Exchange Replacement

[Kenneth E. Lussier]

On Tue, 2003-04-08 at 16:40, Blake, Chris wrote:
> >> If your going to spend that much, you might as well just buy the real
> >> Microsoft product rather than a look-alike.
> >
> >That was pretty funny! Someone on this list is recommending that you
> >purchase a 'real Microsoft product'. I didn't know there was such a
> >thing! ;-)
> 
> My point only being that we often consider Microsoft as big all-consuming,
> all knowing, closed source, expensive, evil big-brother major corporate 
> entity.  So in looking for a replacement for Exchange why replace it with a
> look-alike from some other big all-consuming, ... entity.

But it isn't just a look-alike. To the end user it may look identical,
and it has all of the features that the user wants out of Exchange, but
that is where the similarity ends. If the back-end is completely
different, and it offers substantial benefits, then it is a step up. The
reason for purchasing any of these systems is because you need the
functionality of a client/server group collaboration suite. Not because
you *NEED* Exchange. Any one of these systems (Oracle, Samsung Contact,
MS Exchange) is a viable solution depending on your circumstance. If it
runs on Linux, then I am already at a $7000 advantage because I don't
have to buy the MS operating system to run it on, along with the number
of "Client Licenses" for the OS, on top of the cost of the collaboration
suite. 

C-Ya,
Kenny

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Tact is just *not* saying true stuff" -- Cordelia Chase

Kenneth E. Lussier
Sr. Systems Administrator
Zuken, USA
PGP KeyID CB254DD0 
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCB254DD0