Open Source AJAX Webmail 311
scrasher writes "It seems AJAX webmail is all the craze. Right on the heels of both Microsoft and Yahoo launching beta versions of their new AJAX webmail clients, an Open Source startup RoundCube has released an alpha of a GPLed AJAX webmail client. While there are still many features missing (like search!), the demo they have is completely cross-browser compliant and overall very impressive."
Foldername length patch. (Score:5, Interesting)
http://suso.suso.org/programs/roundcube/ [suso.org]
Roundcube is pretty neat, but it still has some bugs. The IMAP client caches everything so that it is faster on subsequent tries, but on large mailboxes it can be a real pain the first time. It makes for a good program to hack on though. Its just what I've been looking for to replace squirrelmail on suso.org [suso.org].
Re:Foldername length patch. (Score:5, Informative)
$rcmail_config['enable_caching'] = FALSE;
Re:Buggy (Score:3, Insightful)
Double click.
It's not so much buggy as it needs some serious HCI help. Web applications should NEVER require double clicks, and even in regular applications they should be used only in very specific circumstances.
On the bright side, the application is very pretty. (Which is more than can be said for other OSS Webmail like SquirrelMail.)
Zimbra (Score:5, Interesting)
Ajax is the first genuinely new thing I can think of this century.
Re:Zimbra (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Zimbra (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Zimbra (Score:2)
It was an app that would bootstrap itself from an HTML page and a boatload of javascript, and communicated with the server solely via XML HTTP requests therafter. It rendered its UI using client-side XSLT transformations.
I thought it was cool, but felt at the time that the issues with caching, performance, and MSXML library version incompatibilities made it too hard to maintain.
Re:Zimbra (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Zimbra (Score:5, Informative)
Microsoft Outlook Web Access, included with Exchange Server, is widely recognized [wikipedia.org] to be the first real AJAX application. The 2000 version was the first browser app I every used that made me say "wow, how the hell did they do that?". No Java applet or ActiveX, but it felt like a real, usable desktop application. Context menus and everything, with few full-page refreshes.
Google has done quite a bit to elevate the profile of AJAX with the Slashdot crowd, but other people were definitely "really using it" long before Google.
Re:Zimbra (Score:2)
Re:Zimbra (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Zimbra (Score:3, Funny)
Wow, that's a hell of a thinking block... I've managed to have several new ideas since 1999.
"Quick, better to live or die, once and for all, than die by inches, slowly crushed to death--helpless against the hulls in the bloody press--by far inferior men!"
Telamonian Ajax, The Iliad, Homer
Re:Zimbra (Score:3, Interesting)
And "since 1999" refers to 2000 to the present, not 1999 to the present.
I'm fully aware that the first century did not start in year 0, but use of 1999 rather than 2000 creates a better mental separation from the present, which is better for comedic purposes.
Re:Zimbra (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Zimbra (Score:4, Informative)
Roundcube is a nice client for IMAP email access that leaves everything in tact (probably a lot lower requirements too).
Re:Zimbra (Score:5, Informative)
RoundCube = Squirrelmail = Horde != Zimbra = Hula Project = OpenExchange = Exchange
Ok I'm oversimplifying it, but that's how I'm thinking of the relation of the various projects now.
Re:Zimbra (Score:2)
--
Evan
Re:Zimbra (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Zimbra (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Zimbra (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Zimbra (Score:2)
Re:Zimbra (Score:2)
Re:Zimbra (Score:2, Funny)
--
Q
Re:Zimbra (Score:2)
Re:Zimbra (Score:2)
Also, a good name for something can have a serious impact on its popularity. (For one, it makes it easier to communicate about it.) And a good name in this case is more about having a clear (and hopefully easily-expressed) meaning, much more than the n
Re:Zimbra (Score:2)
Peanut butter - arguably a condiment
Bread - Definitely not a condiment
Now, if you meant to reference that most divine of sandwiches, the pb & j
not a business startup (Score:3, Informative)
Cross-browser? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Cross-browser? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Cross-browser? (Score:2)
Re:Cross-browser? (Score:2, Funny)
> javascript or whatever.
And they also need to fall back to printed paper for people without computers. And spoken word for people who can't read.
Javascript is an accepted WWW standard. There is no reason for any app developer to not use javascript to his heart's content.
jfs
1 reason : Handheld (Score:3, Insightful)
Ultra-light hand held clients.
Like a lot of other people, I do use my Palm to surf the web.
Some browser for Palm don't have all the bells and whistle like full Javascript etc.
For some application, like E-Mails, there's (thankfully) still alternate ways to use content that are handheld friendly : E-Mail POP/IMAP software.
But there other application that are only accessible from the website, like train timetables. And if the
Re:Cross-browser? (Score:3, Informative)
They pay a lot of attention to ensuring things keep working, and dgrade in a nice gracefull way instead of just borking.
And yes, in 2005 there are still quite a few relevant browsers that do not support JS, and which would be extremely usable with a webmail application still. This concerns virtually all browsers on handheld devices.
Re:Cross-browser? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's ridiculous. JavaScript may be a standard, but that doesn't mean that you should expect every user's browser to support it. How about blind people using screen-reader? How about search engines? Don't you want them to be able to read your page? (Well, perhaps not if it's personal email sitting behind a login screen.)
And may I remind you that the whole basis of AJAX - XMLHttpRe [wikipedia.org]
Not only the browser (Score:2)
Re:Cross-browser? (Score:2)
Javascript is an accepted WWW standard.
By whom?
Re:Cross-browser? (Score:2)
It's standardized and accepted by the ECMA (European Computer Manufacturor's Association)
Standard 262 [ecma-international.org]
And the W3C provides a binding specification for it: for example [w3.org]
So, yeah, it very much is an accepted internet standard.
Re:Cross-browser? (Score:2)
From time to time, I have to surf the web via my PSP.
Yahoo Mail does not work with my PSP.
GMail does, since it gracefully degrades if you don't have JavaScript.
Despite my preference for my yahoo account (Had it forever), Google now gets my business.
Consider this: With tools for the disabled, those who turn JavaScript off, and lightweight clients, about 10% of the surfing world is incapable/unwilling to use JavaScript. If I were a business, I wouldn't want to turn away 10% of my cl
Re:Cross-browser? (Score:2)
Re:Cross-browser? (Score:2)
Why would you think that you can take Javascript for granted specifically for a web-based email client, rather than any other page?
People use webmail when they are on the road (cybercafe in 3rd country whith obsolete browser, mobile phone, that old text-only screen tucked away in the NOC, obnoxious firewall at work that filters out XML requests...) and cannot access t
Re:Cross-browser? (Score:2, Informative)
The big question is: Does it run on Lynx and Links?
Although the summary states that it is "completely cross-browser compliant", RoundCube's website lists it as having been tested with Firefox, Opera, Safari, and IE. Some people still do use Lynx and Links.
Anyway, I tried it with Lynx and Links and didn't have any trouble logging into the demo. However, it appears that the Compose, Reply, Forward, etc., commands are all represented as images without alt tags, because I was shown the folder list and a bunch
One comment and slashdotted! (Score:5, Funny)
Free, open-source AJAX webmail--it seems we've discovered the secret formula to get slashdotters to read articles!
Re:One comment and slashdotted! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:One comment and slashdotted! (Score:2)
Re:One comment and slashdotted! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:One comment and slashdotted! (Score:2)
WHERE sender_gender='F' AND sender <> 'mom' AND subject like '%party%'
Re:One comment and already goatsed! (Score:2)
Fortunately, it is MySQL-based. Imagine what might have happened to the poor thing if it was SQL-server based instead...
Re:One comment and slashdotted! (Score:2)
Leaving aside all ranting about PG's superiority, most folks should be able to agree that if you already have a working database server installed it's not desirable to install another just to support one product.
The PHP+MySQL mix actually seems like a good idea for starters - most shared-hosting packages will have this out of the box. But when you consider how simple the SQL is for something like a webmail client,
Re:One comment and slashdotted! (Score:3, Informative)
Not all browsers supported (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Not all browsers supported (Score:2, Informative)
Irony (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, no (Score:2)
Yes
> Does GMail use AJAX ?
No
Roundcube as extensible as Squirrelmail? (Score:2, Interesting)
We have found that we can extend Squirrelmail to present a very lite webmail presence, yet keep the functionality simple so that basic features will still work in a syncronized fashion with a heavy remote client (IMAPS).
Roundcube still needs some kind of anti-spam integration and automated signup routines, but we will certainly keep an eye on it.
AJAX Security (Score:2, Informative)
AJAX Security [cgisecurity.com]
Re:AJAX Security (Score:3, Informative)
For example, in AJAX Considered Harmful [intertwingly.net], using HTTP GETs to change state is a well-known no-no. (Google Accelerator recently broke some sites that violate this principle, but it's been known since at least HTTP 1.0 times that infrastructure would break sites that were coded incorrectly.) But XMLHttpRequest supports POSTs (and PUT, and probably all
what communik8r? (Score:2, Interesting)
Call me old fashioned... (Score:5, Funny)
pine + screen (Score:3, Informative)
Dlugar
Re:pine + screen (Score:2)
Derek
Re:Call me old fashioned... (Score:2)
Indeed, I use PINE as my daily mail client. I just don't need some fancy, overblown GUI monster which hogs most of my screen and eats away precious memory.
Funnily enough, even my s/o uses PINE instead of one of those cuddly, oh-so-user-friendly programs. Although she's no computer geek at all, she prefers ctrl-this and ctrl-that over aim-and-click.
Re:Call me old fashioned... (Score:2)
Re:Call me old fashioned... (Score:3, Informative)
And I use Zoe to search through my mail (not that it happens that often), all I need is Zoe inside my MUTT
Re:Call me old fashioned... (Score:2)
Re:Call me old fashioned... (Score:3, Funny)
HTH. HAND.
Installed! Looks nice thus far... (Score:5, Interesting)
- Server-side sorting so that all messages don't need to be downloaded in order to view, say, the 15 newest.
- Special folder support, such as Junk, Sent, Trash, etc. Currently send mail just goes off into the ether.
Other than that, I'm pretty impressed. I personally currently use Squirrelmail [squirrelmail.org] for my webmail needs, but it feels a bit clunky. If they can meet Squirrelmail's features (at a minimum) I can see this being used all over the place. I find the use of a DB for things like user/session/whatever management to be a bit odd, but at least actual files don't have to be used then.
Re:Installed! Looks nice thus far... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Installed! Looks nice thus far... (Score:2)
Otherwise, not a bad start!
Re:Installed! Looks nice thus far... (Score:2)
Re:Installed! Looks nice thus far... (Score:2)
Installed it, easy install, not bad (Score:2, Interesting)
Definitely keeping an eye on this, though
Re:Installed it, easy install, not bad (Score:3, Informative)
Definitely more eye candy than SquirrelMail - www.squirrelmail.org - (which hasn't had a real update in how long?), but the initial hit on the IMAP server did go quite slowly. I'm running UW IMAP and it looks like the RoundCube backend doesn't know enough (not a dig at a
AJA not AJAX (Score:4, Informative)
If you are interested in a pure implementation that has been around longer thats true ajax, check out http://www.communik8r.org/ [communik8r.org]
List of AJAX Webmail clients? (Score:3, Interesting)
Outlook Web Access (Score:2)
Intergration into Thunderbird? (Score:2)
For a while now I've been using the web server interface on eMule, which is designed very nicely and really adds functionality.
alt tags (Score:2, Insightful)
Too Many Users! (Score:5, Funny)
Too many users!
Please check back later!
I love how simple it is to navigate! The features leave something to be desired though. Hey check me out, I just wrote a CNet review!
AJAX or not ... (Score:2)
Excellent work, I will definately try out this mail client on my web site!
Stephen
Changed? (Score:2)
Kerio's had this for a while now... (Score:3, Informative)
Nice to see (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:4, Informative)
No one is "falling" for anything. It's a name that works for a useful technology.
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2)
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2)
Of course, if I were naming the technology, I'd have called it "DOM Twiddling". That way I wouldn't be shy of chucking XML for something better like ASN.1. "AJAX", for an acronym that really represents a kind of architectural style, is unnecessarily specific on irreleva
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2)
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2, Informative)
How about "Javascript", since that's all it is?
And what magical consulting company is this?
Adaptive Path, and here's the original Slashdot article where they started the whole thing:
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/0 2/23/1859222 [slashdot.org]
It's a name that works for a useful technology.
It's technology that already had a name and doesn't need a new one.
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2)
What's retarded is that people spend inordinate amounts of time biatching about the name of a technology. I'm sorry you had to learn to use a new word. If the new name gains most of the mindshare, doesn't that mean the new name is better?
How about "Javascript", since that's all it is?
What is wrong with calling it AJAX instead of Javascript?
Nothing. If anything, 'Javascript' has problems, because the word 'script' -- as in scrip
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:3, Funny)
It's technology that already had a name and doesn't need a new one.
And why not call P2P FTP cause thats what it is...
And IM is just email...
And cars are really just horseless carriages...
Now speakin of horses, get off the high one you are on and move on.
If you don't like ajax go ahead and call it Javascript XMLHttpRequest objects or whatever floats your large water displacing transportation vessel (Boat for those that can stand short easy to use references to n
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2)
Lets not get carried away here.
AJAX is okay for some limited applications like webmail, but it is no replacement for a nicely written interactive GUI APPLICATION.
At my work, we have slaved away for a year to develop an insipid data-entry application. The chosen technogy? J2ee w/struts. It was a colossal pain in the considering that this was strictly an in-house-under-one-roof app. Now, some of the "architects" are already talking about AJAX for our subsequent in-house bloated data-entry web apps.
Everything
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2)
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2)
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2)
http://www.adaptivepath.com/publications/essays/ar chives/000385.php [adaptivepath.com]
(it's not worth linking to, and giving them hits for it, though)
And I agree -- the term right up there with 'blog' as terms that need to go. (the only good thing about the term 'blog' is that it's close to 'bog [peak.org]', which seems to suggest the contents of them)
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2)
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2)
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2)
Still, JavaScript is not a necessary part (and ignores the origins in Outlook), and the article doesn't even use XML! Definitely confuses the architecture and (one) implementation...
How about 'self-updating web content and scripting'?
Or better still: _S_elf-_U_pdating _C_ontent and _K_iller _S_cripting
Re:AJAX is a retarded term (Score:2)
Not really. Some authors have explored other ways [zingzoom.com] of submitting asynchronous requests to the server, involving iframes, images, stylesheets or other scripts. Basically, any sub request that does not involve reloading the main page should work.
And then, XMLHttpRequest itself is a kind of a misnomer. It doesn't necessarily involve XML [jibbering.com], and there are actually non-XML data languages [wikipedia.org] which are better suited for the purpose. It's actually a mystery why they di
Re:LDAP? (Score:2)
Like hell am I going to recreate 2000 user accounts with no syncing of passwords!
If you've got 2000 user accounts, I'd seriously recommend not relying on version 0.2 of an application ;-)
Seriously, RoundCube is pretty immature - I'm sure additional features will come later.
Re:Quality of the code (Score:2)
There should be a RCube class for starters, and a constructers that calls each of the individual sections. Hey, at least it's well commented!
Re:But can it do grouped CONVERSATIONS like gmail? (Score:3, Interesting)
I've never understood what the big deal is about conversation grouping was and why other mail clients found it so difficult to implement. Conversation grouping is one of the easiest things to implement and it should be considered a bare minimum for mail clients. We're talking a few hundred lines of code at most to implement the feature. Why is it so hard? Yahoo? Hotmail? Yep, I'm talking to you.