Why in the world would you not make this a seamless service? To not do so effectively ruins any advantages of going this route (splitting mailboxes between Exchange and POP/IMAP systems depending on level of service required)
And besides, it is a cakewalk to do in Exchange or go buy yourself the Bat book from OReilly and configure it that way. Come on. > We provide Exchange for $9.95 per month per mailbox. We also provide = > Imail (POP3/IMAP) as a part of Web hosting or SQL DB hosting package. > > We do not split a customer's domain name between Exchange and Imail. To = > have a seamless service, all mailboxes have to be either on Exchange or = > on Imail. Yes, we could design all kinds of forwarding tricks, but = > that's too much overhead if one is dealing with tens of thousands of = > customers. > > To offer POP3/IMAP on Exchange is an overkill, Imail can handle those = > better for MUCH less money. Although some customers sign up for Exchange = > and pay $9.95 and only use POP3. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg@;infonition.com] > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 12:25 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Re: somewhat OT > > > You've hit the major players. The entire email hosting business has = > pretty > much flopped and consolidated. Critical Path handed over its hosted > corporate messaging services to HP. United Messaging was acquired by > Agilera. Commtouch sold its hosted Exchange business to TeleComputing. > > USA.NET and Mi8 are still hanging in there, for now. But this entire > market space has just been decimated of late. I still think that the > business case is there for outsourced messaging, but apparently not = > enough > people have the same attitude that I do. > > Anyone else care to comment on why they think that this market space has > flopped? One would think that in a time of economic hardship, companies > would really be looking to outsource anything and everything they can in > order to lower costs. If outsourced corporate messaging can't make it in > today's economy, I have serious doubts that it will ever make it. But = > the > question is why? Outsourced messaging holds the promise of lower costs, > flexibility and the ability to focus on one's core business. In = > addition, > many of the outsourced providers can put together systems that have a = > mix > of high-end and low-end mailbox services that are all tied together as a > single system. This means that companies can have Exchange mailboxes for > those that need it and low-cost IMAP/POP mailboxes for everyone else and > the outsourcer ties it all together to look like a single email system. = > So > why did this market fail? > > > Who all is left in the Hosted E2K (asp-model) game?=3D20 > >=20 > > USA.NET? > > MI8?=3D20 > > Critical Path? > >=20 > > others?=3D20 > >=20 > > j > > Regards,=3D20 > >=20 > >=20 > > John Henley > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
