I guess Outlook 2000 is not too bad. I had the M$ course on it yesterday. It
is absolutely riddled with little bug'lets and inconsistencies, which,
although not usually affecting useage, did make me laugh !
The reason I don't want to use it is that I sit in front of my Linux box all
day coding etc.. I a) have to remember and b) then switch to my Window$ box
to read my e-mails. Even if I can read my e-mails from Linux, how can I set
up meetings or respond to invites or see which other people are free when
etc.. Moreover I would rather use something like Evolution than a browser !
Our sys. admins. have told me that not 'all' the functionality is available
through the web interface and, in true M$ style, even less unless you use IE
!!! Sigh !
I have hunted at the Ximian site but can find no mention of Exchange except
to say that Evolution will support the vCalendar and iCalendar protocols and
M$ will just have to buck their ideas up and adopt propper standards. I would
just like to wish Ximian all the best in the current endeavors !!! :-)
Owen
On Thursday 05 April 2001 6:19 am, you wrote:
> > > > Does anyone know if there is a Linux Exchange client out there
> >
> > any where ?
> >
> > > i don't think so but i believe that the folks at Ximian works on
> > > that...
> > >
> > > --
> > > MandrakeSoft Inc http://www.chmouel.org
> > > --Chmouel
> >
> > I'm using Netscape to connect to our Exchange server - seems to work just
> > great. Of course this box is setup with samba.
>
> What a nice mess ... Netscape is not Exchange client and SAMBA has nothing
> to do with it at all :)
>
> The best case is if admins allow IMAP access. If the problem is security -
> at least fetchmail supports NTLM authentication so that passwords are
> encrypted (really encrypted, not just obfuscated) the same way as normal NT
> workstation does. I fetch mail from Exchange onto Unix server using
> fetchmail. I have also seen rumors about fetchmail being (having been)
> ported to Cygwin.
>
> I belive, there are some more IMAP clients that support NTLM.
>
> But what is actually wrong with OL2000? It is not just as bad; is just
> because it comes from Microsoft?
>
> -andrej
