Slashdot Mirror
Opengroupware
An anonymous reader writes: "From the OpenGroupware.org site: the OGo project announces its formation and the release today to the worldwide open source development community of its groupware server software. Gary Frederick, Leader of the OpenOffice.org Groupware Project says: 'Just to be perfectly clear, this is an MS Exchange take-out. OGo is important because it's the missing link in the open source software stack. It's the end of a decade-long effort to map all the key infrastructure and standard desktop applications to free software.' There are also plenty of screenshots of Outlook, Evolution, Korganizer, iCal etc. accessing the server."
This still doesn't cut it for really big enterprise. Exchange has excellent features for things like VOip, blackberry, etc. That this solution simply can't meet... now or in the next few years.
That being said it is nice to see that there is an option for mid-sized businesses finally. They were the ones who really got nailed by the MSFT tax.
Great job and kudos to the OpenGroupware folks and their sponsors.
Slowly, slowly, one step at a time. A position taken by OSS can never be captured back, and the enemy does not have an infinite ground to fall back on. The circle widens, and there are only two kinds of protagonist: 'us' within the circle, and 'them' outside.
No apologies for my use of the language of aggression - this is the way of human affairs.
But seriously, this will drive OSS into the heart of mid-sized businesses.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
A drop in replacement for Exchange is great (I love the idea) but how does it perform? It would be silly to assume that just because it's on $FREE_OS it will outperform the Windows counterpart.
Trolling is a art,
The last two "big enterprises" I've worked for (including the current one) have only used the out-of-the-box functionality of Exchange. VoIP? Ha! Blackberry? Ha! Just because InfoWorld profiles a couple of companies using that stuff doesn't mean that the majority of companies do.
What the coporate world is looking for is something that is cheaper and easier to run than exchange but will work with all the existing installed software and addons. Some things are handy like having email to fax on exchage. Send an email and it becomes a fax.
Its when this is possible on a non-windows platform that people will look
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
The circle just closed, you mean...
With the massive database support(Oracle, MySQL, DB2...), the small desktop tools (OpenOffice) and all the network management software (Too... Many... Help!...), the Linux was "only" missing some big back office stuff, as in a large cooperation engine.
Now, if you are really willing, and for the FIRST TIME, you can go end to end Linux.
and you are tight. Now that the backbone exists, all the WAP and WhatNot connectivity modules can be (openly) develloped.
Linux covers all grounds of the IT business...
Microsoft ! Nous Voila !
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
So that you can weed out MS products from your back office without upsetting the end user. I would think that if you can replace the server without management noticing, then you've already won most of the battle. Replacing the client will be easier for management to accept once they realize that it will still work with the stuff they already have (and have paid for) and know well. It's a security blanket to know that if you end up not liking the opensource client you can always fall back on what you're already accustomed to.
Believe it or not, nobody here is aware of the others' appointments...
...and ever since switching every (office) PC down here to Mandrake, it'll all cost my company 0,00 (apart from my measly wage, which they'd have paid anyways)
Machine9dotNet
I think that this comes at a good time in the waning of the microsoft cycle. Somewhere above (the first post, I think) I read that this is not a good solution for big enterprise. I agree. The microsoft people have given the big businesses so many features (read: crutches) in their recent releases of exchange that it would be, to them, like severing a limb to switch to a software package that lacks even one of said features.
I know this because I work for one of those corporations, and they're getting killed by the microsoft licensing bullshit that's happening right now. They're still not switching to a more reasonable deployment platform, because they feel they can't live without all of the "state of the art" features in the microsoft package.
But I digress. I also agree that this is a great solution for mid-size businesses. And that's just fine, because the country is not made up entirely, or even mostly, of big business; mid-sized businesses comprise a huge chunk of the market, and they really are the ones who get screwed by the microsoft model. If they come on board to the open source game, then the market comes with them. The large businesses will follow along soon after microsoft loses the market share that small to mid-size businesses comprise.
For all the posts saying "it still doesn't do every last little thing that Exchange does!", do you really need those things?
You might try defining your requirements based on business needs, rather than the feature set of one piece of software. Or is that a crazy, radical idea?
Reminds me of all those guys doing simple web graphics, who say that Gimp doesn't do {some esoteric prepress color feature} that PhotoShop does, so they just can't use it ;)
In a business enviroment rolling out a standard plugin is going to be a complete non-issue. You include it on the standard image(s) and/or deploy it system wide (Either using a deployment tool or the old fashioned way of sending the PFY around with a floppy). The users don't have to touch their computers or the configuration.
Can the plugin do all the stuff you need? I don't know, the site is scant on details (In fact its now at the point where I'm not sure if the plugin is Open! It may be closed and only in the "Enterprise" version...)
If OGo doesn't support the stuff you need, its Open Source and it can (And very likely will be) added.
They did that ? They bring everything to the Mobile?!
I can't manage to understand where is the real challenge in bringing such things to Mobile ?
Since most of Mobile use WAP or i-Mode, you can display anything on it with format similar to HTML.
In this case, the challenge is: make a good UI, nothing more, I think.
Both Lotus Notes and First Class shipped in 1989. From talking to our Exchange admin, I get the impression it still provides only a fraction of the functionality of Notes and FC. OTOH, Notes has always had a horrible client interface. I have only heard good things from FC users.
It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man
-James Baldwin
- Existing software investments - some people already have an investment in Windows and Outlook on their desktops and are currently running it, even it they may not be talking to an Exchange server.
- Cost of retraining - A lot of people know Outlook because they either are using it or have used it at their job. Something else may be similar but it's not Outlook. There are going to be some folks who just learned which buttons to push rather than learning how to interact with the computer. Those people are going to need learn what buttons to push all over again.
- Lack of Windows alternatives - Evolution works fine on Unix even though it lacks some useful Outlook features such as the journal. What feature complete alternatives are there for Windows?
- Linux and BSD already has a foothold in the server room - It's easier to replace one server than a bunch of desktops. Unix systems and software are already replacing Windows file and print servers. This is the next step for a company that might be making the transition to open solutions.
As for the allegation that Outlook is security-hole ridden, Outlook is quite secure once you install the long-since-available security patches. You do install the security patches on your system, don't you?Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
If it doesn't do all that (I can't tell, site is /.'ed), it may be a wonderful product, but it is definitely *not* a drop-in replacement.
This page accidentally left blank
This seems to be one tough niche to break into. Look at the number of products trying to get into the market Exchange and Notes seem to dominate. The main issue is giving companies a reason to switch. I run an Exchange / Outlook shop simply because that's what it was when I got there. There simply is not the time or the money to try and make the switch. And why? Because it's Open Source? That is no reason to throw previously invested money out the window.
The other issue is unification. One search on Freshmeat reveals over sixty related projects. No one wants to band together on something. No one wants to create a "unified" product. It seems that there are a few things that have to be included by default - Exchange compatibility and transition tools.
Look at Oracle's Collaboration Suite, SuSE's OpenExchange Server, and all of the commercial "alternatives" out there. They include transition tools, but you have to hire a consultant to perform the transition. They include "Exchange compatibility" in that you can continue to run Outlook. Well, once you throw in the consultant and the cost of the connection utilities, you cost more than buying Exchange and licensing Outlook outright.
It's an endless cycle. Companies will continue to dump out alternatives, trying to play catch-up with Exchange, while Microsoft continues to add new features, lower their price to be competitive, and offer "free" training with purchase.
What's the solution to this issue? Hell if I know...I just install the stuff. But if we want a competitor that is _competitive_, the community will have to develop both an incentive to switch and the tools to do it.
------------------ D. A. Davenport: http://www.firebin.net
Which is why the world is full of IT staff that wish there was some way to dump it without having to get Accounts to agree to install a whole new set of clients (and possibly OSs).
A backwards compatable replacement is the classic first step to replacing a legacy system like Windows. With the current user base freed from their old system you can then go on to give them all the other things you mentioned.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
There is only a serious hardware limitation on the number of lines if you fail to understand how their hardware works and Asterisk works. By using a T400 card and a channel bank such as the TA 750 from ADTRAN or any other telecom equipment manufacturer you can have as many analog lines as you need, usually up to 24 per channel bank.
T1 => T400 Port1 => Asterisk => T400 Port2 => Channel Bank => Analog Phones
The users mailing list and archives are a great place to look for help with the problems you mentioned.
Disclosure: I work at ADTRAN and know the guys that write Asterisk.
This sounds like a complete show-stopper. The use of basic Exchange-like functionality in an organization is just a first step. After that come plugins for all sorts of CRMs and other such sales and marketing applications. Still it is admirable that they have covered the tiny fraction of the world that only uses Exchange for what Outlook already does on its own. Also important will be adding functionality that Exchange itself is missing so that people are drawn to this server.
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
What you're not considering is that this isn't an unfinished project! It's mature. It's a release into open source of a product which was closed source yesterday. Yesterday I would have had to purchase it for around 9000 Euros. Today I can download it (granted without the Exchange connection and a few other features). But it immediately leapfrogs all of the half-finished projects out there, because I can go stick it on a server today and start using it.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This is great. We really need this type of software in the open source world. Unfortunately it doesn't run on windows. That meeans that it will be harder to get it to be used in windows infested work places.
Getting open sourced applications to run well on the windows platform is probably the best way of fighting the Microsoft monopoly. It's much easier to convince management to replace propriatory software if can be done radually and in a less high profile fashion.
And when enough open source software have invaded Microsft space, there will be no reason to run windows as your OS. At that time there will be little resistance in replaceing windows with Linux or FreeBSD.
God is REAL! Unless explicitly declared INTEGER
make the server talk to outlook natively
no connectors, no webdav to mapi, no nothing
the simple truth is that outlook rules corporate email... not because it syncs with handhelds, because it is what everyone in the office, that isn't us, is used to using.
build a groupware server that works with outlook without any additional plug-ins, and exchange will disappear in time
no one cares about any other mail/groupware client but outlook... when linux is ready to be deployed to all the desktops in an organization (which it isn't yet, and don't try to tell me otherwise) a groupware server that supports "not-outlook" will be viable.
scott king