I've had a similar need for some time now, and I've found that there is
only one "gotcha" in that requirements list,
Item (1) is simply not available. I've looked into all of the PST
conversion options I can find too, and none of them seem
to work with the PST format used by Outlook 2000 or later. As far as
meeting the remaining requirements, Mozilla
Thunderbird is close (doesn't have calendar support, yet, but Sunbird
should change that soon). Novell Evolution
only runs on Linux, for now, but it is probably the closest thing to an
Outlook replacement I've seen, and it even has
the ability to connect directly to an Exchange server, for those stuck
with connecting to a corporate system based on
Microsoft software.
If anyone else on the list knows of a good PST conversion tool, that
actually works, and can run entirely on Linux,
please chime in.
Bryan.ONeal@asu.edu wrote:
>At the risk of being shot
>
>Sadly, IF you have access to an exchange server, AND you run windows, AND all
>your coworkers are doing the same, THEN Outlook ends up being one of the best
>PIMs out their... Sadly most people satisfy the last two if not the first
>requirement.
>
>Speaking of which, I do not need to interface with others, Nor do I need a
>handheld (palm/handspring, iPaq, etc) conduit, but I do need a good PIM that
>will
>1) Read and outlook .pst file for calendar, Contacts, Mail, etc.
>2) Run on OS X, and FC2 (or any other Linux dist), and I would prefer a
>windows version... but it is not needed
>3) Do all those standard address book / contact list, calendaring (VCard
>support would be nice), task lists (with reminders), mail (with good rule
>processing), etc.
>
>I would also like it to be able to synch to a remote directory but again, this
>is not really needed.
>
>So, in essence I am looking for an Outlook replacement without the need to
>work with others (Exchange server) or synch with a handheld.
>
>Any suggestions?
>
>
>On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Ric Fischer wrote:
>
>
>
>>> On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 11:58:27 -0700 (MST), der.hans <PLUGd@lufthans.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> > Am 27. Jan, 2005 schw�tzte Ric Fischer so:
>>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>>> > > I keep forgetting how badly MS' email programs munge the simple things
>>>>> > > in life (I'm referring to the original thread).
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > G Gambill, any chance you can turn on the regular reply quoting in
>>>>> > > Outlook? (It's been a while, but I think it's in Tools -> Options and
>>>>> > > then an email button. Towards the bottom of the dialog box, there are
>>>>> > > different options for how the forwarded and replied emails should
>>>>> > > look. Are you allowed or able to turn on the "> " option for quoting
>>>>> > > or will your co-workers freak out? :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > Does this break anything? How does LookOut normally demark between the
>>>> > original and the reply?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (I'm sorry, but I don't call people or people's work names, I got the
>>> namecalling out of my system at a young age. Feel free to do so in my
>>> presence, I don't care. But I won't say them myself.)
>>>
>>> If the default is for Outlook to send messages as HTML and if, while
>>> writing the message, you convert from HTML to Plain Text, it doesn't
>>> carry over any reply quoting.
>>>
>>> Also, the default is for quoting to show up (using HTML) with a blue
>>> vertical bar down the left side, with an additional blue bar for each
>>> nested reply. The paragraphs stay as true paragraphs, so there's NEVER
>>> any paragraph flowing or re-flowing problems, no matter how many
>>> levels deep the reply is. The deeper the reply, the more its left
>>> margin is indented and an additional vertical blue bar runs along the
>>> left side. Unfortunately, this makes inline reply a pain in the butt,
>>> because you can sometimes farkle the blue bar effect and really get
>>> your reply message hosed.
>>>
>>> My preference was to set all my defaults to plain text, use the reply
>>> quoting fix that Bill mentioned, and just take the occasional, "How'd
>>> you do that?" or "Why does yours look different?" queries from
>>> co-workers.
>>>
>>
>>
>>>> > m$ people at work are always having to state how they're showing their
>>>> > stuff because LookOut apparently doesn't do decent mail handling.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "how they're showing their stuff"? I don't understand.
>>>
>>
>>
>>>> > The proper solution, of course, is to not use LookOut.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Absolutely. If only their IT guys would let them switch to something
>>> else. Problem is, they usually also need connectivity to the Exchange
>>> server and, with that, all the calendaring, notes, to do's, etc. :-(
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ric Fischer
>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
>>> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>
>>
>>
(text/plain)