Slashdot Mirror
HP's OpenMail: I'm Not Dead Yet
Jon Hill writes "It looks as if HP's OpenMail system is not dead yet and development of the project has been assumed by Samsung's software division. This is great news considering OpenMail was the only serious Unix-based competitor to Microsoft Exchange. Now if only it was strongly marketed and made well known, enterprise administrators such as myself could embrace it." For those of not familiar, essentially OpenMail is the *only* e-mail platform out there, besides Exchange that will support a whole slew of Microsoft Outlook features - something necessary in the enterprise, despite that people should know better.
Sheesh... If all of you weren't so damn scared of Lotus Notes. Runs on Linux, S/390, Solaris, NT, ASS/400 (yes, the extra S is there on purpose), and others I'm sure I'm forgetting.
It may be a bit different from what you're used to, but it supports, IMAP, POP3, SMTP, and HTTP(S) methods to access your mail easily..
Actually, that link does serve some purpose - the entire tone of the article is very amusing given that the vulnerability was fixed 2 days later, and is worth re-reading with that in mind to see the sort of crap and guesswork people will write.
I've been trying to convince them that 'proper' email is text only, and attachments if you are completely ftp-impaired but to no avail. They seem to insist on 200Mb attachments (sent to 30 other users no less...)
Get with it!
Information Technology exists to serve the needs of users, not the other way around.
If your users want to send 300Mb attachments to each other then propose to them the infrastructure and funding requirements of such a platform rather than shouting "ftp!" to their hands (because sure as hell the face ain't listening).
There is a massive gap between what most sys admins think of themselves and what their userbase actually thinks of them. This is a dangerous place to be in, and no amount of name calling will change their attitude.
Deliver what the users want within reasonable expectations and the prospect of a career *not* sitting in the wiring cupboard beckons, with all the rewards that can come (CTO anyone?!)...
Exchange is actually one of Microsoft's best products. Unlike the NT registry and SAM database it's based on LDAP and a dumbed down SQL database engine. In addition to the workgroup features like calendars, team folders, public folders it has a ton of other great features.
One is called Deleted Item Retention Time. You set the number of days and when a user deletes an email it's not really deleted for the specified days. If he realizes he made a mistake restoration is from the Outlook client and takes seconds saving the admin time from going to the back up tapes. For businesses like law firms it's a life saver since they are required to keep records and emails for five years or so. They simply buy a lot of storage and set a deleted item retention item of 1600 days or so and it's a secondary back up.
A second feature is single instance storage. You send a file out to 50 people it gets stored once in the database saving you storage space.
Then third party back up programs have a feature called brick level back up's where you can back up individual mailboxes. If you delete on by accident restoration is simple. Exchange 2000 has this feature out of the box.
Exchange is scalable. It's overkill for small offices and I've supported it for a government agency with 35,000 employees and 300 Exchange servers. It scales very well.
A good Exchange anti-virus program like Trend Micro Scanmail 3.7 has file blocking features and greatly eases the management of your anti-virus strategy.
Since email is in a database searching for messages is easy.
And the global address book is great. Users don't have to keep their own huge address book and greatly minimizes the calls to the admin of I sent out this email but it came back returned and asking you to track down an email address.
Sure you can cobble together a few products for most of the functionality and perform some of the usability features manually, but you'll spend more time while the CEO is asking you to restore an email from a year ago.
We use OpenMail. I read about the discontinuing development last February with much sadness.
When I heard about the deal with Samsung a few weeks ago (we got a letter), I was pleased. I had already read what Bruce Perens had said about open sourcing it...it just wasn't going to happen. He would've like it to (as would I) but there was too much code licensed from third parties, etc. that would have to be re-written before it could be open-sourced, and the whole point was: they weren't developing it anymore.
At any rate, when I came on board at my present employer, the front end client (Outlook) was deeply embedded into the environment here. I am still working on weening people off of it. But the great thing about OpenMail is that I can let them keep Outlook if they want. Believe it or not, when dealt with properly, Outlook is not so bad. The end-users love it. They really don't know and don't care what happens behind the scenes.
OpenMail gives me the flexibility to use any IMAP/LDAP client I want, or the web interface if I so choose, or Outlook. It lets the Outlook users have a system directory, shared folders, and shared calendars...all nice features...without buying into Exchange. It also lets me control what the Outlook users can do. Every time they connect to the server, I can send them a MOTD, reset their security settings to my way, and force all incoming/outgoing mail to be plain text if I so please. I can limit the size of their mailboxes, and I can set up gateways to just about every other type of messaging system I want. I can scan for viruses in attachments at the server and force Outlook to block all attachments of an executable type...whether the server detects a virus or not.
As for the administrative tools, the command line tools are the bomb, but take some getting used to...and the GUI admin client basically sucks.
Overall, I love OpenMail and was glad to pay for the licenses. We have about 100 users hitting the server via Outlook, Netscape Mail, the Web interface, and we even have a whole department with old DOS PCs, accessing their mail via a packet driver and PC-PINE!!! (They refuse to upgrade because it works for them and as the adage goes...if it ain't broke, don't fix it.)
You need a customer friendly attitude in this business. The user doesn't care about computers. He want to get his work done in the shortest amount of time and then surf the internet. He already has enough on his or her mind about their job and they don't want to remember a bunch of obscure ftp commands. They just want to point and click.
Can somebody tell me what these features are, compared to what you'd get with sendmail/qmail / some-random-pop/imap-client ?
Well, for example, if I want to schedule a meeting, I can invite all the people I want via Outlook/Exchange, and it will check their calendars to see if they're free, and if they are, send them a message that when it is opened will automatically fill in their calendars for them, if they say they do want to come. That's just a simple example. The reason all these macro virii can be written at all is that Outlook/Exchange isn't really an email solution per se: it's intended to be a platform for building groupware / workflow / directory applications on, so it's all very scriptable. Shared folders, contacts, task lists and diaries are wonderfully useful in an office where people move around a lot and can be hard to get hold of in person. And all this ties into project management software (MS Project) for really serious tracking.
Email's the easy bit, and you can't compete with sendmail+popper+imapd if that's all you need, because they're free and easy to use. Exchange, like Lotus Notes, is sold on value-add. Just think of Notes as document management with messaging functionality, and Exchange as messaging with document management functionality.
I researched for days looking for a Linux/BSD based Open-source solution for this functionality, and I didn't find anything even remotely close. I tried to get OpenMail, but HP has shut down the download area so you can't get it anymore. Products like Evolution are slick and have a good email interface, but are single-user only calendaring systems, with no (automated) group coordination at all. Frankly, I find this type of functionality critical in a company of even 8 employees: I just don't see how companies can get along without some kind of group calendaring solution.
This is definately a major gap in the overall functionality of Open Source software in general, which is one reason why Exchange/HP OpenMail/Lotus Notes will continue to thrive.
Please Rate my comment (and help support Fre
Bill G.: Bring out yer dead!
HP:'Ere you go...
Open Mail:I'm not dead yet
HP:What do yer mean, yer ready to go at any time!
Open Mail: I'm getting better!
Bill G.: I can't take thi$, it'$ not GUI reliant nor i$ it a real threat to my monopoly!
Open Mail: I feel happy! I feel fine!
[THUD]
HP: Thanks a lot!
Users: Do you see them oppressin' me?
(wink wink nudge nudge know what I mean)
In USASETAF we had thousands of users on each exchange server and except for running out of disk space because of no mailbox limits it worked well. But that was the admins and a political issue. My office in US Army Corps of Engineers we had 140 users on ours and only had one problem in the year I was there. But isinteg works very well. My present job we have a server with over 300 users and a ew other servers with 150 users each. All works well. I never touch exchange except to make new mailboxes or delete terminated employees.
The main thing is the hardware. You need a good SCSI adapter and plenty or RAM. 512MB is good enough for 140 users.
I work for a Very Large Organization that uses Openmail in parts of itself, and Exchange in others. When HP announced they were knifing Openmail, this gave some people the excuse to start planning the switchover.
So, now it's not being knifed. I made sure to get this information to my boss, who is going to pass it on to other people today, to read, review, and spit bile over, because now the reason for their pet project going through is negated. And it means we're not going over to Exchange, which is, pretty much, a good thing overall, even if having two different email systems between the parts of the corporation that merged together is a Really Not Very Good Thing.
I love the sound of an entire Fortune 10 corporation's IT management and planning group having a collective stroke, especially when I gave the information that causes the stroke. It really makes my mornings worth it some days.
Brazil has decided you're cute.
I'm still holding ot for a ximian evolution server.
As far as I'm concerned, this will have the same problem that Exchange Server has: its coolest feature (calendaring) is supported in the Linux client only.
Our enterprise is about evenly split between Windows users and Mac OS X users-- we recently went through a huge rush of employees buying new iBooks. Any email/messaging/whatever platform that requires a specific client must provide that client for both of those operating systems for it to be useful to our company.
I'm this --> <-- close to giving up and doing the whole thing on the intranet with PHP and Postgresql.
One word: Calendaring.
As much crap as LookOut/Exchange does, there is no other piece of software that seamlessly integrates the groupware automated scheduling functionality that Exchange does. From a New Event window, I can create the event, add users from the Exchange domain, verify their schedules, move the event, confirm it, have a mail sent that shows up to each person with the information and 3 buttons (Accept, Decline, and Accept Conditionally). After I send the Email, I can then track who has opened the Email, who has replied, who is coming, and who isn't.
Evolution is a nice client, but it's a client. All of that work is on the serverside.
Notes is OK, but I need a bigger machien to run it on than I run my data warehouses on. And when it crashes (when, not if), it's gonna be seriously borked.
This is why companies use Exchange/LookOut. Not because it's a great mail client, but because it integrates all of the possible messageing functions a business needs, and talks to additional software like Project to plot out Project Management information.
OpenMail is the only other server-side enterprise messaging system out there that fulfills these needs. It's a decent program, it's not MS, it's significantly cheaper (if for no other reason then you only need 10% of the servers to run it on), and it runs on a more stable OS.
This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U
Please refrain from speaking about things when you have no idea what you're talking about.
n 't-count people saying that all of this could be done with opensource products, it can't right now.
To all the uninformed and never-worked-in-corporate-it-and-no-helpdesk-does
Our company researched a migration from Exchange to a linux-based product and simply could not do it. Two key features available in exchange are NOT available in opensource tools: shared calendering and shared contacts. Sure you can hack something together with ldap to handle the shared contacts but the outlook client won't support it. Everything else I looked into from Bynari et. al. required alot of the work to be done from a web interface. Forget the shared calendaring. It didn't take advantage of the normal outlook mechanism and didn't work quite right. Don't give me any shit about using something other than outlook either. When your company runs Office, outlook is a part of it. Why go and shell out more money for another mail client? Besides, no other mail clients support shared calendaring. You may not need it at home but business damn sure love it and frankly so do I.
Maybe iCal will be finally standardized and integrated into outlook but until that time, companies that already use Office, will use outlook because it's included and thus will want to use the features of it.
"Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
there are lots of Unix-based competitors to Microsoft Exchange. What about sendmail? There are not a lot of Exchange clones with code licensed from Microsoft in them that will behave exactly the same for Outlook clients. Even then there is now Evolution from Ximian. Volution from Caldera, Insight from Bynari, and various web based solutions.
How about an alphabet soup of open standards that does the job better, easier, more efficiently: POP, IMAP, SMTP, HTTP, SSL, CGI, FTP, LDAP, ABCDEFG, ETC?
Its not called competition if you're selling the same product.
there are lots of Unix-based competitors to Microsoft Exchange.
What about sendmail?
Bad example. Sendmail is one of the most non Unix pieces of software ever, in terms of modular and secure design. More to the point, its at best clone on the Exchange Internet Mail Connector. An MTA != A groupware app.
There are not a lot of Exchange clones with code licensed from Microsoft in them that will behave exactly the same for Outlook clients.
Not, but there are clones which will behave exactly (as in, equivalent functionality and no staff retraining) the same for Outlook clients.
Evolution from Ximian.
Yes indeed. Exchange connectors for Exchange5.5 and 2000 will be avaliable at the start of next year. They do all the X400 based stuff Outlook and Exchange do, including group calendaring, unsending messages, etc.
Volution from Caldera
I thought this was a system management tool and a repackaging of postfix, an imap server, and a couple of other bits and pieces. Again, an MTA and MDA are not groupware. Though it it has OpenLDAP and more importantly some way of doing the calendaring stuff it would be close. Corect me if this is the case.
Insight from Bynari
Indeed. Insight also does all the Exhcange - > Outlook specific stuff. The client is also free as in beer, so download it and give it a try. it does seem a little clunky tho, especially when compared to evolution.
Steltor
You didn't mention Steltor that seems to be the best of the Exchange comaptible groupware servers. I have yet to implement it myself but from what I understand its much better maintained and works better with existing Unix services than the others.