Re: [Evolution] back from Outlook

[Pete Biggs <pete biggs org uk>]

> 2.  The GUI in Outlook is better. The font size and toolbar size is
> smaller and hence it gives a better view. I am yet to figure out how
> to change toolbar and font size in Evolution (under KDE).

It follows the Gnome settings, so you need to run something like
'gnome-appearance-properties' and set it in there - or fire up a gnome
session and configure that how you like it.

> 4.  One important feature / convenience for Outlook end user is that
> they don't have to compile the software / new version. I had a
> nightmare compiling  Evolution 2.12. As an end user I would love to
> get a compiled (rpm) of new stable version.   

The Evo versions are linked to Gnome versions - you are using FC7 I see,
so the only way of getting an RPM of 2.12.xx would be to do a wholesale
upgrade to Gnome 2.12 - or upgrade to F8.

If Evo wasn't so intensely linked to Gnome, like Thunderbird, then I
suspect that upgrading in a mixed environment would be much easier.

> 6.  The filter rules worked more consistently in Outlook
In what way?  I've never used outlook filters, but I don't see an
inconsistencies in the Evo filters. 


> 7.  Outlook has more import / export features than evolution. 

That's a difficult one!  The primary platform for Evo is Linux, and the
import of Linux prevalent formats (i.e. open ones) is fine.  What Evo
won't (or can't) do is import proprietary formats. 

P.