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."
with POP3 functionality.
Everything else will be "Planned for the future" and they will be recruiting programmers.
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?
MS Exchange is perfect for my needs! I can pick up a 1000 seat licence and a couple of XP Advanced Servers and blow my wad right there! Plus, I can hire a bunch of IT guys to keep up with bugs and patches - ooooh, don't kill Exchange!
Signed, Brewster
(a.k.a Richard Prior)
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?
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.
I don't understand why people are always talking about the latest and greatest exchange killer.
There was already an exchange killer. It was called Nimda.
Experts agree: everything is fine.
I looked through the site, and could see no sign of native MAPI support - rather, you have the usual collection of IMAP, POP3, SMTP, etc. protocols. Many sites I look after would love to switch to a free Exchange replacement when they phase out their current 5.5 deployments - but if it doesn't support MAPI and seamlessly integrate with Outlook, they won't be interested.
It also seems to be missing a few of Exchange's better features: single instance message storage, (relatively) easy multi-site replication, deleted item retention, just to name a few.
Finally, who on Earth wants to put their Exchange server on their PDC? If this product doesn't integrate well with existing domains, I don't think that I have a single client who could actually use it!
Lead developer, http://wisptools.net
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
... so, who's going to print the shirts ? ;)
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.
This is being touted as an Exchange killer, yet it costs $1249 for 10 licenses?
I just looked up Exchange 2000 Server pricing. Assuming you're upgrading from Exchange 5.5, the base package for Exchange 2000 Server is $639 and the additional 5 licenses need to bring your server up to 10 licenses are $499, bringing your total to $1138.
You save $111 in license fees by upgrading to Exchange 2000 instead of buying this solution.
Here is where I got my prices for Exchange. Note that I have no affiliation with this company and have never bought software there; I found them on a Google search.
So, if cost isn't the advantage here, what is? Exchange 2000 is pretty much guaranteed to have more features and support. I can't see why anyone would want to buy this product.
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
They are actually worse then the government if you think about it since what they are doing has already been declared illegal and many things they have done have been illegal and all they get is a slap on the wrist "don't do it again" the government says. The government and microsoft probably have closer ties than most people would like to think...some kind of twisted symbiotic relaionship...parasitic to the people however...(Editors Note: Or Maybe I am just paranoid)
Just my luck - I'm in the middle of downloading SuSe from one of the mirrors, and it goes and gets slashdotted. What are the odds?
political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
It's not a "drop-in" replacement for Exchange, it's a "pay us $999 plus expenses if you have an old setup, otherwise ask us for a quote" replacement for Exchange.
:-)
It's not even cheap. I know I can get good pricing from Microsoft due the area in which I work (Healthcare), but this is considerably more expensive, probably twice the cost for just the base server application.
I think I'll give it a miss
Am I saying its no good? No; we haven't seen it yet. It's not an Exchange replacement. It looks like Bynari.
Bynari however, does produce an actual replacement for Exchange, especially when coupled with the InsightConnector for Outlook.
Also, the former HP OpenMail now owned by Samsung and called Samsung Contact appears to support MAPI as well, so that could integrate with Outlook and have all those groupware/calendaring features.
And last, a Dutch company called ConnecTUX has created a Linux-based server application called Team-Link that integrates completely with Outlook and mimics all Exchange features. (Both sites in Dutch unfortunately.)
So plenty of alternatives. But I agree, this OpenExchange, is not one of them.
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.
But have you tried to open any doc files from someone that has "upgraded" to Office 2000? Almost impossible unless that person has the sense-of-mind to save it in the old 97 Office format..........
Perhaps I'm wrong, but that fits the defination of "practically unusable" to me. Not to mention being an "MS Tax"...
"To open newer Office files, you will have to upgrade to Office 2000. This 'upgrade' will cost you all of your privicy rights (EULA), everything that's in your bank account (the actual monitary cost), and all your hair (from frustruation)."
"Thanks for calling Microsoft Tech Support, how can we mug you..I mean, help you...today?"
--CypherDragon
when it would cost me just as much as Exchange and doesn't provide all the functionality.
The kroupware project and and is supposed to be exchange compatible as well as open source and free of those pesky licencing fees.
Scheduled completion by the end of the year.
Wow. SuSE doesn't have many supporters at /., eh?
I've used SuSE mail servers 2 and 3 at a few consulting clients and find them to be well designed, solid products. THe price on Version 2 was a paltry $399 or some such, but SuSE learned that people don't buy a good thing unless its expensive, so they ratcheted the price of v.3 to $999.
To install the SuSE server, you boot off the CD, accept all defaults and wait about 15 minutes. SuSE linux is installed jointly with the mail server, so from bare drive to fully functional takes about 20 minutes.
Previous versions work well with IMAP or POP (i use IMAP) and come bundled with a a custom version of Arkeia backup software so you can slap on a tape drive and back up the server every night.
Server has a great web mail client (much better in the Open Exchange version) and allows users to easily change their vacatin, auto-reply, forwarding prefs from a web config screen.
Using outlook, Mozilla, Netscape or any LDAP compliant email client, you can pull all your user addresses off the server with a link to the server based LDAP directory, no server based config needed.
I love this client for small business clients, and I will certainly give the latest a shot. Just 'cause the slashdot headline uses the term "exchange killer" doesn't mean you have to jump on SuSE like lemmings off a cliff.
SuSE often touts "exchange-like groupware" functionality, only to reveal that its soley available via the web based client scheduler. That aside, they make good products. If you don't have time to configure your own, its worth a shot.
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
I already have an Exchange replacement.
Try and keep it hush hush, OK?
It's called Lotus Notes. Shhhhh.
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?
In my view :
:-) The service there is to listen to the band's playing live, not in providing CD's.
;-)
You could either look at it as the consumerisation (is that a word?) of software, which occurs with pretty much any type of electronic product you could name (digital watches, cd players, VCR's), where the price of the product starts high and then drops when people figure out how to mass produce it cheaply.
Unfortunately, the main reason as to why the price starts out high - that the components are difficult to make in large numbers and become cheaper as time goes by and demand increases - doesn't apply to software because once you've made the first copy, you can mass produce it simply by putting it on the internet or on CD.
And because it is so easy to mass produce, the large companies have to artificially make it more difficult to mass produce, which is why everyone on Slashdot get's so pissed off with them.
The only way this cycle will break is if someone figures out a business model where
a) The programmers write the software and still get paid, and
b) No artificial constraints on what can be done with the software are applied.
Personally, I think that as long as big companies think that they can make a product once and sell it millions of times, (remind you of Douglas Adams' Mostly Harmless?) they are going to keep fighting this losing battle.
The solution, as companies like AOL have figured out, is that the software is a means-to-an-end. They don't try to sell you their software, they sell you their web service. Do most city database companies try and sell a generic e-commerce application, or are they selling the service to customise it to the needs of the client?
And god help the recording industry
Consumer software and consumer pre-recorded music are dead end industries, which is why they are fighting using every dirty trick in the book to try and stay alive at the moment.
Well, that's my view on things anyway
Requiring marketshare ehh...
Boy you're making this hard...
Actually the first one I checked falls into this category... DELL... Maybe you've heard of them?
True you can get servers from them with RedHat now but near as I can tell anything in their Dimensions line (aimed at home users) gives you the generous choice of Win XP Home, Pro, Home with Plus or Pro with Plus. Their workstation line also gives you the choice of Win 2000. Oooo...
That's what people are complaining about with the MS tax business. See for your self, choose any desktop or workstation line and try to configure it without windows... you can't!
Ironically, it's those without the 'significant marketshare' who will sell you a computer without charging you for windows. Fred's house o' parts will probably happily assemble you a computer sans OS no problemo.
I've heard about exchange students, but exchange killers!?
You obviously didn't bother to read anything at the link provided. It offers a web interface, POP3 and IMAP (hence server-side storage), uses standard mailstores and OpenLDAP for the calandering and such. Recovery of mbox mailboxes is fairly trivial, however, I know nothing of recovering OpenLDAP (it seems to be Berkley DB so that should be possible). Accessing ex-employees info is simple, just reassign access to the OpenLDAP data and append the mbox to someone else. Heck, it's probably even an automated option in the web interface. As for mailbox recovery, if you delete a mbox, it's gone. That's why you have tape. I personally think it's stupid for Exchange to keep the data around after you delete someone. Talk about a long-term waste of space.
kc8apf
As if the shootings in DC were not enough.
Not to be rude, but this is hilarious.
FIrst no mention of single instance storage. The money you save in licensing you'll spend in increased storage costs.
Please tell me you're joking. How much space do you think the average email server saves using this? At any rate Cyrus supports this, see http://winnie.acsu.buffalo.edu/doc/overview.html#s ingleinstance . Now I really wish people would stop bringing up that stupid buzzword.
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.
Thats a basic function of IMAP . You really should research this stuff.
Third, I didn't read anything about a web interface to read your mail like Outlook Web Access.
Ever heard of IMP or squirrellmail? http://www.squirrelmail.org/ How did you get moded +5??
Backups are the same scenario. Actually with Cyrus, you can simpley change the ACL on the mailbox to admin only if you want to prevent access and not delete it. Cyrus has it's entire admin functionality exposed as a PERL module so that you can script the server directly to do what the hell you want when a employee is terminated.
OpenLDAP is just as easy to back up. A simple LDIF dump, or copy the db files.
Both these packages are rock solid. I mean months and months with absolutely *zero* downtime, except for upgrades, and even then with failover the users never notices a thing. I've managed several. Including Cyrus in an ISP environment.
+5 ??!! LOL
Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW