Slashdot Mirror
Yet Another Exchange Killer?
jmertic writes "SuSE Linux now has the latest Exchange killer, but this time for Exchange Server. Openexchange Server is designed to be a drop in replacement for Exchange 5.5 users who don't want to pay the MS tax of going to Exchange 2000. They say it will be available mid November."
the "tax" refers to the cost that microsoft charges you to upgrade. you usually have to upgrade or else the obsolete software is practically unusable.
Disco Stu was talkin' to you.
This is *not* a drop in replacement for an exchange server. This does look like a nicely packaged set of servers to replace the functionality, with optional arm&leg support contracts.
woo.hoo.
I mean, yeah professional support is a great thing that will get a little bit into companies, but seriously, nobody is going to rip out an exchange server, dispite its distatefulness; then reconfigure every client to use smtp-auth/imap/ldap not to mention *loose* outlook's calendaring feature, just for clientside flexibility that they never wanted in the first place?
Wouldnt it be awesome if this was integrated with Evolution to give the open-source market a firm footing in the messaging arena
Why is the root name copied in all open source software of the proprietary version in which it competes? Its unimaginative, it often cause problems legally, it sounds like a runner up solution instead of something possibly better.
Thoughts?
So, instead of paying the Microsoft tax, you're paying the SuSe tax?
The (Hopefully) Great Slashdot Blackout Apr 21-27
Would that this were an Exchange killer. It is not. The SuSe material says you can 'sync' your Outlook with it, just like your PDA. Ooooo!
Calendar, Task Requests, Free/Busy? I wish.
Like it or not, Outlook users in corporate mode use a lot of exchange _server_ features. Outlook (and Express) users that use it in POP/IMAP mode exclusively could care less. Maybe this is an Exchange killer for POP/IMAP users, but so is Cyrus.
This is no 'drop in' replacement; its not any kind of a replacement in unless a lot of drugs are added.
Am I saying its no good? No; we haven't seen it yet. It's not an Exchange replacement. It looks like Bynari.
Unfortunately, it doesn't sound as though the "Open" in "Openexchange" means that it's going to be open-source. SUSE mentions that they have a much friendlier licensing policy than MS, only paying for people who are actually connected to the server instead of per seat that can connect. That's nice, but it just means that you're getting hooked into a proprietary system that's likely to be less well developed and possibly even less reliable than Exchange, without any of the advantages of Free/Open Source software. Very disappointing.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
why don't you people stop making like you're being forced to buy more from Microsoft? The only real taxes are those collected by the government with guns to back them up.
well, all the time i order machines that i intend to install linux on from vendor X, and i say, "i don't want windows installed on the machine, and i don't want to pay for a windows license". however, thanks to microsoft's bulk licensing approach with vendors, this is not possible.
no guns, but i am forced to buy what i don't want, and put $60 in the coffers of a company i don't like.
now, one could say that exchange is a totally optional product, and that one is not forced to buy it, so the concept of "M$ tax" doesn't apply to this case. fair enough. however it does apply to some cases, and is a valid term.
-- p
Typical Scenerio.
User: I want to be able to share my schedule contacts and project info.
admin: sure we can install exchange it will cost $$$$$$, ohh yea it also runs on Win2k.
user: wtf? are you nuts. aren't our win2k servers the ones that all went down because of that mimlinda, in lisa and melissa and code red,
admin: well errr , lets see
moral, SuSE (my distro of choice) is giving users an option to MS that will not be as much of a bite in the butt. ohh yea it runs on linux.
ps. I dont give a damn about the spelling errors
If it doesn't support Outlook and the way it handles calendaring and such as smoothly as Exchange does, it will never be an Exchange Server killer!
I know I'm not the first, nor will I be the last person to make this observation.
Then you are not buying from the right place. There are thousands of vendors that will sell you computer with no OS installed. You can also make them yourself (An extremely cost effective solution for large companies).
You are not "forced" to buy anything. You are whining. Nothing more.
Yet Another Exchange Killer?
This implies that there has already been an exchange killer. As should be blatantly obvious to everyone involved, this is hardly the case.
I think, therefore I am an Atheist.
If they were smart, they'd do what M$ does when its trying to penetrate a market: get a few "early adopter" sites up and running, write a case study or two, and then market market market.
Show me 5 major companies that did the switch (and did it painlessly) and we'll talk. Otherwise, keep smoking.
when it would cost me just as much as Exchange and doesn't provide all the functionality.
But i'm seeing a lot of people complain that SuSE is charging for this "Exchange killer". It's taken MS litterally hundres of thousands of man hours to develop Exchange. I'm sure the developers at SuSE have put in at least some effort into developing their clone. Do you really expect either of them to give it away for free?!? When I go to buy TV I don't consider what I pay the Sony tax. And When I buy a car I don't consider the price of that the Honda tax. I want to use something people have worked very hard to create. I'm buying a product. This costs money. Deal with it.
Active Directory, despite its complexities, is really what makes Exchange a necessity for your MS power users and executives.
Until Exchange 2000, and open source Exchange "killer", OutlookXP, Linux exchange clients can coexist within the same Active Directory infrastructure, there won't be a true Exchange "killer". I think we'll just have to wait until the Samba team can assist us with that.
And I hate to be pessemistic, but Microsoft seems to be staying ahead in this game with their new "Titanium" Exchange.
Sure i can understand that there are needs for interopability with MS software but still. Why not develop an open standard and then work from that? With all the brilliant developers currently working on various linux projects all that is needed to work in the same direction would be an open standard for calendars and syncing. Its not brain surgery so it should be fairly easy to whip up a standard for it.
We are now inline with MS and has the chance to run away from them. To embrace their technology is to justify it when we could cevelop better things than they can.
My C++ book is in the mail and im going to start making a difference too. I know i shouldnt be voicing about theese things when i dont do anything by myself so i decided to learn programming and do someting about it. See ya!
HTTP/1.1 400
Okay, so we create this open-sourced exchange server replacement.
:(
We also have our own free versions of something similar to Outlook Express.
We have a GUI similar to Windows, and Debian recently announced a fully-graphical install interface. Wow.
Looks like Microsoft are setting the standards these days, allright.
And I always thought of *nix as something different, why is everything pointing towards Microsoft?
If this is an Exchange killer then where are the killer features?
FIrst no mention of single instance storage. The money you save in licensing you'll spend in increased storage costs.
Second where is the server based mail storage? Again the money you save on licensing you'll spend backing up mail downloaded on users' computers or home folders.
Third, I didn't read anything about a web interface to read your mail like Outlook Web Access.
Fourth, unlike Exchange 2000 it doesn't seem to have any mailbox recovery except for back up tape. Exchange 2000 if you accidentaly delete a mailbox you can recover it easily without back up tapes.
What about mail restore for terminated employees? Exchange you just restore it into the same mailbox and give others access to it. Not with this.
On the surface you'll save in licensing. But when you dig deeper, you'll spend more on storage, back up resources and help desk costs. And don't start with the daily BSOD's. My company's exchange servers run, and run and run. I think we reboot once every quarter or so. And the better architecture more than makes up for UNIX's superior up time.
it doesn't look any cheaper than keeping our Exchange 5.5, really, since client licenses are about the same price and OpenExchange Server is really an untested unknown. I don't know ANYbody running it, and Suse is almost unheard of here (BC, Canada) because of its un-redistributable licensing. To be honest, I think the only real advantage here is that the OpenExchange isn't Microsoft.
Why should my company (50 users) migrate? No new features, dubious availability of support (on the other hand MCSE are a dime a dozen here) and inclusion of proprietary software from a relative unknown aren't exactly compelling.
A real exchange "killer" needs to emulate MAPI enough to work with Outlook for shared calendars and tasks.
Anyone got a pointer to solid MAPI documentation? It's amazing that a samba-like project for it hasn't sprouted up..