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."
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)
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
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!
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
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.
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.
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.
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?
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
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