Linked by David Adams on Thu 28th Aug 2008 17:51 UTC, submitted by stonyandcher
Features, Office Everyone knows that Microsoft Exchange is expensive - but ubiquitous " and plenty of open source projects and vendors have been trying a variety of technical approaches to replace it. While none is yet a drop-in replacement, a PC World article looks at ways that some administrators can get a cost advantage by switching.
Thread beginning with comment 328502
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: My answer is a no.
by voidlogic on Fri 29th Aug 2008 13:49 UTC in reply to "My answer is a no."
voidlogic
Member since:
2005-09-03

>1) web ui is sluggish and slow, and the "desktop" client is an entire webapp server distribution etc. WAY WAY hefty.



>2) Its built on common unix mailers and packages etc (yeah I guess it could be a positive and a negative, however I consider it mostly a negative)

You must be refering to the use of postfix, the more modern, faster, easy-to-administer, and secure alternative to sendmail. I think postfix is a far better than MTA functionality of exchange. There is the added advantage that any scripts I had for postfix can be used with Zimbra.


>3) Licensing and pricing is f--king out of control.

This seems like FUD to me, I have seem the pricing they offered a local school for the network ed. (comes with 24/7 support) and it was very good.
You are forgetting it is opensource, my company pays nothing. Since each member of the zimbra stack (which are by no means exotic), as well zimbra itself have large communites, the organization with a competent UNIX staff does not necessarily require the network ed.

>4) Configs, startup scripts are fragile as hell, and the server would eat resources until ultimately it'd stop accepting connections.

I have found the setup robust and have never seen this kind of problems on my servers, so I am inclined to consider user(-admin) error as a factor here.

>5) Load balancing, Backup procedures etc are assinine, even for the commercially supported version.

I wrote my own backup solution for the community ed. so I can't comment on that. But in my experience a zimbra server can handle many times the load of an exchange server.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: My answer is a no.
by zombie process on Fri 29th Aug 2008 14:39 in reply to "RE: My answer is a no."
zombie process Member since:
2005-07-08

Can you imagine what managing postfix is like for someone who has been a windows jockey their entire career? It's no surprise at all to me that exchange admins wouldn't care for it. I'll admit that I worked on sendmail for years before ever touching postfix, and do find postfix to be a better alternative for security and scalability, but I have yes to see/understand the "easier to manage" aspects of it. As far as I'm concerned, both are equally as confusing. And yes, I'm down and dirty on the CLI with vim, not using some gui frontend for either.

Edited 2008-08-29 14:39 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: My answer is a no.
by Soulbender on Fri 29th Aug 2008 14:47 in reply to "RE[2]: My answer is a no."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Can you imagine what managing postfix is like for someone who has been a windows jockey their entire career?


It's obvious you have never used Zimbra.
You don't have to manage postfix, everything (except if you WANT to go hardcore) is managed with a web interface. No CLI or vim skills required.

Reply Parent Score: 3