MozillaZine

Full Article Attached mozilla.org Announces Calendar Project

Thursday October 25th, 2001

mozilla.org today announced that OEone, makers of the Penzilla Linux device that uses Mozilla as its shell, will be offering a significant portion of their calendar code to Mozilla. For more info on this, check out Gerv Markham's post by clicking the Full Article link.


#1 Important Addendum

by Gerv

Thursday October 25th, 2001 7:13 PM

Reply to this message

It's not completely obvious from the article, but the code's not in CVS yet. OEone are currently trying to get a beta out the door this week; we hope to get the code into CVS next week.

Gerv

#2 Oh, and also...

by Gerv

Thursday October 25th, 2001 7:59 PM

Reply to this message

if anyone starts wondering how this fits with no-new-features, the answer is that it being reviewed, super-reviewed and turned on by default is very much a post-1.0 thing. There are some external contributors (e.g. the Open Office groupware people) who may well want to work on it, which is why it's going into the tree now.

We'll be making sure it doesn't take the time of key people.

Gerv

#3 Now are you happy?

by joschi

Thursday October 25th, 2001 8:16 PM

Reply to this message

Gerv, does this news satisfy your question in a previous M.Z. thread?

"Where are the large contributions made from outside Netscape we can point to to show the value of the open source process?"

:)

<http://mozillazine.org/ta…le=2063&message=28#28>

This is really terrific news, I look forward to looking over this when it is given to the world.

#11 Re: Now are you happy?

by Gerv

Thursday October 25th, 2001 11:14 PM

Reply to this message

It depends. Netscape may not be interested in the calendar either. We'll have to see. :-)

Gerv

#21 HA!!

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday October 26th, 2001 2:17 AM

Reply to this message

Yeah, I'll BET Netscape's not interested (choke, giggle). Are you being sarcastic? They probably wet their pants! Netscape is going to descend on this like a pack of hungry wolves, I'm quite sure.

James (the Amiga dude)

#4 Netscape Calendar?

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Thursday October 25th, 2001 8:33 PM

Reply to this message

What do you think the chances of Netscape including this in a future version are? The MozillaNews article about Netscape's future plans <http://www.mozillanews.org/index.php3?article=12> speculated that enterprise versions of MachV could include a calendar app similar to the one included in earlier versions of Communicator (interestingly, jesus_X has removed all the cool details such as this from the MozillaNews article - under no pressure from anyone, apparently).

If Netscape do include Calendar then hopefully it will convince some of their management that this open source thing is worthwhile - they're getting an enterprise-level calendar for free! It's also good to see more major contributions from outside Netscape (not because I don't like Netscape - I do, really - but because it helps expand the project).

Alex

#7 Re: Netscape Calendar?

by johnlar <johnlar@tfn.net>

Thursday October 25th, 2001 10:13 PM

Reply to this message

Cause jesus_X is a commie pinko. j e s u s | jesus_X_susej | s u Setting our snipper s rifles, on jesus_x e for 20 years. j

#28 Re: Netscape Calendar?

by sabi

Friday October 26th, 2001 1:53 PM

Reply to this message

Netscape Calendar was developed by CS&T, now Steltor (<http://www.steltor.com>). They have continued to develop the program as CorporateTime. It's not free, but it's very good, and it's extremely cross-platform (clients for Windows, Mac OS/OS X, AIX, HP-UX, IRIX, Solaris and Linux x86); it syncs with Palm on both Windows and Mac, as well as WinCE; it has a Web client; and it's been really reliable in my experience.

A competing product (with mostly the same support, though I think no Unix clients) is Meeting Maker.

Of course, free would be better, but that's a lot of work. :)

#29 Re: Re: Netscape Calendar?

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Friday October 26th, 2001 2:23 PM

Reply to this message

"Of course, free would be better, but that's a lot of work. :)"

Of course, as OEone are donating their code, Netscape wouldn't actually have to do any work! Other than branding, that is. And anything else they might want to add, for example, synchronisation with Netscape WebCalendar. But you get the idea. It's a win-win situation for everyone: Netscape 6 has more cool features that enterprise users will love and Netscape gets the code more or less for free (which is one of the reasons they made Communicator open-source in the first place).

Alex

#33 Re: Re: Re: Netscape Calendar?

by strauss

Friday October 26th, 2001 4:15 PM

Reply to this message

>> Of course, as OEone are donating their code, Netscape wouldn't actually have to do any work! Other than branding, that is. <<

Checkins to the main trunk require extensive review and evaluation by drivers and others.

#34 Re: Re: Re: Re: Netscape Calendar?

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Friday October 26th, 2001 4:35 PM

Reply to this message

Not all the drivers are Netscape people though.

Okay, so Netscape aren't getting a full and complete calendar app for free. But they're getting it at a knockdown price. :-)

Alex

#38 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Netscape Calendar?

by strauss

Friday October 26th, 2001 6:46 PM

Reply to this message

Whether drivers are Netscape or not does not seem to make much difference here. They would be diverted from Mozilla 1.0 responsibilities if they had to review a new feature. Fortunately it appears that this will not happen.

#6 Re: Oh, and also...

by strauss

Thursday October 25th, 2001 9:54 PM

Reply to this message

Is it #ifdef'd out?

#9 Finaly

by djcovey

Thursday October 25th, 2001 10:52 PM

Reply to this message

About time. Ive been missing a calendar app ever since I moved from Outlook 2000 to Mozilla. I certainly hope the mozilla communicty will get behind this project, but I do believe that focus need to remail on the browser and moving it towards 1.0.

Damien

#12 Re: Re: Oh, and also...

by Gerv

Thursday October 25th, 2001 11:15 PM

Reply to this message

It's not even in the tree yet :-)

Gerv

#5 Enough already...

by rgelb <nospam@nospam.com>

Thursday October 25th, 2001 9:34 PM

Reply to this message

...with countless distractions. Focus on the browser suite and get it finished already. Is this calendaring tool really needed? Aren\'t there enough PIMs in the world. Even open source ones (aethera, evolution, korganizer, etc...), not to mention commercial ones. What will moz gain by adding yet another useless side project? If OEone wants to build something with moz engine - then let them do it on their own time and on mozdev.org, not on mozilla.org.

#8 Re: Enough already...

by ERICmurphy <murphye@gmail.com>

Thursday October 25th, 2001 10:46 PM

Reply to this message

I agree. I dunno why they get to integrate into Mozilla.org. I've been asking to get Jabberzilla in Moz CVS for a long time with no response and lots of roadblocks.

#13 Re: Re: Enough already...

by Gerv

Thursday October 25th, 2001 11:18 PM

Reply to this message

Eric, will you please stop complaining about this. About two weeks ago we had an email conversation about this very subject, and I laid out the conditions that any piece of software must meet to be incorporated into the tree and turned on by default. This conversation ended with you saying:

"After talking with Jim, we've decided that Jabberzilla is not ready for Mozilla, and Mozilla is not ready for Jabberzilla ;-)"

Calendar will have to meet all the criteria I outlined in my message to you to be turned on by default in the Mozilla build. So please, cease the accusations of favouritism.

Gerv

#32 Re: Re: Re: Enough already...

by ERICmurphy <murphye@gmail.com>

Friday October 26th, 2001 3:47 PM

Reply to this message

Sorry, I keep living in the past. This has been the case for over a year, so I have given up on the idea for now. If it could have happened last year, Jabberzilla might be much better off now.

You're right though. I'm just bitter ;-)

#39 ERICmurphy

by jedbro

Friday October 26th, 2001 6:59 PM

Reply to this message

Hello... I also e-mailed you about the project, with no response... I personally think that Jabberzilla is an AWESOME application, with a HUGE future for mozilla, and also for JABBER.. I think Mozilla would be a great way to "evangelize" Jabber, and get it out to more people...

I am VERY dissapointed with you saying you are "bitter".. does this mean all your hard work has been done in vane?

Could you take the time and right up a quick mock-up of a document stating exactly what needs to be done to make Jabberzilla able to be put in the Mozilla tree??????

Mabey some of us could help you get there. As I ahve seen on posts here and other places, GERV has been VERY supportive of Jabberzilla, and we all know it being included in the tree would be ANOTHER WIN-WIN situation for both JABBER.org and MOzilla!

Please re-concider your stance on "having given up", and let's let the Dream come alive again.

Cheers!

--Jedbro

#40 what 'are' the requirements?

by tseng_mike <tseng_mike@yahoo.com>

Friday October 26th, 2001 7:04 PM

Reply to this message

Just out of curosity, what is the condition for code to be integrated into mozilla cvs? Shouldn\\\'t it be public information? I sure would like to know.

#14 Re: Enough already...

by Gerv

Thursday October 25th, 2001 11:20 PM

Reply to this message

> Even open source ones (aethera, evolution, korganizer, etc...)

Are any XP?

It's quite simple. We were offered code. There are people who want to work on it (OEone, Open Office and others.) We are making it happen. That's what we (mozilla.org) do. There's no reason it should affect Mozilla 1.0.

Gerv

#30 Re: Enough already...

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Friday October 26th, 2001 2:53 PM

Reply to this message

Gotta love those knee-jerk reactions. Now read the article again and let the facts sink in. The calendar is not a distraction at all, as no one focused on \"finishing\" (I assume you really mean 1.0) the browser has spent any time on it. It was developed by OEOne. They have been doing it on their own time, so your comment doesn\'t make any sense. Nor does your implication that the project is somehow less of a distraction if the raw code is hosted on mozilla.org instead of mozdev.org (it really makes no difference). Thanks for the useful feedback.

#36 Re: Re: Enough already...

by rgelb <nospam@nospam.com>

Friday October 26th, 2001 5:27 PM

Reply to this message

I am a software developer and I know exactly how this type of stuff works. Moz team WILL BE distracted, even if for a small time. Someone has to move the calendar into CVS, someone has to hook up Bugzilla to deal with it, someone will have to give them permissions, etc... The devil is in the details - and if you don't think that you are not a developer. Somewhere down the line, OEOne devs will have questions on how to do this or that (related to Moz/XPCOM) or will need some type of support. Now, I am sure that OEOne has nothing but good intentions by releasing the code. But why does it have to be at mozilla.org? Let them develop at mozdev, just like every third party project out there.

#37 Re: Re: Re: Enough already...

by michaelg <mike@vee.net>

Friday October 26th, 2001 6:34 PM

Reply to this message

Yeah, but you can't seriously think that it effect the whole team, all of the contributers, even for a short period of time.

Sure it will distract a few people for a small amount of time, but so does a lot of other things, like having a life, eating or maybe even sleeping. 8)

Keep in mind that mozilla.org has a lot of people that don't spend their time writing code, or spend it writing code for other Moz projects.

#10 Hold it off for a bit

by caspy7

Thursday October 25th, 2001 10:53 PM

Reply to this message

Agreed. The code should be held back at least until 1.0 is out the door. Best not to take the focus off code that's 1.0 destined.

The least that could be done would be put it as an independent project on mozdev till 1.0 happens.

#15 THANK GOD

by flacco

Thursday October 25th, 2001 11:47 PM

Reply to this message

If I miss one more birthday since moving from outlook to Moz, I\'m gonna have NO friends left.

Not to mention remembering to swap the backup tapes.

And remembering to wear pants on the days that the house cleaner comes over. Seriously folks, whether the \"Mozilla-should-be-a-stripped-down-browser\" faction likes it or not, the best place for your calendar is right next to, and interacting with, your e-mail client.

If this works out it will be a great thing for just regular folks and Outlook captives alike.

#16 Hear, hear!

by ipottinger

Friday October 26th, 2001 12:33 AM

Reply to this message

Bloat *rules* the desktop!

Real-world users, those who get confused when you tell them to click and hold the left mouse button - "Duh, which button?" "The left one. No, the LEFT button! The other one!!! NO! This one!!!" "This?" "YES! Dear God, YES!" - want everything in one place. They are NOT going to download this and that. They wouldn't have a prayer configuring two applications to work with each other.

The more useful applications Mozilla can bundle, the more successful it will be. Climb down from that ivory towers and mingle with the masses!

#17 you said it

by djcovey

Friday October 26th, 2001 12:58 AM

Reply to this message

Just look at the number of users that Outlook has. People want their calendar integrated with their email app. I know I do. Lets just hope that this project turns out to be upto the same standard that moz is currently.

#19 Re: Hear, hear!

by flacco

Friday October 26th, 2001 1:10 AM

Reply to this message

<i>Bloat *rules* the desktop!</i> <p> Not necessarily bloat - I couldn't care less if the application were one monolithic beast or a dozen specialized modules - but you DO want a unified interface without having to constantly resize a fistful of separate applications all over the place; and you want the different components to KNOW about, and be capable of interacting with, the other components. Drag and drop, looking up meeting participants in the addressbook, etc.

#43 Re: THANK GOD

by ksheka

Friday October 26th, 2001 9:53 PM

Reply to this message

Hey, if it interacts with my Mozilla/Netscape addressbook *and* my palm-top (Palm Vx), I would be *ecstatic* !!!

Heck, if that was the case, I could probably get my dad to switch. :-)

#18 national holidays?

by johann_p

Friday October 26th, 2001 1:09 AM

Reply to this message

I wonder if this will be yet another calender that is practically useless because it doesnt have all the holdays programmed in/programmable (and that would mean for a lot of countries). Not to talk about the fact that some people actually use entirely different calendars than in the u.s (jewish, muslim, just to name two).

#20 Re: national holidays?

by flacco

Friday October 26th, 2001 1:41 AM

Reply to this message

>> I wonder if this will be yet another calender that is practically useless because it doesnt have all the holdays<<

I wouldn't consider a calendar useless just because it doesn't contain every conceivable holiday under the sun. I need something to schedule meetings and generate reminders, not tell me what day Christmas or Inna-godda-da-vita-day falls on.

In any case, I think it would have the ability to import iCal items, so if you could GET HOLIDAYS IN ICal format somewhere you could probably get them into this calendar.

I can't wait for the calendar to be incorporated into Mozilla!

#24 Re: Re: national holidays?

by broadbandbra

Friday October 26th, 2001 7:35 AM

Reply to this message

Mozilla has an ongoing localization team that focuses mostly on language for different parts of the world, I imagine that that team of people might also be able to assist with holidays and could create holiday profiles based on official country holidays, and another catagory for religious/lunar based holidays. Then have them made available from inside calendar prefs under import my calendar from: settings.

#59 Useless

by johann_p

Sunday October 28th, 2001 3:49 AM

Reply to this message

I think that incorporating holydays including ones that are not "trivial", like easter holidays in europe that depend on the moon, is very important. When I plan an activity, I want to know if I will be working on that day! And if I have business partners in other countries, I want to know if they will be working. Again: there are already millions of calendar programs out that do the trivial: adding international holiday support is not trivial, but it is not that complicated either. I think it just sucks to have calendar programs programmed in the year 2001 that still *dont* do what is essential for a calendar. *Every* paper calendar I buy for $10 will have my national holidays, abd a bit more expensive one will give me those of neighboring countries (remember, not everybody on this earth is an US citicen)

#65 Re: Useless

by tny

Sunday October 28th, 2001 3:48 PM

Reply to this message

From the scare-quoted uses of the word "trivial" in Johann_p's posting, I expect that he didn't understand what I mean by "non-trivial" in my posting - the phrase "non-trivial" as used there means that the programming involves some work, it isn't just a matter of adding a few names and dates, but of some rather complex mathematics and a good deal of serious research to find out how the algorithms for certain holidays work. E.g., I doubt that johann_p knows the algorithm for determining the Gregorian date of Diwali. If, however, he does, and is willing to do the programming to put it in a Mozilla calendar, that would be damned helpful, as it would have a great deal of utility in my life.

For some introductory information, see <http://www.pauahtun.org/C…arFAQ/cal/calendar23.html>

#69 Re: Re: Useless

by flacco

Sunday October 28th, 2001 9:12 PM

Reply to this message

>> I doubt that johann_p knows the algorithm for determining the Gregorian date of Diwali. If, however, he does, and is willing to do the programming to put it in a Mozilla calendar, that would be damned helpful, as it would have a great deal of utility in my life. <<

If you're really interested in this stuff, there is a book called Calendrical Equations with about three hundred pages of calendar-related calculations, including Hindu calendars (and Diwali).

Unfortunately the book also comes with this idiotic copyright statement:

...for strictly personal use you may copy and use the code... Any other uses, including without limitation, allowing the code or its output to be accessed used, or available to others, is not permitted.

Had I known of that copyright statement I never would have bought the piece of crap.

#73 Re: Re: Re: Useless

by johann_p

Monday October 29th, 2001 3:37 AM

Reply to this message

I doubt that it is possible to limit the use of mathematical relationships: I dont know about the indian calendar, but to calculate the date of easter monday which is a holiday in many european countries you have to know how to calculate the date of the first full moon in april. this is based on physical laws, and that cannot be copyrighted. however, they can limit to some extend the use of the actual code to calculate that law. So, what does the book contain, code or mathematical formulas?

#74 Re: Re: Re: Re: Useless

by tny

Monday October 29th, 2001 6:47 AM

Reply to this message

I think Johann_p is right on this (though IANAL).

#77 IANAL?

by johann_p

Monday October 29th, 2001 6:52 PM

Reply to this message

just out of curiosity, what do you mean by IANAL?

#78 Re: IANAL?

by jcf76 <jfleshman@hotmail.com>

Monday October 29th, 2001 6:59 PM

Reply to this message

"I Am Not A Lawyer," I'd guess.

#71 Re: Re: Useless

by flacco

Sunday October 28th, 2001 10:05 PM

Reply to this message

>> I doubt that johann_p knows the algorithm for determining the Gregorian date of Diwali. If, however, he does, and is willing to do the programming to put it in a Mozilla calendar, that would be damned helpful, as it would have a great deal of utility in my life. <<

If you're really interested in this stuff, there is a book called Calendrical Equations with about three hundred pages of calendar-related calculations, including Hindu calendars (and Diwali).

Unfortunately the book also comes with this idiotic copyright statement:

...for strictly personal use you may copy and use the code... Any other uses, including without limitation, allowing the code or its output to be accessed used, or available to others, is not permitted.

Had I known of that copyright statement I never would have bought the piece of crap.

#23 More complex than that

by tny

Friday October 26th, 2001 7:15 AM

Reply to this message

For some holidays (for instance, non-US national holidays like the Queen's Birthday or Indian Independence Day), this is something that's probably quite easy to do: that is, for holidays that occur regularly (i.e., don't require an ephemeris to date, but can simply follow calendar rules).

For non-civil calendars, on the other hand, it might be more difficult: since the Muslim calendar at least is lunar, and I believe the Jewish calendar, the math is completely different from the solar Gregorian civil calendar. A calendar that doesn't follow the math of the Gregorian calendar (days=365, unless ((y/4=integer) & ((y/100 != integer)|(y/400 = integer))), in which case days=366), especially one where the year starts on the first new moon after a solstice or equinox, would require another, more complex math engine. The math's already been done, of course, so maybe you could add functions for each holiday (Easter, Yom Kippur, etc.), but this is just to point out that adding lunar calendars and lunar holidays is a non-trivial task. You could just calculate them all yourself and add them one day at a time for the next 100 or so years, but that, too, is non-trivial.

#22 KICK ASS

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday October 26th, 2001 2:34 AM

Reply to this message

I for one think this kicks ass. Of course, I am in control of the largely non-project called mozoffice, and am glad to see someone else actually make it happen (not that mozoffice had anything to do with it, but it made some people think, pehaps).

Now, between Open Office and this Calendar stuff, this implementation is about what I envisioned: an open source Office app/Mozilla combination. Of course, I had hoped for small, clean-room Mozilla Office code, to challenge Open Office's sheer size, but I don't know that the size matters so much; it won't matter at all in five years. Still, Composer may come a LOOONG way between Mozilla 1.0 and 2.0, and ideally it will be eventually able to use XML to create documents of any type from within one application, but I suppose that's just gazing at the stars and dreaming, right now.

Finally, since Open Office has stripped out the crappy fake desktop in SO 5.2, modularized its apps, and killed its browser in favor of hooking into Mozilla, I don't think I could have asked for a better solution. True, Open Office is a big download, but not everyone needs all modules, and now that they're being separated, as MS Office apps are, they're getting cleaner and tighter all the time.

Rock on Mozilla, Outlook just wet its pants.

James

#55 Re: KICK ASS

by johnlar <johnlar@tfn.net>

Saturday October 27th, 2001 6:09 PM

Reply to this message

I have to ask you kovu? did mozoffice ever go anywhere? Or is it simply and evangilism project?

#25 Imagine time based tools in Mozilla!!!

by broadbandbra

Friday October 26th, 2001 7:45 AM

Reply to this message

Calendar for Mozilla is going to be sweet!!!, can you imagine setting up messaging events to perform actions with other components of mozilla? say I want to query different web sites Monday-Friday at 4AM, save the files, and have Composer combine and publish them...now Mozilla is an automated site management system! at 4:10AM, the Browser could browse the links, and report dead links to composer, which could update the page and push it back out to the server. once all the updates are done I'd be contacted in my Jabberzilla messenger or mail account with the link for my browsing pleasure. being able to compose that birthday greeting email a few weeks in advance and have it sent out on the right date. Using a webservice to call your cell phone for appointment reminders by having the browser submit a special get request to an http based service.....

thanks for the calendar, now lets make a MozMacro recorder that makes it easy to record a task and then play it back using time specific events from the calendar.

there's about 3 minutes of brainstorming, anyone else got some ideas on how to make MozCallendar the most powerful calendar suite available?

#26 Re: Imagine time based tools in Mozilla!!!

by Gerv

Friday October 26th, 2001 10:17 AM

Reply to this message

Interesting thoughts... but I should point out that there's a very important line in that announcement: No New Features for the calendar until the current code is stable and working. I want to hold a very strong line here. Grr.

Gerv

#70 Re: Imagine time based tools in Mozilla!!!

by kb7iuj <ajvincent@hotmail.com>

Sunday October 28th, 2001 9:48 PM

Reply to this message

Sure. Just use the calendar feature so Mozilla can download the latest nightly at, oh, 1:30pm.

Post-1.0, I can live with that.

#27 Maybe it's time...

by choess <choess@stwing.upenn.edu>

Friday October 26th, 2001 12:40 PM

Reply to this message

...to fix bug 350 (<http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=350>). Oldest open bug in Bugzilla!

(Apparently NSPR has problems with years pre-1901 & post-2099).

#31 integration

by archen

Friday October 26th, 2001 3:34 PM

Reply to this message

how far is the integration of this thing going to go into Mozilla? Is it going to be joined at the hip like composer, or a seperate package/download?

#41 Awesome

by jedbro

Friday October 26th, 2001 7:07 PM

Reply to this message

SWEET!!!!!

I can't believe people are bitching about this... what the heck!!!! Haha.. when I saw the article, I automatically thought to me self.. "hehe I can just see all these ignorante idiots (no offense) complaining about more "features" boat. "

What the heck.. hipocrisy?? This is what we the community have been waiting for, since I can rememnber. HOw many times have we bitched about Mozilla not getting enough "out-side" support an code.... And here it is.... and yet we bitch?

Gerv pinted out that this would be POST 1.0.... did that pass by any of you? This is code that netscape hasn't touched, totally made by a mozilla contibuter.. we should all be rejoicing. I could understand bitching if key Mozilla (browser) developers from netscape and others started working on the calender.. But this is NOT the case...

Getting off that.

I totally agree with a post up above.. there is no better place to have a calander then right by your mail. Once this happens, it will be another KEY reason for people to leave outlook and IE all together... Why do you think Outlook has had it's success? The calender is a key features, and is actually made very well (and thats coming from a #1 MS hater).

I'm glad to see so many people here posting comments and embracing this... Awesome. And thanks OEone.... this is great!

(has anyone checked out the screen shots? this thing looks sweet!!!!!!!!

cheers

--Jedbro

#42 Re: Awesome

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Friday October 26th, 2001 7:15 PM

Reply to this message

"(has anyone checked out the screen shots? this thing looks sweet!!!!!!!!"

Yes, I have checked out the screenshots. However, I believe the plan is to make Mozilla Calendar (as I suppose it is now) use the native Mozilla UI. That said, the screenshots do look nice. Perhaps we could convince OEone to make a theme for Mozilla...

Alex

#47 Screen Shots

by jedbro

Saturday October 27th, 2001 10:40 AM

Reply to this message

Alex... BUt looking at the pics.. the colors seem to go ok with Moz, I can see where a new theme (Moz UI) would make it look better, but I'm sure OEone has thought about that.... If not, allot of talented people, who don't contribute directly to Moz's code due to lack of knowledge or skill I'm sure could work on a theme..

Let's hope for the best... this is going to rock!

#44 Re: Awesome

by joschi

Friday October 26th, 2001 11:38 PM

Reply to this message

They key here is that the mozillazine/slashdot/open source/whatever "community" are full of people with a severe messiah complex. They want to come into our worlds as the voice of reason and salvation, to guide the ignorant masses away from the evils of their ways. Those who can create do so, many of the rest bitch :)

#45 And how about web mail support?

by Vec

Saturday October 27th, 2001 5:52 AM

Reply to this message

I strongly agree that mozilla mail needs integration with a calendar since this is one of the key points of outlook's success. One other thing that mozilla's mail client needs is support for web mail accounts, and especially hotmail, which is very popular in europe. You can't imagine the number of people who I know that use outlook express just because of this. And please don't tell me about netscape's support for web mail. I don't think that somebody is willing to drop his hotmail account and use netscape mail just for using netscape 6.1.... (yes, I have tried hermes...)

#49 Web mail support options

by ipottinger

Saturday October 27th, 2001 12:04 PM

Reply to this message

Your best bet is to encourage Microsoft and Netscape to provide mozilla.org with whatever client-side code is necessary to support their web-based services.

However, you could approach the appropriate standards organization, if one exists, and encourage them to define a specification for client to web-based services communications. At most, mozilla.org could support such a standard once defined. Anything beyond that is outside the scope of a SOFTWARE project.

As for Netscape forging some alliance with Microsoft?s Hotmail ... don?t hold your breath! Netscape is smart enough to know that if, as you say, Hotmail is the ancient Rome of European web-based email then it was not built nor will it be destroyed in a day. Netscape?s new Webmail empire will be constructed one new account at a time while the old empire is dismantled one convert at a time.

#54 Webmail in Europe

by niner

Saturday October 27th, 2001 5:24 PM

Reply to this message

At least for the German speaking part of Europe there is already a very good and large alternative to Hotmail: GMX (<http://www.gmx.net>). I don't know for sure but I think it has even been there before Hotmail existed. It's good and supports full POP access.

#50 Re: And how about web mail support?

by gwalla <gwalla@despammed.com>

Saturday October 27th, 2001 12:40 PM

Reply to this message

Microsoft keeps the Hotmail interface secret, so only their own client (Outlook) will support them. Remember that Microsoft owns Hotmail, so they can make it work however they like.

#51 Re: Re: And how about web mail support?

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Saturday October 27th, 2001 1:02 PM

Reply to this message

"Remember that Microsoft owns Hotmail, so they can make it work however they like."

Much like MSN...

Alex

#52 Can it be done?

by jedbro

Saturday October 27th, 2001 4:18 PM

Reply to this message

Shouldn't there be a way to analyze teh communications done between Outlook and hotmail, to figure out how it's done? heck, we've done that for AIM, ICQ, etc.. souldn't it be similar hacking to go by this?

cheers

#53 Re: Can it be done?

by strauss

Saturday October 27th, 2001 4:26 PM

Reply to this message

Should be as easy as using a packet sniffer, like Ethereal. I doubt they encrypt the traffic. From OE status messages it looks like a simple CGI protocol, but I haven't looked any deeper.

#58 Re: Can it be done?

by gwalla <gwalla@despammed.com>

Saturday October 27th, 2001 11:22 PM

Reply to this message

Probably. The problem is that they would probably take steps to block non-Outlook clients if they noticed, and Mozilla would be playing catch-up.

#60 And how about web mail support?

by Vec

Sunday October 28th, 2001 4:31 AM

Reply to this message

<http://www.pop3hot.com> Has anyone checked this program? I have test it about a year ago. I could not make it work (I'll try again) and it was adware in its unregistered version. On the other hand, these guys seem to have obtained somehow the information required to synchronise with hotmail. They even say that it is independent from the site layout. Can anyone get any ideas form this?

#62 Nah

by jedbro

Sunday October 28th, 2001 1:38 PM

Reply to this message

I don't think that that would be a problem, as you could tell Mozilla to send info stating it is Outlook Express 6. That way It would be imposible to block, because MS would have to block all OUtLook Express, and force useres to upgrade, which they know, only about 20% would get the latest version...

Can someone with knowledge look into this? I hate hotmail, but I would like it if there was another sollution to get people off outlook and using Mozilla =) *grin*

#64 I can see problems here...

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Sunday October 28th, 2001 3:03 PM

Reply to this message

Hotmail relies on advertising for funding. If Mozilla allowed users to bypass that advertising then Hotmail would lose income and Microsoft would have a valid complaint against The Mozilla Organization.

Alex

#66 Re: I can see problems here...

by rgelb <nospam@nospam.com>

Sunday October 28th, 2001 7:56 PM

Reply to this message

>>Hotmail relies on advertising for funding. If Mozilla allowed users to bypass that advertising then Hotmail would lose income and Microsoft would have a valid complaint against The Mozilla Organization.<<

Not really. MS gets no cash if you are accessing Hotmail through OE, which is how many access it. If you add a small minority of Moz users to that, I doubt MS would mind or even care.

#67 Re: Re: I can see problems here...

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Sunday October 28th, 2001 8:36 PM

Reply to this message

I may be wrong, but I think Outlook Express sports advertising while using it to access Hotmail accounts. But like I said, I could be worong because I don't use Hotmail or Outlook Express (or Lookout Express as its security flaws have led me to call it).

Alex

#75 Re: Re: Re: I can see problems here...

by rgelb <nospam@nospam.com>

Monday October 29th, 2001 12:04 PM

Reply to this message

Outlook Express does not show any advertizing. Unless I missed it in 2 years of using it.

#76 Re: Re: Re: I can see problems here...

by dave532

Monday October 29th, 2001 2:30 PM

Reply to this message

Probably an older version. I tried with whatever version I have installed on this machine and an ad frame appeared at the bottom of the screen.

#68 False

by gwalla <gwalla@despammed.com>

Sunday October 28th, 2001 9:06 PM

Reply to this message

When you connect to Hotmail through Outlook, Outlook sprouts a frame at the bottom of the window that displays banner ads. There is no option to turn them off--you pay for your Hotmail account by viewing ads.

#61 Re: Can it be done?

by djcovey

Sunday October 28th, 2001 4:48 AM

Reply to this message

Check out web2pop. Its a neat little program that does this. You can access your web mail from any pop email client. I think that <http://www.jmasoftware.com/> is their address. You can use almost any web mail you can think of. If they can do it, I'm sure someone in the mozilla community can figure it out.

#46 Client/Server ? Help me understand?

by gemal

Saturday October 27th, 2001 7:27 AM

Reply to this message

How is this gonna work? Having a calender in a mail client is only good if there's a calender server or what??? Is what's gonna be checked in the client only???

#56 Re: Client/Server ? Help me understand?

by johnlar <johnlar@tfn.net>

Saturday October 27th, 2001 6:14 PM

Reply to this message

Well there believe it or not, you can use existing open source servers. Imap and LDAP combines should make a great backend for this. Note, the typical configuration would not automatically work, but you can configure imap to be able to share folders between users. Not sure if the sharing options can be done client side though, should be easy to add such into the interface, given its done securly. I'll have to play with imap tonight, see what really can be done with it :)

#48 Beta test?

by jedbro

Saturday October 27th, 2001 10:42 AM

Reply to this message

Is there a way to Beta Test this now with Mozilla? or do we have to wait until it's in the TREE? Would love to try it out.

Thanks

--Jedbro

#57 Re: Beta test?

by Gerv

Saturday October 27th, 2001 10:50 PM

Reply to this message

No, no way. It doesn't really even work as part of Mozilla yet. There's a lot of work still to be done.

Gerv

#63 But the question still remains...

by caspy7

Sunday October 28th, 2001 1:39 PM

Reply to this message

...will I be able to sync my palm device with it?

This is the primary reason I must still use outlook. With this ability my information could finally be unified. As it is, there's a lot of redunancy and conflicting information between my address book and my contacts list because everything syncs to Outlook.

#72 Re: But the question still remains...

by fgxh298

Sunday October 28th, 2001 10:44 PM

Reply to this message

Yeah we really need hotsync to Mozilla/Netscape. I can't believe no one created a project at mozdev for this.

#79 What else speaks these protocols?

by sanity

Monday October 29th, 2001 7:02 PM

Reply to this message

Does adherence to the RFCs mentioned mean that this software will be able to interoperate with other popular software such as Microsoft Outlook and various PDSs? Such interoperability will be essential for adoption of this software.

#81 Re: What else speaks these protocols?

by mushon <moshe@u4all.com>

Thursday November 8th, 2001 7:01 AM

Reply to this message

Well, I happen to have researched this fact a bit...

MS Outlook and Lotus::Notes both support these RFC\\\'s (iCalendar) but not perfectly... still you can take a iCalendar event file and open it in MS Outlook and it will create the meeting.

#80 Really OT but strangly on topic

by WillyWonka

Monday October 29th, 2001 8:52 PM

Reply to this message

Two items on this www page <http://www.gizmoandwidget…der_Side_of_Widget_4.html>

Nunzilla "No one is safe from the wrath of the fire-breathing Nunzilla." and Internet Urinal "You’ll never have to leave your computer again!"