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

Sure, but...

[AntiOrganic]

Does it have menu shadows? :(

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?

[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?

[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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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).

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.