MS Exchange Server competition

[Kenneth E. Lussier]

On Mon, 2004-08-16 at 23:13, bscott at ntisys.com wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Aug 2004, at 9:18pm, coutu at snowy-owl.com wrote:
> > I recently did an investigation for a client of Linux based alternatives
> > to Exchange. I found two that were very good at providing full blown
> > Exchange capabilities and compatibility.
> 
>   Do either support MAPI?  That is, do they provide seamless Microsoft
> Outlook integration?  Not just IMAP mail (which Outlooks has limits with
> anyway), but contacts, calendar -- the whole Outlook store.  Right or wrong,
> that's what a lot of people want.

The answer to that is a definite yes and no. OpenExchange itself does
not do MAPI. You have to install the iSLOX connector on the Windows
client. The connector then converts the MAPI calls to WebDAV/XML and
passes them on to the server, then translates the response. The
connector is a free download, but not F/OSS. 

The interesting thing that I find is that OpenExchange supports LookOut
or "other web clients". So, if you aren't using LookOut, then you use a
web browser. This is a problem for me. The major limitation of web-based
systems is the requirement that you have to be online to use it. Most
web-based systems lack a conduit to download calender info, contacts,
etc. to either a local data store or a hand held.  

> > My primary beef with [SuSE OpenExchange] is the cost. For small shops the
> > cost, while cheaper than Exchange by 1/2 to 1/3 less, is still
> > substantial.
> 
>   That doesn't concern me so much.  The issue I usually face is that people
> want the kind of Outlook integration that Exchange provides, but I would
> like to be using a Linux server.  Since nothing on Linux I know of can meet
> their needs, we go with Windows instead.
> 

I don't find the price to really be a concern. The reason that most
people look for alternatives to MS Exchange is that they are currently
considering MS Exchange. That means that they are already considering
paying a lot of money. So, any savings, no matter how small, is still a
savings.

Also, it is true that Novell/SuSE only want to deal with 500 seats or
more. However, they have a network of resellers for smaller
installations. This, IMNSHO, is a perfectly valid and acceptable
business practice. They only want to deal directly with enterprise
customers. It's expensive to runs a sales force to deal with all sales
levels, and many times, it just isn't cost effective. 

My $0.02,

Kenny
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20040817/f4869acd/attachment.bin