The article's example scales out to 50k seats, with the example server still
running that on a single box. Groupwise documentation indicates it can scale
to 10k users per server, it also doesn't appear to run on any flavor of
*nix. Didn't forget about it per se, just thought it was unlikely to be the
groupware application running on the config mentioned in the article.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rocky Stefano
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 9/15/2001 12:52 PM
Subject: RE: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange
You'er forgetting about GroupWise 5/6. Also runs on NT and can scale
with
clusters, either NT or Netware.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scharff, Chris
Sent: September 15, 2001 1:43 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange
I was thinking that perhaps they might have been talkign about Insight
Groupware from Bynari (http://www.bynari.net/), but I find it interesting
they didn't bother to go into details or specifics at all.
2 years ago I worked as part fo an implementation team migrating 8,000 users
from MSMail to Exchange and from personal experience I can say that there
are a whole host of numbers which have been left out of this "TCO" analysis.
How much does it cost to deploy a client to the desktop.. are there training
materials for this suite, whatever it is? If so, how does the learning curve
compare to Exchange. <Insert 100 other cost related questions here>
The only other possible decent collaborative mail solutions I can think of
offhand which can scale to the sizes discussed in the article are OpenMail
and Domino. If it's OpenMail, one wonders what crack the author was on to
implement a product whose end of life cycle has been announced and if it's
Domino, the administrative costs listed are completely off base IMHO.
BTW, on the off chance it was Bynari I went to their website to see if I
could download a demo version of the client and server to install on my
Linux box. Can't seem to find one unfortunately.
-----Original Message-----
From: Glenn Corbett
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 9/15/2001 5:53 AM
Subject: Re: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange
Chris,
My additional assumption would be:
h. Linux has an equivalent mail system to that of Exchange.
Whilst all these numbers may be great to throw around (and based on the
publisher they are biased towards a Linux implementation), the real
question
is "does Linux have a mail system that could go head-to-head, or
toe-to-toe
with Exchange" ??
So far, the mail systems / packages / collection of unrelated
applications
on Linux that I've seen doesn't come close to what the Microsoft
Exchange
system offers. Most of the solutions seem to revolve around web-based or
POP3, IMAP4 clients.
Yes, there is web-based email for Linux, but no, most Exchange installs
don't use this as the primary client.
Yes, Exchange supports POP3, IMAP, but no, most exchange installs use
the
Outlook client, not Outlook Express.
Looking at TCO number for servers and licensing is great, and is
something
that should be done regularly to ensure your company is receiving value
for
money, but unless the resulting solution provides the necessary
functionality, what is the point ?
I'll be the first to admit that I'm not 100% up on the offerings from
the
Linux community, but after recent investigations looking for a
replacement
for Exchange on the Linux platform for some smaller companies who see
the
cost of Exchange as prohibitive, I was unable to locate a complete
solution
that offered the same functionality. If someone would like to point me
to
such a solution, then maybe we can have a discussion about the TCO
numbers /
relative merits of such a solution.
Glenn.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scharff, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:39 PM
Subject: RE: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange
> It's amazingly accurate if the following assumtions are made:
> a. bandwidth is unlimited
> b. bandwidth is free
> c. MCSEs are all paper
> d. Unix admins are all rocket scientists
> e. The Unix community if full of messaging experts who are willing to
drop
> everything to run to the aid of anyone with a software issue.
> f. The exchange community is not.
> g. morons were hired to design the Exchange infrastructure
>
> I'd like the specs on Jimmy's Groupware application though. The T in
TCO
> includes more than what he's listed... I'd like to see how the product
> enhances productivity in the Enterprise. That certainly has to be
factored
> in unless you're a SSM who isn't aware of how what they do and the
services
> they provide effects the bottom line.
>
> BTW, "Jimmy went out of his way to be fair to the Exchange/PC
solution,
> since the industry average is 350 mailboxes per server" is a perfect
example
> of zealotry blotting out rational thought processes.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Razler
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Sent: 9/13/2001 6:35 PM
> Subject: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange
>
> Hello:
>
> I am not advocating either side. I am just providing this as
> some
> related reading for Exchange Admins. Maybe you can even comment on it
> and
> let the rest of us know if you disagree with it and why.
>
> http://consultingtimes.com/Serverheist.html
_________________________________________________________________
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
