Discriminatory pricing is a good reason to go with a free/open solution or even a more expensive commercial answer. Though Exchange might be cheaper for you today, it will cost you and your users tomorrow. The cost of that software in the "real" world is about an order of magnitude more for a typical set up. It might be cheap and easy now, but Microsoft alway makes their money, and not always honestly.
That dishonesty and Microsoft's track record create a host of good reasons to avoid Exchange. Microsoft is famous for their upgrade train and each piece of their software you use gives them leverage over you. Do you really want to build up experience administering a Microsoft thing? While it might make you more marketable to a big dumb company today, it will also make you more likely to chose a Microsoft solution tomorrow wherever you end up. Do you really want to inflict all the quirks of Exchange, such as weird and inconsistent pop logins, on your users? By using Exchange, you will make it difficult for your users to set up Mozilla Mail and other non Microsoft clients. While you can overcome the current quirks, the next "critical update" can undo all of your work and break your clients who are not up to the minute Microsoft users. In time, this will push your whole network to M$ and Lookout, give you security headaches and fuel the upgrade train. On Wednesday 14 April 2004 08:46, Giovanni Tairov wrote: > One correction about the pricing: $279 is not a retail price of course. > As some of you may know M$ have a pretty confusing licensing deals, but > educational organizations, non-profits and alike get a substantially > discounted prices for M$ products. Example: XP goes for $50 something with > the state of LA, so called "state contract"... > > Thank you for all the input! Still reading... >
