[NTLUG:Discuss] RE: Messaging system & support

[Bryan J. Smith]

On Thu, 2004-08-12 at 14:08, Cameron, Thomas wrote:
> I met the CEO of Scalix (www.scalix.com), Julie Farris, at LinuxWorld Expo.
> Her presentation led me to believe that Scalix is a drop-in Exchange
> replacement.  She indicated that Scalix servers could either co-exist
> with Exchange servers or replace them completely.

Actually, any mail server that provides a MAPI Service Provider to the
MAPI subsystem of the underlying Windows OS can co-exist with any other
MAPI SP.  In reverse, Outlook talks to the Windows OS, the Windows OS
provides the MAPI subsystem, and the MAPI SPs provided the connection
the individual stores of the servers.

In layman terms, this is Outlook in "Corporate E-mail Mode."
The MAPI SPs for each server is defined under "Services."

I looked at their site.  They look like the provide what every other
commercial contacts/calendaring back-end does.  I have to look deeper
about the "co-existence" -- but it sounds like the standard party line.
They have a web interface that looks like Outlook, which is goiod.

The _real_ question is, "Is the back-end open?
Or just open interfaces into our proprietary back-end?"

Furthermore, there is this note on the Evolution Connector page:  
  "Support for Mozilla Browser, Ximian Evolution and Outlook 2003
  will be available later this summer."

So it's "not there yet" as far as:  
1)  An Evolution Connector, and
2)  An iCal interface (Mozilla Calendar, Apple iCal, etc...)

And how much do you get to pay for that?

In defense of Scalix, before Novell's purchase of Ximian, Ximian had a
nasty habit of breaking any 3rd party connector.  E.g., Bynari released
a version of InsightConnector for Evolution, so Outlook and Evolution
could read Insight's "enhanced, non-email store" for IMAP.  That would
mean you wouldn't buy Ximian's $79 connector anymore, and just use
Bynari's at about $25/pop.

Ximian broke it in quick order, and quite purposely.  Bynari gave up
quickly, and no one else looked at doing the same.

But now that Novell considers Evolution "just a client," and Groupwise
is its "major value-add," they GPL'd Ximian's Exchange Connector.  So
now everyone is making Evolution connectors, because it's open for the
modification/support.

SKYRiX just modified its ZideLook Server-Side store to work with
Evolution as well as Outlook in version 4.x, and now the version 4.1
implementation is available in the open soruce OpenGroupware.ORG -- no
other software needed for Evolution (but you _do_ need the MAPI-SP or
XML-RPC connector for Outlook).  Although you do need to watch what
version of Evolution you are running, because each new version seems to
introduce quirks (1.2 is solid, 1.4 seems to be very good now too).

And OpenGroupware.ORG also offers iCal _now_.  So why pay and wait for
it?

> I have not had a chance to pursue this but Scalix looks pretty darned
> good.

There's lots of options that look good on the surface.
But what they say on-site doesn't seem to be actually implemented yet.

I don't know the system, but just the technologies referenced and
shown on their site.  I'm trying to figure out what I'm paying for
versus just using something like OpenGroupware.ORG?

> Kerio also presented a strong product.

With Novell's GPL'ing of the Evolution connector, everying is now
touting a collaboration server that not only offers "standards-compliant
interface," but "_full_ Outlook _and_ Evolution" support.

But what are you really paying for?  And how "open" is the back-end?
Is it just for an Outlook Web Access (OWA) similar web interface?
Or the promise of Evolution connector and iCal integration?

That's the questions you have to ask yourself.
And sometimes, you're really only paying for support.
If you have that relationship, that's cool.
But then you have SKYRiX as an option.

But at the same time, these systems shouldn't need support.

I install the HP OpenMail product in early 2000 for 50 users.
I was laid off with 3/4ths of the company in 2001.
The product is _still_working_ with 0 support staff for 12 users.
The damn thing works and works and works on some really low-end
hardware -- only the MAPI SP breaks (all MAPI SPs do, it's the
Windows client, not the server).

Couldn't say that about Exchange 2000 even with a half dozen users.
And don't get me started on the clusterfsck upgrade with Exchange
2003.

I seen similar reliability I had with HP OpenMail with
OpenGroupware.ORG thus far.  Only it now offers an open backend
with more interface options -- options other commercial companies
are only _now_ promising to offer.

All I have to do is pay for MAPI-SP or XML-RPC connectors for Outlook.
I have it running with Evolution _now_, not waiting for the vendor.
So these companies really need to sell me on, "what more does it do?"

Heck, sometimes just Bynari InsightConnector to a regular IMAP server
does the job -- no "heafty back-end."


-- 
     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