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."

Comments

So... it's what exactly?

[Jonsey]

We've not got an exchange server, but with or without the insecurities of exchange?

I'm lost. Is this like exchange, or is it secure? : p

Sure, but...

[AntiOrganic]

Does it have menu shadows? :(

How long till Microsoft tries to break it?

[mikeophile]

Be it by code of bytes or code of law?

MAPI?

[Anonymous Coward]

On the screenshots page it says:

Microsoft Outlook using the ZideLook plugin and Ximian Evolution using the Connector for Exchange

So does this mean Outlook will work natively or not?

Re:MAPI?

[Anonymous Coward]

Looking at this it looks as though Outlook requires a plugin in order to access the server. However as that plugin is also Open Source, I don't see a major problem with this. The users can't tell the difference.

Re:MAPI?

[Acidangl]

The problem i see with having to use a plugin is that it adds time to your install. Does the plugin and OpenGroupware support public folders, notes, and shareing calendars? Does OpenGroupware support multiple sites? How did OpenGroupware address Outlook Web Access? My users require that feature.

Re:MAPI?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:MAPI?

[WindBourne]

go to the about page. The plugin is available from the original company. I am guessing that they are selling it .

Re:MAPI?

[dalslad]

Et tu Brutus?

This project is laden with hurdles and I'd be very careful before contributing to it or deploying it. In fact, it needs a serious technical review. We've heard this story before.

Bynari, who has actually replaced Exchange with a Linux server running on the IBM S/390 had some problems with Ximian. Any plugin for Ximian required that one gives the code to Ximian, lock stock and everything.

The Ximian connector no work with anything but Exchange 2000 in "web mode". Not all functionality is present.

In an article in Linux Journal, February, 2003 page 52, the author outlines the components necessary for create this product.

Outlook only works natively with Bynari's Exchange Client Extension and it's Global Address Book. Otherwise, you're looking at an internet mode of Outlook and nothing special exists with that.

MAPI no longer runs the Exchange server, instead the monster runs XML-RPC. It will accommodate some legacy Outlook software, but not much.

Outlook 2000 service pack 3 running on Windows 2000 or XP desktop enables most of the functionality. But Microsoft has pulled off another lock in to obsolete Outlook 97 and 98 and will required installing the .Net framework to enable Outlook 2000 which will wind up on the chopping block once Office 2003 makes it's debut.

I wouldn't want to tackle this project. While the intentions appear good, it's just another me too.

Now, Colab - the German government's well funded project already works albeit with their own client and Bynari's connector which took the place of Steltor after Oracle bought Steltor.

I hope these guys succeed. But look at the carnage. Ever look at the Open Exchange Project. Abandoned by Luke. What about Sendmail.com's fierce announcement that it was going into groupware -- two years ago?

This is a tough customer. One of the worse development glitches, you need Microsoft developers to build parts of the product. Ooh, they just don't mix.

Re:MAPI?

[stinnux]

No, it is not open source. I've met them today at the Linux Tag in Karlsruhe. It will start at around 65 per User.

Re:MAPI?

[coebabelghoti]

It looks like their WebUI feature takes care of your web access question. From the screenshots it looks like it does calendars, but the rest is my guess.

Re:MAPI?

[scalis]

"Et tu Brutus?"

Wasnt this what the Czar of rome said when his former ally Brutus stabbed him in the back?
The open source movement is hardly an ally of MS Exchange or am I missing out?

Anyway, what I was thinking was that Yes, you are right. Competing with Exchange IS a tough fight mainly because of Outlook being the most popular browser combined with the most widespread and, in my view, one of the most powerful collaboration systems around.
I support, implement and manage (mostly) *nix based systems..... And then we have Exchange. Impossible to get rid of because of two things:
A) Users like outlook
B) No other collaboration tool for the same cost or less impresses management
Now, point A) is easy. Most users tend to love Evolution too since it works in the exact same way but without shared calendars and the like, no change of software. period. Points B kicks in.
Any attempt to solve point B, ANY attempt, is most welcome.
I DO hope this will work since one of the major downsides of Exchange is the crappy protocol MAPI and its successors.

Re:MAPI?

[Theatetus]

Wasnt this what the Czar of rome said when his former ally Brutus stabbed him in the back?

A: He's usually called a "Caesar" not a "Czar".

B: He was stabbed in the crotch, not the back.

C: According to Plutarch he said kai su, teknon; according to Shakespeare he said et tu, brute.

B) No other collaboration tool for the same cost or less impresses management

It's funny, I've noticed how in love PHB's are with exchange because of all the bullet-points it has.

But when I think about it, I've never seen an office use exchange/outlook for anything but email and signing up for the conference room on a single public calendar.

Re:MAPI?

[scalis]

He was stabbed in the crotch, not the back.

Stabbing an ally in the crotch is definitely to stab someone in the back. ;)

Re:MAPI?

[deuce868]

[blockquote]But when I think about it, I've never seen an office use exchange/outlook for anything but email and signing up for the conference room on a single public calendar. [/blockquote] We use it here for assigned tasks, calendaring for 50 students and 15 staff plus two conference rooms, and web based access to it as well. We're education so we get a nice price break on Exchange and such, but I would still love to get rid of it.

Re:MAPI?

[shokk]

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.

Re:MAPI?

[Kong the Medium]

Ts,Ts,Ts. Kids today. Never read something else than comics.

A: He's usually called a "Caesar" not a "Czar".

He's not called "a" Caesar. He was the Caesar, Julius Caesar. He was killed at the idens of March 44 BC, because he wanted to become imperator of Rome. The terms "Czar", "Zar" and "Kaiser" are derived from his name. And also the month of July and until 1513 the Calendar was named the "julian calendar" because he invented or at least ordered it.

Re:MAPI?

[azzy]

As we're correcting people: It was the ides of March.

Re:MAPI?

[riggwelter]

Any plugin for Ximian required that one gives the code to Ximian, lock stock and everything.

<MASH>Horse Hockey!</MASH>

Evolution is Free, you can download the source, and hack on it for free.

That means you can write a plugin for it FOR FREE, indeed often on the Evolution mailing lists when a function is requested that Ximian do not have planned for the core software, the answer is write it yourself.

Still not good enough for enterprise...

[DigitalCH]

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.

Re:Still not good enough for enterprise...

[Erore]

It's a misconception that small and medium sized businesses do not have needs every bit as complex as those of large companies. They still have things that need to be done that are critical to their business, and messaging may very well be one of them.

Also, a mid-sized business was hit no harder than a larger businesses by Microsoft's license 6.0. In fact, Microsoft lowered the entry requirements for Select and Enterprise agreements, which means more mid-size businesses could participate in that particular brand of extortion.

Re:Still not good enough for enterprise...

[falconed]

maybe this can't cut it in the big enterprise just yet, but there's tons of small businesses that don't need or can live without the advanced features of exchange. Especially when an exchange solution costs (I'm sure I could find it cheaper, but I'm lazy) $1199 for win2k server + ($700 || $4000) for exchange + ($67 * #users) for client licenses. For a company with only 10 employees, that's a minimum of $2570 for email software costs alone (since exchange is typically run on a dedicated machine).

Re:Still not good enough for enterprise...

[mikefoley]

Let's not put the cart before the horse. Get a solid open-sourced replacement for basic Exchange Server functionality (Contacts, Calendar, Email, etc...) and the add-ons will happen FAST.

Re:Still not good enough for enterprise...

[vofka]

I've been (forced into) using Domino/Notes for about 5 years now, mainly because at the time we migrated, the guy in charge saw Notes as the "easy" way to move away from cc:Mail.

I've been itching for something like this to come along for a long time, so I can show the Directors what they are missing. OGo, coupled with OTRS to replace our in-house fault-tracking system, and OOo to replace MS Office, and we'd be almost set. All that is left is somce decent Open Source CRM software to replace ACT! for Notes, and I could probably drop Notes on it's head! Heck, with all that, I could probably drop Windows on it's head for half the company!

Unfortunately, I may have to go with Exchange proper anyway - the management are planning a Microsoft Project server for centralised project scheduling of many projects and resources, so unless I can get Project server running an non-IIS platform, talking to OGo, or I can find a replacement for Project Server that talks to OGo, I'll be stuck

Bah! Management - what do they know anyway! Can't wait to try OGo out...

Re:Still not good enough for enterprise...

[tzanger]

Let's not put the cart before the horse. Get a solid open-sourced replacement for basic Exchange Server functionality (Contacts, Calendar, Email, etc...) and the add-ons will happen FAST.

Like this? I'm not saying it's perfect (closed source MAPI connector), but everything and I mean everything is stored in pgsql and 99% of it is in plain English. I've just been playing with it these past few days (importing 4000 contacts, about 2500 emails, shared folders, calendars, etc.) and checking it out... works over CORBA. Server runs Python (ick). So far so good though, but man do you need a beefy system (fast disks a necessity!) for this to work. My existing P90 Exchange 5.0 server takes this out (on a dual Cel466) at the knees for speed, but I'm positive it's disk-bound.

Documentation?

[nakhla]

Hmmm...The site seems to be lacking any decent documentation as to functionality. Is this just a drop-in replacement for Exchange? Or, do I have to jump through a bunch of hoops to get Outlook, et al to connect to it?

Re:Documentation?

[saden1]

The first rule of programming.
- You never talking about what we do.

The second rule of programming.
- You never talk about what we want to do.

The third rule of programming.
- You code first then document.

Re:Documentation?

[LoneWolf]

The fourth and final rule of programming.
- You never finish coding.

Re:Documentation?

[koali]

>I thought the first rule of programming was "you don't talk about programming."

No, that's the first rule of "how to attract girls".

Good, but

[grennis]

This is certainly a great step in the right direction, but Microsoft will be releasing their next-generation Titanium Exchange server. The major new feature of Titanium is integrated mobile device support for accessing your calendar, emails, etc.

It sure would be nice to see these features in an open source alternative!

Why always "big enterprise"?

[laetus]

Microsoft didn't start out at the enterprise level. Their apps started small and then they (tried, some people say) to scale them to the enterprise.

I'm glad to see you're at least giving these guys a chance at the "mid-sized" business market.

This is excellent

[heironymouscoward]

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.

Re:This is excellent

[Ciderx]

Don't be daft. If you are a professional, there is no "them" and "us". If you are unable to look at all solutions in terms of their technological prowess, as opposed to engineering some ludicrous political ambition about being "us, not them", then no one should value your opinion in an IT decision of the sort of magnitude of which Groupware product to use.

Re:This is excellent

[civilizedINTENSITY]

If you are an *employed* professional you had better be aware of "them" / "us". Try explaining to your boss at Ford why you authorized the purchase of a fleet of Pontiacs for executive use. "Oh, and we'll be using Chevy vans for delivery."

Note on Outlook compatability

[Zeddicus_Z]

If you notice, the screenies of Outlook are using a plugin called Zidelook. They dont mention whether this is requisite to get full compatibility (i.e. drop-in replacement for exchange), but they DO mention that OpenGroupware base is not compatible with Zidelook.

To use Zidelook, you must use SKYRiX, and "enterprise distribution" of OpenGroupware. I.e. it's a commercial plug-in.

Of course, I could be wrong, but that's just how it reads.

Re:Note on Outlook compatability

[lennart78]

Why you would use a security-hole ridden, payware product to access your mail and calendar, when you're allready on the open source bandwagon is beyond me.

The staying power of Outlook is mostly due to the fact that a lot of companies are hooked on Microsoft products anyway. And I guess it will continue to be that way as long as Exchange keeps outrunning open source groupware alternatives. (Which it probably will for another couple of years, since this is a 1.0 version or something like that.)

Re:Note on Outlook compatability

[a_timid_mouse]

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.

Re:Note on Outlook compatability

[pigeon]

Agreed.. but what would you guys recommend as an outlook replacement for windows? Preferably one that is opensource.. or free... and compatible with opengroupware.

Re:Note on Outlook compatability

[FattMattP]

Why you would use a security-hole ridden, payware product to access your mail and calendar, when you're allready on the open source bandwagon is beyond me.

For several reasons:

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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?
4. 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?

Kroupware/Kolab 1.0

[twener]

Don't forget the Kolab 1.0 server which is supposed to be released during LinuxTag too.

Re:Kroupware/Kolab 1.0

[arendjr]

True, but the required license is only for *Outlook clients*. You're perfectly able to use fully functional KDE clients free of any charge. If you're having Windows/Office clients, $50 for a Bynari plugin won't matter much, especially compared to the prices of Exchange. By the way, you _do_ receive support from Bynari when using their client, but (as is totally logical) it will be just for the client and not for the server.

Overhead?

[grub]

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.

Re:hmmmmm.. comes from LinuxTAG!

[murple]

Sorry, this does not come from LinuxTag. This comes from the SKYRiX Groupware Server by the MDLink company. It was just announced on the LinuxTag convention. I hope it stands to the promises, as a good GPL/LGPL groupware would be a good thing. Murple

VoIP is already covered...

[955301]

There is an open source public branch exchange solution already. Supports SIP phones, conferencing, etc.

Check it out. It's stable, easy to work with, and the mailing list is very active.

WARNING: misuse of terminology in parent post

[ta bu shi da yu]

It's not an insecurity, it's a potential feature that we haven't yet activated.

Get with the program already!

Yours humbly,
Ta bù shì dà yú

Buzzwords

[uradu]

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.

Re:Buzzwords

[MonkeyDluffy]

Also, Outlook Web Access is basically unbeatable.

More like, excretable. I have to use it at work, and it doesn't work right with Mozilla, so I have to use NS4. Admittedly, it could be the morons that administer it screwed it up :(.

-MDL

Re:Buzzwords

[LardLadPA]

More like, excretable. I have to use it at work, and it doesn't work right with Mozilla, so I have to use NS4. Admittedly, it could be the morons that administer it screwed it up

Reverse situation here, the admin morons screwed it up so well that IE won't logon (domain authentication issues) whilst Mozilla works fine. 8-)

Re:Buzzwords

[Asprin]

I have far less groupware experience than some of the other posters, but I want to share this in hopes that others can confirm or refute my opinion that the VALUE of groupware is overrated for many (if not most) organizations.

I have installed GroupWise and Exchange a couple of times as a consultant, as well as managing a mid-size GroupWise network for three years.

My experience is that everyone uses the group features in the beginning (for scheduling, conferences, etc.), but over time very few stick with it. Most of them just go back to using DayMinder and pocket calendars (or, in my case, POST-ITS!) because that's just the way they are wired, and no amount of Blackberry/VoIP/Web-enablement featurism is going to change that fact.

After a year or so, the only people who were still consistently using the group features are the handful of executives who were shopping for it in the first place.

Has anyone else had experiences like that?

Re:Buzzwords

[gi-tux]

My experiences are a little different than yours. Where I presently work, we use Exchange/Outlook for groupware. Some of the folks use it and use it well, however most use it as email (similar to your experience) or because they are forced to use it by their manager.

However, at my previous job, we didn't use a groupware package. We had a real X.500 directory server for addressing within the organization, we had an email system that was best of class that tied to the X.500 DSA, we had a calendaring system that was best of class that tied to the X.500 DSA and the email system (at the server). We had shared email folders via the email server and shared addressbooks via the email server also.

EMail as based on IMAP, SMTP, and IMSP and came from a company then known as Esys, later ExecMail, not sure if they even exist anymore). Their server was basically the same as the cyrus code. The calendar was CorporateTime (later Steltor and now Oracle). We used Palm Pilot handhelds that sync'ed with the calendars just fine. And later even added support for Windows CE (I left there before it was renamed PocketPC but I am sure that it worked as well).

We had about 3500 email users (all the full time employees of the organization) and close to 1000 calendar users (most of the professional and management type employees). We had about 90% of the users actually using the systems. Everyone was given a training class on proper usage of the systems by our in-house training staff and everyone was confident that they knew how to use the systems.

I attribute the usage of the systems to three things. First was training the users to use the systems (not every bell and whistle, but what they needed). Second was the fact that we didn't look for everything in one package, but got the best of class for each individual area. Third was that the packages would actually loosely integrate together.

That is what I would look for today, if I were assigned to get a groupware system together for a company. Unfortunately, with too many people interested in getting everything under one hood, it is getting difficult to get best of class applications. This is true in everything including office suites, office automation (otherwise known as groupware), etc. I have, to this day, never found an email client that I liked as well as the client from ExecMail. It had features that I have never found anywhere else. WordPerfect still tries to fall under my fingers occassionally for WordProcessing (however, I never really liked the rest of their suite.

My search is (hopefully) over!

[invisik]

As a consultant to small- to miz-sized companies, this has been the place where Linux has fallen short of a "complete" server solution. Everyone wants what Exchange can do, but can't break the bank to buy it. And to top it off, the archive is about 20mb!

One concern is the selection of client programs. Most need an additional connector ($) or are less then functional (Mozilla Calendar or the web--people always complain about the web access for some reason). It would be my vote that the new split Mozilla works closely on their calendar features with this project. They have a good start already.

Thanks to all the developers and companies that put OpenGroupware.Org together!!!

-m

The problem is not techical its social

[Advocadus Diaboli]

I'm working for a "big enterprise" firm and we tried out Groupware several times. All the projects more or less failed not because of technical problems, the real problem is that using Groupware also means that the user has to be "open-minded". Our users unnfortuantely were afraid that by using Groupware others could do some "data mining" on their work and that they have no secrets anymore. Everybody could see what they are working on, how much they do and so on. And they didn't want that. As long as people don't want to share their knowledge and data about their actual jobs you won't get Groupware working, no matter if its proprietary Groupware solutions or OpenGroupware.

Independence Day

[micaiah]

Our IT department is chearing. We can see President Thomas J. Whitmore declaring, "this...... is our Independence Day!!!!!!"

Re:Good, but...secure?

[DrWho520]

How secure is a system like that? Where I work, you cannot have a PDA that has any form of wireless connectivity because of security concerns. Security would even like to keep people from bringing their cell phones in to work. I finally got a nice job and I cannot even get my cell phone / PDA.

Another groupware project - cool!

[t482]

There are two definitions of groupware in the industry. The Microsoft one: groupware consists of email with some additional productivity: Calendar, Mail, and basic forms(which are hardly ever used). And the IBM Lotus one: groupware consists of database forms for routing and document management and email.

Competing with the Outlook definition:
OS foundations Chandler (Calendar focused)
Mozilla Mail (+calendar proj)
Evolution
Open Groupware
kmail/KGroupware


And from the Lotus Perspective:
www.phpgroupware.org
zope
OpenACS
And Lotus Domino which runs on Linux. The client works fine in wine or crossover - but is not officially supported.

I wonder if they can still

[Phil John]

check their e-mail/calendar/appointments even though their site is slashdotted? ;o)

Alternative: Open source web based groupware

[Anonymous Coward]

Check Convea (http://www.convea.com) which is a great open source web based groupware product (currently supports MS platform only with Linux / Moz version in development).

Re:compatabilty

[Trigun]

Been there, done that, got the t-shirt.

Hylafax could be set up to do that easily, and has been.

huzzah!

[Machine9]

now I'll finally be able to realize my dream of having an Exchange-like structure where I work...

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)

Middle America, here we come!

[scottymonkeypants]

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.

Re:OpenSSL rip....

[triptolemeus]

And they credit them for it. Just mouse over the logo. (or do as I did, wait for /. effect and look at the alt text while waiting for the page to load)

define requirements

[cascadingstylesheet]

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 ;)

Oracle are you watching?

[micaiah]

We just purchased Oracle's collaboration suite for various reasons. One thing that Oracle needs improvement on is the web interface. Why, because it totally sucks! A high school web development class could do a better job. IMHO, what Oracle needs to do is borrow the code from OpenGroupware's web interface and then give back something. Just like Apple did with Safari/Konqueror.

Lotus

[dmaxwell]

But in most cases, Microsoft was the first to do these things.

I believe Lotus was a full blown groupware suite before Outlook. For all I know, maybe even Lotus wasn't the first. MS is rarely the first to do anything; they are masters at co-opting other proprietary vendors innovations....then claiming them for their own.

Re:Lotus

[good soldier svejk]

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.

Re:Lotus

[I_M_Noman]

I believe Lotus was a full blown groupware suite before Outlook. For all I know, maybe even Lotus wasn't the first.

AFAIK, Notes was first (ca. '89 or so). I think Novell's Groupwise was second.

Interoperability with MS

[pubjames]

I hate the fact that so much effort is going into interoperability with MS. That includes OpenOffice too.

I think this idea of having a "drop in" replacement for Exchange is just nuts. Do you think the Apache project would have gotten to where it is today if they decided what they had to do was a "drop in" replacement for IIS? (Yes, I know the chronology of metaphor is skewy, but you know what I'm trying to say).

What we should be concentrating on is making the best possible tool for the job, not making it compatible with existing close-source software. That's the only way to win in the long term.

Evolution must have Connector??

[Bates]

Umm.... Why do I have to use a closed source plugin to connect an open source client to an open source server?

Re:Evolution must have Connector??

[mshiltonj]

Why do I have to use a closed source plugin to connect an open source client to an open source server?

Step 3. PROFIT!

Has anyone actually tried installing it yet?

[babbage]

I'm trying to give this a whirl on my Mac, and am getting exactly nowhere. The README file just says

- for build instructions, go to the developer section on
http://www.opengroupware.org/

But the (apparently) relevant page on their site is just a walkthrough of the major system components, with a note saying

Note that OpenGroupware.org packages are different to SKYRiX ones and do not contain any autoconfiguration, so you need to do some steps on your own.

We are going to improve that section over the next days, stay tuned.

Which means that, apparently, the old ./configure && make && make test && sudo make install is unlikely to work here.

So -- has anyone tried this yet? Has anyone tried it on a non-Linux machine?

Make a new protocol...

[_Brazil_]

Exchange has nothing to be proud of!!
Exchange is a horrible product... The groupware calendar sharing isn't even real time. Updates are sent in the message queue. I hate Exchange... people are stupid... The only reason it does well is the same reason people buy a combo TV/VCR/DVD/DirecTV/Tivo that is all together... It's simple if it's all in one package.

I think the answer to Groupware problem is not new software; but to create a new protocol standard. Something to replace in a groupware environment by either have many servers that talk with the new protocol... or you can still have the one server that does it all.

The combo idea should only be in the protocol.

I think the protocol should be some kind of query protocol...

A new protocol is needed for many reasons right now anyway. People want to make a new e-mail protocol to make sure we never see spam again. LDAP is good for contacts; if you don't ever want to update it. I think it's dumb to make a Calendar file format. (MS was one of the main developers in the iCal standard by the way.)

It would be no problem to run a web, WAP, VoIP, or whatever service you want to add... just as long as it ask for you centralized information...

Okay... I said enough... maybe I shouldn't be sharing this great idea with all of you...

-Brazil

Oh... make be in XML too..

Re:Make a new protocol...

[nagora]

Exchange has nothing to be proud of!! Exchange is a horrible product...

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

Only part of Oracle Collab Suite

[Lysol]

I'm not necessairly a fan of Oracle and I'm definitely no fan of Exchange (out of experience), but I watched a little Oracle Collaboration Suite marketing demo on their site and for a moment, just a moment, I put myself in a biz guy frame of mind and thought "wow, that actually looks pretty kick ass". They have it intergrated not only with pda/phone but also with voice commands - everything. The whole enchalada.

Of course, I have no idea about the stability, hardware costs, and licenses. But, it seems as tho Oracle is already ahead of Titanium - not that that matters much to M$ customers. Still interesting nonetheless.

While I commend the Opengroupware product, I'm not too sure when the OS community will be able to come up with something like the Oracle Collab Suite. Not that they have to, but I guess biz types will be looking for features that exist in a shrink wrapped solution.

Their acronym is a letter off

[The Wicked Priest]

It should be "EGo".

Oh my god!!

[Gads]

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.

Why use Exchange as the template?

[Moderation abuser]

Exchange really isn't very good at groupware. It does nice calendaring, but calendaring isn't groupware. It's also very rigid in terms of functionality and not terribly flexible.

Notes would be a better template for a groupware solution. From a server point of view anyway.

Yes, I was wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

Starting with the launch of OpenGroupware.org, SKYRiX becomes an enterprise distribution of the OpenGroupware.org software...

The SKYRiX distribution also includes some additional software which is not available as part of the OpenGroupware.org project
[snip]
Outlook Support for ZideStore

So it is not Open Source. However the OGo wire protocol is documented & available; so it is possible to write an Open Source Outlook plugin that can interface to OGo. Now wether someone does that is another matter (No one has written any Outlook plugins for any other OSS groupware projects yet).

Exchange performance...

[ites]

Oh yeah, forgot this gem.
We were testing an email application. Send a thousand emails to a tiny free email server on Windows, it swallows and asks for more. Send a thousand emails to our Linux box, it blinks and says 'yeah, so what?' Send a thousand emails to the departmental Exchange server... it crashes and IT support screams at us for 'overloading' their box. Just cracks me up.

Another choice

[Ded Bob]

more.groupware is another Open Source project for web-based groupware.

Drop-in replacement?

[tadas]

To me, a drop-in replacement for Exchange server means that I can move all of my users' mailboxes, public folders, etc. to the new server, using something like System Manager. A drop-in will also let me replicate public folders, pick up email addresses, etc. from Active Directory, etc. etc. All I would need to do is point the Outlook clients to the new "exchange server".

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.

Re:Drop-in replacement?

[iSwitched]

I've been looking for a spot to shout "The emperor has no clothes!" This post seemed appropriate in that I was able to view the site, and read the FAQ. And while I applaud this effort and wish it every success, this is NOT an Exchange Take-out... Yet.

Every place I've ever worked for the past 6 years has had an Exchange server, and at each company, the email and calendaring features were the most used. I am no fan of Exchange, or any MS product, but Exchange does provide a certain baseline of service, right out of the box, which take relatively little experience to get running (if we ignore security concerns in our example).

This product requires the installation and configuration of a separate email server, and client connectors for Outlook. Sounds like a bit of work to me, just to get the integrated email and calendar provided by Exchange. I know most mid-sized companies would love to get off the MS-license-treadmill, but they're not gonna trash their business or hire new staff to do it.

In my opinion, you've hit the nail on the head with your comment. If you want to take out Exchange, you have to provide everything in a single, nearly brain-dead install, as well as provide migration paths for ALL of the current Excange data, plus turn-key client support. What I've read of this project indicates that this is not the case. In sum, this may be a very handy groupware server, with capabilities beyond Exchanges, but it isn't yet the David that will remove Goliath!

10 max ftp users?

[the_rev_matt]

Now that's an enterprise ready organization. Maybe I'll try back in a few hours. Or maybe I'll have forgotten by then. Fortunately, /. will remind me by posting a dupe of this in the next few days (it's just a joke, sheesh!).

A touch niche to break into...

[thefoobar]

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.

Re:A touch niche to break into...

[Abcd1234]

And why? Because it's Open Source? That is no reason to throw previously invested money out the window.

I think you're forgetting that it is possible that an MS Exchange outfit may very well have a higher TCO than an open source solution. As a result, companies may choose to switch simply because it's cost effective. For example, suppose it cost you x to switch over to another system, but in the long run, it'll save you 2x every year. Sounds like a great deal to me. After all, it's arguments like this that are allowing Linux to displace more proprietary solutions in the rest of the server space... why can't groupware be the same?

Re:A touch niche to break into...

[PsychoKiller]

And why? Because it's Open Source? That is no reason to throw previously invested money out the window.

Actually, that is not true. Previously invested money should have no bearing on decision making.

If you take any economics courses, that is usually something that is covered early on. People have this instinct to worry about money that has been spent already, but logically it is wrong to do so.

You need to do the math to see if the future value of using an alternate solution is greater than the current one.

Look at Notes 6...

[sean.peters]

You're right about the functionality difference between Notes and Exchange - Notes wins hands down. Also, the latest version of Notes fixes most of the "ugly interface" issues previous versions suffered from. Another bonus: if you don't like the look, or even the functionality... you can change it. The folks at OpenNTF have even released an open source version of the template that looks/acts like MS Outlook on steroids.

This is not your father's Notes.

Sean

P.S. I have no business connection with IBM/Lotus... just a fan.

Re:"The circle widens"

[pmz]

"Linux"

It is important for us to make a more general distinction between those things from Microsoft and those things not from Microsoft. In a healthy market, we should be able to focus on going end-to-end with any OS, given that it supports the necessary standards.

Linux is simply an option. A very good option, but by far not the only one. We need choice more than anything else, lest we stagnate once more.

This still costs $$$$$ to connect outlook clients!

[No-op]

If you read the FAQ, they mention that the ZideStore server is open-source, but the Zidelook plugin for Outlook is *NOT*. that's what maps the MAPI calls to WebDAV calls, and is the part you would really want to have for free.

So this is really just another half-assed payware product. ugh. I hate exchange, I want it's abomination gone, but I'm not going to replace it unless it's with something free, open and stable.

If I'm going to buy closed source products from someone, it's going to be from somewhere that at least HAS a QA department...

Re:Asterisk and SIP phones

[Jsprat23]

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.

OpenGroupware live CD with German Linux Mag

[PsyQ]

If you buy the current issue of Linux Magazin (Germany), you'll get a bootable Knoppix CD where OpenGroupware with all its components (PostgreSQL, Cyrus-IMAP etc.) is already set up and ready to use. You can try almost all the features, so you see what you'd be getting without having to spend the hour or so required to set things up on a fresh server.

Looks like this is exactly what we've been looking for all this time, and Skyrix will offer commercial support for the package as well as nifty add-ons (that cost some money).

FC Admins may feel otherwise

[ehintz]

I sure do. The UI for FC is sweet, but the back end server is a mess. We migrated off to Lotus last year, because FC was so far behind the curve. From a user point of veiw FC was great, but from the admin side it could be extremely painful to deal with(for instance, client level mail filtering was just implemented in the last year, well after we migrated; they were way behind the curve on that one, so spam filtering was rather more difficult-the gateway could tag it but the client couldn't use that information to dump it somewhere). All that being said, for a small company or some such it might be useful still; the good part is the server end was generally fairly robust(though feature poor and several years behind modern) so the admin needs were infrequent.

power to 'em

[Anonymous Coward]

if you want to use proprietary crap like outlook in your enterprise, you wont balk at using some other small peices of proprietary software to get your servers on something more stable than the crap from MS.

Re:How about finish *one* first?

[Alowishus]

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.

Exchange replacement is hard

[ErikJson]

We're trying to replace Exchange where I work and I've been involved in the process. I suppose it all depends on which features of exchange you want to replace. The main problem, I think, is Outlook. Outlook is hard to talk to. We would like to be able to use other clients along with Outlook (Mozilla and Moz Calendar, some web-based service maybe, Evolution, etc).

But Outlook has to stay. Primarily because no other application is able to do synchronization with PDA:s (both PocketPC and Palm devices) in a decent way. It's a shame that such a basic feature seems so hard to implement in OSS clients.

Mail is easy to replace. Exchange already supports IMAP, and throwing in an OSS IMAP-server (Cyrus for example) is a piece of cake. Tell everyone to configure Outlook to use the new IMAP-server and you're done.

Address book functionality _should_ work with an LDAP-server like OpenLDAP. Read this.

The calendar thing is the hard part. Outlook supports publishing iCalendar data via WebDAV and FTP, but that's just FREEBUSY-info wich Mozilla Calendar ignores, and Mozilla publishes complete iCal-events which Outlook ignores. Great. Sure, there are closed source plug-ins for Outlook that could do the job, but we're after a completely open source solution at the server end.

I think we're going to replace what we can anyway and just skip the calendar part right now. Hopefully some software will evolve that we can drop in for a complete calendar solution some time in the near future.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Esys / Execmail

[rickmoen]

gi-tux wrote:

EMail was based on IMAP, SMTP, and IMSP and came from a company then known as Esys, later ExecMail, not sure if they even exist anymore).

Originally it was called "Simeon" (MUA and MTA pieces), from Canadian firm Esys. Then it was Execmail from Execmail, Inc. Then, there were some mergers involving companies called Isode and Messaging Direct, Inc. (one of which may now own the other; I forget).

In any event, that firm now owns the rights, and could resell it if it wished, but has apparently discontinued the product, as they're no longer in that business.

Rick Moen
rick@linuxmafia.com

It doesn't run on windows

[unoengborg]

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.

Reply from OGo regarding Outlook functionality

[Plug]

> I'm sure you've heard this a million times, but the biggest concern
> people will have is how to make Outlook interoperate with
> OpenGroupware.org.

Yes. I would like to point out that OGo is one of the very few
solutions which provide a full MAPI storage provider (aka live access)
instead of just a sync.

> Is the ZideLook plugin free?

No.

> If not, what are the
> licensing costs

AFAIK about EUR 55, depending on the number of users. For exact
information contact sales@skyrix.de.

> and would SKYRiX consider making the plugin free?

We would like to, but we don't own the plugin. It was developed by a
partner of SKYRiX which needs to get back his investment.

regards,
Helge
--
OpenGroupware.org - http://www.opengroupware.org/

when are we going to learn?

[scottking]

you want to replace exchange, there is only one way:

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.

Re:Insecurity: A Bogus Objection

[TeraCo]

http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/286254 http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/43307 http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/11901 http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/6968 Here be bugtraq references to exploits.