Exchange vs. Linux/390 Comparison
eclarkso writes: " The Consulting Times has done a quite even-handed study of the TCO for each platform in a fairly large (5000+) enterprise environment. The article is as much a commentary on the mainframe architecture as it is on Exchange vs. Linux groupware."
Actually HP still supports openmail.. and will for another 5 years.
From HP's web site:
HP will support our customers using versions 6.0 and 7.0 of the product for the next five years until March 31st 2006. The new 7.0 release further strengthens OpenMail's ability to support thousands of users per server and provide rich functionality when connected to the Outlook client. Support for OpenMail 5.10 continues until 31st October 2001.
"For the sake of simplicity, certain items such as depreciation and management overhead were excluded from the comparisons."
It's kind of interesting, since management overhead is widely regarded as the main reason why people prefer Windoze systems to Linux systems. People believe that it costs less money to perform essential administration tasks in Windows than it does in Linux.
I'm not stating that the costs actually are lower, but it's not a terribly informative article if they're going to eliminate that important bit of information.
Why do you need VM programmers? The port is already done, the logic for running Linux as a guest OS is there, and it's stable. Henceforth you should be coding on the Linux level, not the VM level.
One down side to Notes comparison -- the interface stinks big time as an e-mail client. Although configurable it does not compare with Outlook out of the box. It stinks to the rate of impacting user use of e-mail -- i.e.: Notes users on average use e-mail less than 1/2 as much as Exchange users do...
The groupware used on the Linux/390 is Bynari
"Fred can reply to you@foo.com, but doesn't have a way to reply to "Joe User, Marketing" or whatever Jane's fictitious title is. "
Huh?
Exchange automatically does the conversion when it goes out the SMTP layer.