the Unix way: Have speciliazed
> > components
> > which are very good in their task. Konqueror provides the seemless
> > integration
> > of them and provides easy navigation abilities.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Waldo
> > --
> > KDE, Making The Future of Computing Available Today
> > http://www.kde.org
> 
> I'm sorry but I have to contradict you. Outlook is the best
> general-purpose message organiser I have ever seen - and I'm as far from
> being a MS fan as you can get. You're right indeed when you say that it
> is the kind of program that wants to do everything by itself, but
> strangely it manages to do that very well, and I can safely say - after
> a long, hard look at Outlook, from a developer point of view - that it
> is very far from Netscape and light-years away from KMail. We'll
> certainly keep the same poor standards in applications (as we have today
> in KDE) if we just say "yeah, M$ sucks", but please have a closer look
> at Outlook. Apart from some really weird things, such as a clipboard for
> cut&paste-ing objects with conversions (like I did in my clone, so you
> can cut&paste contacts into mails, as vCard attachments for example),
> you can find almost anything in Outlook.
> When I've started programming in KDE, I was very optimistic about it.
> Now I know that the documentation is very poor, many basic things (like
> the clipboard or the drag-and-drop) [barely] work, and that I have to
> spend many hours reading KDE source code just to figure out how to use
> some class or what's wrong with the mime-types etc.. but in general the
> people are happy and thinking about CORBA and sophisticated things.. ;)
> Sorry if this sounds sad but it's plain reality.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Teodor Romeo Mihai  [email: teddy@piercom.ie]
> Development Systems Engineer at Piercom Ltd.
> Eurotechnopole Building, Holland Road
> National Technological Park, Limerick
> Ireland
> Tel. +353 61 201972     Fax + 353 61 335051

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]