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."

34 of 319 comments (clear)

  1. Not. by Telastyn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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?

    1. Re:Not. by alsta · · Score: 5, Informative

      I detest MS Exchange for many reasons, but foremost because of MAPI. This package does not have MAPI specified, in which case it is correct of Telastyn to claim that it isn't a drop in replacement package.

      MAPI is Outlook's native protocol which encapsulates calls to the Exchange server to retrieve/modify calendars, mailboxes and other objects.

      This will probably be a nice mailserver-in-a-box deal and it's nice to see Linux vendors do these things. But to call it a drop in replacement sounds like a lot of hot air. PLEASE do not assume that I am in any way saying that Exchange is better. I am not. I am saying however, that vendors should take care in advertising more correctly. Otherwise they're proving to Exchange users that Exchange is the real deal and whatever is offered by SuSE is a joke.

      --
      Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. -Ayn Rand
  2. Source code license? by pope+nihil · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I notice that you can get the source code, but under what license?

    SuSE Linux Openexchange Server 4

    Base license with ten groupware clients and an unlimited number of external e-mail clients (POP3/IMAP)

    Order no.: 2118-1INT

    US $ 1,249.00

    Software
    SuSE Linux Openexchange Server 4 (based on SLES 8), source code (4 CDs)
    1. Re:Source code license? by bogie · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Interesting question, but I'd rather see them do something about Yast. That one piece of software spoils the distro for me. I mean most of the other distros GPL their tools, why can't Suse?

      Because of Yast I don't support Suse and never will.

      I know I be modded as Troll for this, but I know many other people feel the same way I do. I mean for a company that claims to be so into opensource why have this "gotcha" built into their distro? Could you imagine if Redhat had done the same thing with RPM? Or Debian had did this with Apt?

      Suse did invent the tool so they do get to pick the license, but what would happen if the 99% of software written by others which they are repackaging all did the same thing?

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
    2. Re:Source code license? by root_42 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't understand what the fuzz is all about. Yast is not that great a tool that I would say everyone has to use it. The source code for Yast is there, and you are allowed to modify it as you wish -- with one condition: you have to label this version as a modified Yast-version. So no big deal! Try to focus on what SuSE has done for the OpenSource-community: They fund a lot of the ALSA-project development (Jaroslav Kysela), they heavily pushed the development of XFree86 including writing of drivers for until then unsupported cards, porting Linux to the s390 and much more. They also employ a couple of the KDE core developers (Waldo Bastian et al.).

      --
      [--- PGP key and more on http://www.root42.de ---]
  3. But I've got too much money! by teamhasnoi · · Score: 5, Funny
    I've got to spend 30 million dollars in 30 days so I can inheirit 300 million! I can't give any away to charity, and I can't tell anyone why I'm doing it! (shhh.)

    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)

  4. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wouldnt it be awesome if this was integrated with Evolution to give the open-source market a firm footing in the messaging arena

  5. Exchange killer or not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  6. Interesting use of "Open" by rgmoore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Interesting use of "Open" by bo-eric · · Score: 5, Informative
      Taking a look at the "Features" page (of the "Article"), we see that the components Openexchange Server consists of are the following:

      • Operating system: SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 8 for ia32, Kernel 2.4.19
      • Installation: graphical installation with YaST2
      • SMTP mail server, mail transfer agent: Postfix 1.1.11
      • IMAP mail delivery agent: Cyrus IMAP 2.1.9
      • Web server: Apache 1.3.26
      • LDAP server: OpenLDAP 2.1.4
      • Integrated spam filter
      • Samba PDC
      • DHCP


      Admittedly, the "Integrated spam filter" and "DHCP" parts are not specified and might be closed source, but that seems quite unlikely, IMHO. Every other component seems to be both open sourced and free. Am I missing the reason you concluded it was closed-source?
      --

      -- Free speech is only free if your time is worth nothing.
  7. Something I don't get by silhouette · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.
  8. MAPI support? by TheBracket · · Score: 5, Informative

    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
    1. Re:MAPI support? by Kunta+Kinte · · Score: 4, Funny
      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.

      Yeah, those useless IETF standards!

      --
      Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
  9. Re:MS Tax? by pmineiro · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

  10. Exchange SuSE by Rik+van+Riel · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... so, who's going to print the shirts ? ;)

  11. Obvioulsy you've never used Exchange by Brigadier · · Score: 5, Insightful


    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, .. is there anything else that will let me use ms office and its nifty features such a schedule sharing and such.

    admin: well errr , lets see .. aaahh. no ..

    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

    1. Re:Obvioulsy you've never used Exchange by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've run into this many times before with admins who come out of the MCSE mill. Unfortunately, there's no way to get your money back for Exchange/W2K once you've been ass reamed for it.

      A good option that I've reccomended and implemented is phpGroupWare, which works really well for a small to medium size office that needs basic collaboration sofware.

    2. Re:Obvioulsy you've never used Exchange by Crispin+Cowan · · Score: 5, Insightful
      You wish. For that matter, I wish, but it just isn't so. More likely scenario:

      • 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: Fine, whatever, just tell me when it's done and don't bug me with details.
      • admin: what about all of that mimlinda, in lisa and melissa and code red stuff?
      • User: Which part of 'don't bug me with details' was unclear? Just do it.
      The open source/free software world desperately needs a drop-in replacement for Exchange, where "drop-in" means "will work with Outlook without having to explain stuff to Outlook users." There are open source functional replacements, and there are proprietary drop-in replacements, but no open source drop-in replacements.

      For that matter, we could use an open source drop-in replacement for Outlook, where "drop-in" means "works with Exchange." I've heard that Evolution does it, but I've also heard that Evolution employs a proprietary module to get to the Exchange Calendaring functionality.

      If I'm wrong here, I'd love to be corrected. Preferably with URLs pointing to code :-)

      Crispin
      ----
      Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
      Chief Scientist, WireX Communications, Inc.
      Immunix: Security Hardened Linux Distribution
      Available for purchase

  12. Wait a minute. by SlashChick · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:Wait a minute. by MyHair · · Score: 5, Informative

      From reading the other comments, Openexchange appears to have a 10 concurrent user license where Microsoft is per seat licensed.

      So if you have 200 users but only 10 are connected to the server at any given time you'd need a 10-user Openexchange license or a 200-user MS Exchange license.

      Plus MS server OSes require client licensing, too. Suse doesn't.

      At work a group was all sold on using terminal services, so we have Win2k terminal servers running Citrix and administered through Novell DeFrame. There are 5 licenses (Windows server, Citrix, Novell user, Novell DeFrame and application) required for every user/application. Yikes! And some licenses are per seat and some are per concurrent user. I guess you could call it six licenses if you throw in the MS Windows client. Why not?

    2. Re:Wait a minute. by ProfDumb · · Score: 5, Interesting
      This is being touted as an Exchange killer, yet it costs $1249 for 10 licenses?

      You are comparing, I think, a discounted web price for an Exchange upgrade with a list price for Suse. Suse will also discount, everybody does. Also, others have posted that Suse is charging per connected user, rather than the total number of users who ever connect (if I understand the other posts.) This will make a difference. Further, if you need to upgrade other software (MS OS, Office) and the only thing holding you up from going to Linux / OpenOffice is Exchange, then Suse's OpenExchange prices might not have to be far below the MS price.

      However, if Suse really undercuts pricing, MS could always increase its discounts until SuSe's commercial offering goes away. This is a big advantage of true open source -- it can't be priced out of the market.

  13. Drop-in: NOT by jlv · · Score: 5, Informative
    From the linked page:
    The migration from MS Exchange 5.5 is possible without any difficulties.
    But, if you go and read their detailed migration plan you'll see this is anything but drop-in. At least they come on-site to assist you in the process (you gotta get something for the extra $1K).
  14. Timing is everything :-/ by tulare · · Score: 5, Funny

    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
  15. Some alternatives... by jeroenb · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  16. kroupware by fava · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  17. Easy now.... by kikensei · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  18. Re:Prediction: It will be available in november.. by zurab · · Score: 5, Informative

    with POP3 functionality.

    Everything else will be "Planned for the future" and they will be recruiting programmers.


    C'mon now! They even state on the features page that The preferred protocol is IMAP.
    Why predict when you can read and find out?
    Features page says it will come with SMTP, Webmail, IMAP, LDAP, spam filter, Samba PDC, and DHCP. The features include E-mail (of course), scheduler, document management, project management, addressbooks, forums, knowledgebase, etc., etc., etc..

    Not that you can't piece these software packages yourself, but this sounds like it will be an integrated solution for mail server like Exchange or Groupwise servers, integrated IMAP and web interface; basically they want people to have OpenExchange server interoperate with MS Exchange server (migrating period), and after you're sure everything is set up correctly as you want it then ditch the MS Exchange completely. All this will be configurable through YaST too.

    To me it sounds very nice as an alternative and way cheaper too.

  19. I know I'm going to unpopular for saying this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  20. No Need by BurritoWarrior · · Score: 5, Funny

    I already have an Exchange replacement.

    Try and keep it hush hush, OK?

    It's called Lotus Notes. Shhhhh.

  21. This may be a bit off-topic, but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

    1. Re:This may be a bit off-topic, but.. by krmt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're being very selective with your "everything" description.

      Does Windows have a net-based install that only requires a couple of floppies to get going? Does Windows have a unified scheme where you can pull down whole libraries of software from either a command line, text-based, or full GUI interface? Does Windows have the ability to customize its kernel? Does Windows have tab-based, minimal, and even mouseless GUIs?

      Linux offers choice. People are choosing to make programs that are similarly functional to those offered by Microsoft, but that doesn't mean that Windows is setting the standard for everything.

      Besides that, there's a lot of crossover. A lot of programs run on both Windows and Linux. Emacs. Vim. Mozilla. Perl. Python. Ruby. Nethack. Windows doesn't set these standards either.

      If you still don't believe that Linux is different than Windows, try doing a LFS or Gentoo install. Then come back here and tell me that Windows is setting the standards for everything.

      --

      "I may not have morals, but I have standards."

  22. Re:Prediction: It will be available in november.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  23. Exchange who? by krokodil · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've heard about exchange students, but exchange killers!?

  24. Re:Where are the features? by Kunta+Kinte · · Score: 5, Informative

    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