[NTLUG:Discuss] Re: Messaging system & support -- understand technologies, not products

[Bryan J. Smith]

[a friend] wrote:
> I have no problem finding people to install and support Exchange,

If you look, you'll find:
- Bynari has its Insight products and partners with IBM
- Novell has their Groupwise
- Novell GPL'd SuSE OpenExchange
- SKYRiX's (http://www.skyrix.com) hast their v5 Server
  (OpenGroupware.org is SKYRiX v4.1)

Don't offer an "Exchange replacement" for the sake of "anything but
Microsoft."  Many "Exchange replacements" are _very_proprietary_ and
_no_better_.

Furthermore, there is no such thing as a "free Outlook connector" --
you'll either pay for it by using a proprietary server (Groupwise),
proprietary store (InsightConnector) or an open store
(OpenGroupware.org/SKYRiX5, OpenExchange) with proprietary connectors
(e.g., SKYRiX ZideLook and OpenExchange doesn't have one yet).

I am really pushing clients to go the OpenGroupware.ORG route, and then
purchase the SKYRiX ZideLook Connector for Outlook for those users that
want Outlook integration.  The ZideLook connectors to Outlook (non-free)
and Evolution (GPL thanx to Novell) offer _full_Exchange_
_equivalent_features_.  This is great for Linux desktop shops, GPL
(although newer Evolution/connector releases may have issues that slowly
get worked out for OGo1/SKYRiX4.1).

The cool thing about OpenGroupware.ORG is that the backend is _open_ and
offers _lots_ of connectivity options (iCal, Connector, XML-RPC, Web,
etc...).  Surprisingly I've had good success with users using Mozilla
Calendaring, Apple iCal and just the web front end (they like it better
than Outlook Web Access, OWA).  So that's a "reduced feature" option,
but one to still consider.

SuSE's OpenExchange.ORG _should_ soon, but there is _no_ Outlook
Connector for it at this time (probably soon, after the GPL transition
is worked out) and it _will_ be proprietary.  So no different than
OpenGroupware.ORG/SKYRiX SideLook.

Again, if I did not make myself clear enough, there is _no_ "free
speech" Outlook connector for anything, _period_.  The only time I saw a
"free beer" one was back when HP offered the 50-license OpenMail in
1999-2000, which had a MAPI Service Provider (MAPI-SP = 12-year old LAN
Manager technology = crash happy).  But then OpenMail had a
_proprietary_ server back-end.

With OGo (and OpenXCH soon), we don't have that problem anymore.  But
you still have to pay for Outlook.  It's only fair, run a proprietary
client with licensed libraries, you have to compensate the vendor who
licenses those libraries so they can connect.

For a _deeper_ discussion, although it's a bit dated now (doesn't
include the SuSE OpenExchange GPL'ing), see:  
http://lists.leap-cf.org/pipermail/leaplist/2004-March/038122.html  

I really need to write a formal FAQ on this stuff, no one else has one.
  
Robert Citek wrote:
> Any ideas?  Specifically:
>   - What other products offer built-in (or nearly built-in) Calendaring?
>   - Any opinions on SLOX?
>   - Is there any reason not to use Exchange?
>   - What other questions should my friend be asking?

I've supported Exchange since 1996.  I _refuse_ to support it as of
2000.  Why?  It's more than just the fact that the back-end is
proprietary.  Lots of vendors have that problem, even SuSE (until Novell
GPL'd it recently).  It's even more than the fact that they use "I
corrupt on a pin-drop" MS Access tables (although newer versions
_finally_ use SQL, although it's still MS Access ODBC-like ;-).  That's
bad enough on their own.

But I discovered an RFC822 non-compliance in Exchange 5.5's ESMTP
service in 2000, one that allowed me to crash my server, and Microsoft
painted me like a "hacker" (I was only debugging an issue with a piece
of problem tracking software that used the service), I got really turned
off.  I refused to support that system any longer.

The same RFC822 non-compliance I discovered (among others who had been
"detered" from reporting it to CERT) had a _global_ "script kiddie"
exploit available in 2001 for not only Exchange 5.5, but 2000 as well. 
There were 2 others, including one for Exchange 2003 recently.  When
that one came out, it also became possible to get
_full_administrator_control_ of Exchange 5.5 and 2000 (but not 2003)
with the same, ESMTP service access.

When I was at a Fortune 20 company last fall, it was funny to see how
many Microsoft people were now "happy" to talk to me about what I found
back in 2000.

I temporarily switched to OpenMail which is _still_ in production almost
5 years later (hasn't been touched).

I have worked with Bynari InsightConnector solution to store non-email
data over IMAP, which makes the Outlook client _far_more_stable_ than
via a MAPI Service Provider.  On an IBM "big iron" this is very, very
robust, but even to a UW IMAP server, it's perfect for most SMBs.

I have more recently been deploying OpenGroupware.ORG with SKYRiX
licenses for Outlook.  More and more of my clients want to use a web
front-end anyway, and several are already running GNOME and Evolution as
their desktop.  So is the best solution.

Once Novell starts releasing commercial Outlook connectors for SuSE
OpenExchange (again, the current GPL release has none, even though the
previous commercial OpenExchange releases had them -- so it shouldn't be
long), I will re-evaluate.  But since this solution will compete with
Novell's own Groupwise, you _know_ they will limit its commercial
capabilities.  We'll see (Novell has done GPL proud so far).

Again, I'm extremely impressed with the "options" in the
OpenGroupware.ORG approach.  You've got a web front-end, the simple iCal
interfaces and the more advanced ZideLook store for Outlook (commercial
connector) and Evolution (GPL connector).  So it'll take me a lot to
switch.  

-- Bryan J. Smith
   Independent Consultant, Trainer and CMP/MacMillan Writer
   Local to Orlando, FL (but I'm open to travel)
   (407) 489-7013  (Mobile)


-- 
     Linux Enthusiasts call me anti-Linux.
   Windows Enthusisats call me anti-Microsoft.
 They both must be correct because I have over a
decade of experience with both in mission critical
environments, resulting in a bigotry dedicated to
 mitigating risk and focusing on technologies ...
           not products or vendors
--------------------------------------------------
Bryan J. Smith, E.I.         b.j.smith at ieee.org
-- 
     Linux Enthusiasts call me anti-Linux.
   Windows Enthusisats call me anti-Microsoft.
 They both must be correct because I have over a
decade of experience with both in mission critical
environments, resulting in a bigotry dedicated to
 mitigating risk and focusing on technologies ...
           not products or vendors
--------------------------------------------------
Bryan J. Smith, E.I.         b.j.smith at ieee.org