[NTLUG:Discuss] RE: Messaging system & support

[Cameron, Thomas]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces at ntlug.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at ntlug.org]On
> Behalf Of Bryan J. Smith
> Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 1:30 PM
> To: NTLUG Discussion List
> Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] RE: Messaging system & support
> 
> 
> 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.

Really?  Is that how that works?  Thanks for clearing that up.

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

Thanks for clarifying this - I certainly need to be spoken to "in layman's terms."  I'm not terribly technical, you know, and apparently neither is the rest of the list.

> 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?"

I guess in my case the question is more "will it do everything I want without the security and stability problems, and without having to pay the insane licensing fees MS charges."

> 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?

If it does the main functions of Exchange (mail, shared calendars, tasks, etc.) and it's 20% the price, it's probably worth looking into.  As I said in my initial post, I just saw the presentation, I haven't tested the product.

> 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.  

I'm curious how you know that.

> Bynari gave up
> quickly, and no one else looked at doing the same.
> 
> And OpenGroupware.ORG also offers iCal _now_.  So why pay and wait for
> it?

I was making a suggestion for a commercially supported Exchange replacement.  OpenGroupware.org looks great, but I don't find any professional support for it locally.

> > 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.

Yeah.

> 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?

Umm, support.  Not all of us are as brilliant as you, so we occasionally need to ask for help.

> > Kerio also presented a strong product.
> 
> But what are you really paying for?  

Support.  I think that the OP made clear that they were looking for up to 24/7/365 support.

> 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?

Different philosophies.  When I make a recommendation I factor in general functionality and availability/responsiveness of the vendor.  Using mailing lists and newsgroups simply doesn't cut it if a business relies on a product.  Messaging and calendaring are core needs of many (if not most) businesses.  I'm not typically going to tell someone to rely on a product for their communication that I can't pick up the phone and talk to tech support.

> 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.

Agreed.

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

Horse feathers.  Whether or not a system "needs" support - i.e. it breaks - you should be able to get 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).

I could make the argument that a 120-user Exchange 5.5 installation that I did back when 5.5 was brand spanking new is still running with almost no support.  The noise about Exchange being so fragile is only partially correct.  It is fragile if it is not designed and implemented correctly.  In most cases, the worst Exchange nightmares that I've seen have been due to some schmuck who just clicks "next, next, next" on the install with no clue what is actually going on.  I deployed Exchange 2000 for 6000 users across 20 sites in Angola, Africa.  We planned and designed it well, trained the local IT staff correctly and now it Just Works(TM).

> Couldn't say that about Exchange 2000 even with a half dozen users.

I can.

> And don't get me started on the clusterfsck upgrade with Exchange
> 2003.

I've done very successful upgrades to Exchange 2003 and Windows 2003 at the same time to take advantage of native mode for both.  It's all about planning, design, countless simulations and appropriate follow-through.

> 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.

Great - it definitely bears further investigation.

> 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?"

You have different needs and skill level from most small IT shops.

-- snip --

> -- 
>      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

Please have a look at http://www.sideroad.com/Netiquette/signature-files.html and http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/signatur.html and http://www.onlinenetiquette.com/signature_file_use.html.  Seriously.


-- 
Thomas Cameron, RHCE, CNE, MCSE, MCT
Assistant Vice President
Linux Design and Engineering
Bank of America
(972) 997-9641

The opinions expressed in this message to not necessarily reflect those of my employer, Bank of America.