[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Then why new versions?
Because Microsoft has to sell new versions in order to maintain its
revenue flow. The only other option is licenses that are not
perpetually valid (i.e., licenses you have to pay for again each month
or each year).
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
The problem is you just don't want it to be a hardware problem
because you don't accept the possibility that the NT driver wrote
around a hardware problem and the FreeBSD driver doesen't.
No, I don't want to run on a wild goose chase just
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
There is a third option. Microsoft can simply quite releasing new
versions of it's established products and go to work creating new
products that people would want to buy.
That business model doesn't work, which is why no PC software company is
using it.
It costs a
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
You have no proof of that unless you were to run the tests that I
already posted.
You're wasting my time. Perhaps somebody who actually understands how
FreeBSD works will offer useful assistance sooner or later, although I'm
less and less optimistic.
--
Anthony
Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?
If the database becomes corrupted, which is highly unlikely, you
must restore it from your last backup (every mail administrator
takes frequent backups, which can be done online with Exchange).
Only if you purchase a backup software.
You are totally 100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
There is a third option. Microsoft can simply quite releasing new
versions of it's established products and go to work creating new
products that people would want to buy.
That business model doesn't work, which is why no PC software
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
You have no proof of that unless you were to run the tests that I
already posted.
You're wasting my time. Perhaps somebody who actually understands how
FreeBSD works will offer useful assistance sooner or later, although I'm
less and
On Tuesday 22 March 2005 03:29 am, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
You have no proof of that unless you were to run the tests that I
already posted.
You're wasting my time. Perhaps somebody who actually understands how
FreeBSD works will offer useful assistance sooner or
On Mar 22, 2005, at 4:21 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
There is a third option. Microsoft can simply quite releasing new
versions of it's established products and go to work creating new
products that people would want to buy.
That business model doesn't work, which is why
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
You were given things to try and do to solve the problem.
No, I was not. I encountered a few people throwing darts and trying
to pretend that they had a clue and/or working to divert any
suspicion from
FreeBSD towards unspecified,
On Mar 20, 2005, at 4:03 PM, Duo wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Duo writes:
And yes, looking for non MS solutions, for the sake of it, is a valid
choice.
Not for many corporate managers. They don't care whether it's
Microsoft
or not, as long as it's the best tool for the
On Mar 20, 2005, at 11:10 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Duo writes:
And now that embrace and extend has worked, Exchange, sits fairly
stagnant.
If it does the job, it doesn't have to change.
Then why new versions?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Mar 20, 2005, at 11:10 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Duo writes:
And now that embrace and extend has worked, Exchange, sits fairly
stagnant.
If it does the job, it doesn't have to change.
Then why new versions?
Why does this list even care? Why does
Exchange server on FreeBSD?
If the database becomes corrupted, which is highly unlikely, you must
restore it from your last backup (every mail administrator takes
frequent backups, which can be done online with Exchange).
Only if you purchase a backup software.
You are totally 100% wrong
Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?
If the database becomes corrupted, which is highly unlikely, you must
restore it from your last backup (every mail administrator takes
frequent backups, which can be done online with Exchange).
Only if you purchase a backup software.
You are totally 100% wrong
Atkielski
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 11:29 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?
If the database becomes corrupted, which is highly unlikely, you must
restore it from your last backup (every mail administrator takes
frequent backups
] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 11:29 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?
If the database becomes corrupted, which is highly unlikely, you must
restore it from your last backup (every mail administrator takes
frequent backups
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Then why new versions?
Because Microsoft has to sell new versions in order to maintain its
revenue flow. The only other option is licenses that are not
perpetually valid (i.e., licenses you have to pay for again each month
or each year).
--
Anthony
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
The problem is you just don't want it to be a hardware problem because
you don't accept the possibility that the NT driver wrote around a
hardware problem and the FreeBSD driver doesen't.
No, I don't want to run on a wild goose chase just because it hurts
someone's
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
The problem is you just don't want it to be a hardware problem because
you don't accept the possibility that the NT driver wrote around a
hardware problem and the FreeBSD driver doesen't.
No, I don't want to run on a wild goose
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, RacerX wrote:
Oh for fucks sakes, stop insulting the folks that are offering solutions.
Like I posted before - upgrade your firmware to meet FBSD half way .
How do you expect an OS written for 2005 to play well with shit that was made
in 97?
Get a grip, stop insulting us -
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, RacerX wrote:
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
The problem is you just don't want it to be a hardware problem because
you don't accept the possibility that the NT driver wrote around a
hardware problem and the FreeBSD driver doesen't.
No,
I have not personally used it, but I have hopes to try it out someday
where I work, or for possible home use...
http://mirror.open-xchange.org/ox/EN/community/
Called Open-Xchange.looks cool..
Also, you could realistically implement something 'exchange like' that is
all web based, and IMAP
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jerry Bell
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 8:15 PM
To: Mike Jeays
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?
I'll second that the calendar/email functionality has
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mike Jeays
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 4:51 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?
I have to disagree with this! In my organization, a government
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 1:16 AM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?
Tricking-out a UNIX server just to avoid using Exchange may
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 11:29 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?
If the database becomes corrupted, which is highly unlikely
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
Fine, you list the features you think are key ones and I'll provide it.
Why not just buy Exchange?
You make the same mistake that so many people with emotional investments
in software make: You feel you must look for non-Microsoft solutions
_just for the sake of
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 11:37 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?
Jerry Bell writes:
I'll second that the calendar/email
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2005 1:53 AM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
Fine, you list the features you think
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
Only if you purchase a backup software. If you want to use windows
backup you must shut down exchange because windows backup will not
back up open files.
You can back up a running Exchange server with the standard software
provided with Exchange and Windows.
Some
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
No they don't. Shared calendaring is a requirement once you
introduce e-mail to a large organization.
Most e-mail systems don't provide it. Organizations got along without
it before, so they don't actually need it. However, once they have it,
they like it, and they
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
You said you would be interested in other solutions that provided the
same features as Exchange. What is wrong, were you not telling the
truth?
I am telling the truth. But another solution that provides the same
features as Exchange will have ALL of them, and so it
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
Fine, you list the features you think are key ones and I'll provide it.
Why not just buy Exchange?
You make the same mistake that so many people with emotional investments
in software make: You feel you must look for
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
Fine, you list the features you think are key ones and I'll provide it.
Why not just buy Exchange?
You make the same mistake that so many people with emotional investments
in software make: You feel you must look for non-Microsoft
Count me in on the group that doesn't think that a web-based system is
adequate for the enterprise, but in the realm of web-based groupware
systems, I have taken a strong liking to group office. I've not used all
of these below, but I've been most impressed with group office's interface
and
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
No it doesen't. There are open solutions that handle this well.
Exchange handles it better, and it's one-stop shopping.
And, one stop shopping is not always the best course of action. In fact,
it's extremely limiting in alot of ways.
Another thing,
Jerry Bell wrote:
Count me in on the group that doesn't think that a web-based system is
adequate for the enterprise, but in the realm of web-based groupware
systems, I have taken a strong liking to group office. I've not used all
of these below, but I've been most impressed with group
As I follow this discussion an idea/question forms in my head.
The server side should be managed by BSD, but the client side is most
surely an heterogeneous group.
So a solution to somehow emulate/simulate an exchange server on an box
(or cluster of sql horde what ever servers), and import this
Duo writes:
And you failed to answer his question. Why not stop trying to avoid it by
answering it.
I did answer it. I asked for a product that provides ALL the features
of Exchange. And he surely knows what all of the features of Exchange
are, otherwise he could not say with confidence that
Duo writes:
And, one stop shopping is not always the best course of action. In fact,
it's extremely limiting in alot of ways.
Maybe, but that's the way a lot of organizations do it, and they have
both good and bad reasons for doing it that way.
Another thing, Exchange may have it all as you
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
The original post in this thread, was about emulating an environment in
which to run exchange.
And I gave the original answer, which is that Exchange doesn't run on
anything but Windows servers, period.
That's not entirely true. The AS/400 can and do run Windows
Christian Tischler writes:
The server side should be managed by BSD, but the client side is most
surely an heterogeneous group.
The server side of what? It all depends on the complete architecture of
your IT infrastructure. For some situations, sendmail and qpopper are
all you'll ever need.
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Christian Tischler writes:
The server side should be managed by BSD, but the client side is most
surely an heterogeneous group.
The server side of what? It all depends on the complete architecture of
your IT infrastructure. For some situations, sendmail and
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Duo writes:
And you failed to answer his question. Why not stop trying to avoid it by
answering it.
I did answer it. I asked for a product that provides ALL the features
of Exchange. And he surely knows what all of the features of Exchange
are,
Duo wrote:
Please, spare me. Welcome to the killfile, troll. You are the most
uncouth, evasive, unprofessional troll I have seen on this list. One
wonders why you are even on it, as you take every chance you get to try
to stomp on people who actually work to improve open souce.
*plonk*
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Duo writes:
And you failed to answer his question. Why not stop trying to avoid
it by answering it.
I did answer it. I asked for a product that provides ALL the
features of Exchange. And he surely knows what all of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to point out what I need, and then you probably will
understand why
I started this in the first place. I need to synchronize
peoples (in the
beginning only a few) calenders. As they all use Outlook I wanted to
keep things easy on them. As I really fancy FreeBSD,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Duo writes:
When and if another product that is superior comes along, people may
well move to it. As far as I know, however, nobody is trying
to compete
with Exchange. It would be a billion-dollar undertaking with very
high risk, and the market potential just
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Actually I don't agree with that statement Duo. Every new version of
Exchange has gotten bigger, fatter, more complex, slower, and harder
and harder to troubleshoot when there is a problem. Sure there are
more features, but the price is the black box
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Duo writes:
Not for many corporate managers. They don't care whether it's
Microsoft or not, as long as it's the best tool for the job. People
don't usually
reach the upper levels of management in large corporations by
indulging emotional attachments to one vendor
Duo wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
I prefer to take the choice out of the users hands. MDaemon virus
scans mail as it comes in. Users never get a chance to possibly
infect their system.
Today it is completely irresponsible to set up a corporate mailsystem
that lacks
On Mar 20, 2005, at 1:18 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Duo writes:
And you failed to answer his question. Why not stop trying to avoid
it by
answering it.
I did answer it. I asked for a product that provides ALL the features
of Exchange. And he surely knows what all of the features of Exchange
Duo writes:
And now that embrace and extend has worked, Exchange, sits fairly
stagnant.
If it does the job, it doesn't have to change.
--
Anthony
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
You are claiming yourself to be knowledgeable enough to run anything.
Not anything, but a lot of things.
If you are a true generalist then you couldn't possibly know mail
systems well enough to make an informed comparison of Exchange and any
UNIX equivalents.
But
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
You were given things to try and do to solve the problem.
No, I was not. I encountered a few people throwing darts and trying to
pretend that they had a clue and/or working to divert any suspicion from
FreeBSD towards unspecified, unverified hardware problems, but I
Nick Pavlica writes:
I have had excellent results with Novell GroupWise.
Groupware is fine if you need other functions more than e-mail, but for
an organization interested primarily or exclusively in messaging,
Exchange is the best choice.
For example, Lotus Notes (like Groupwise, IIRC) is
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 3:45 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD?
Exchange is the best choice for intra-organizational e-mail
Thanks for all the replies. I will take a look at the, more or less,
open solutions. I never intended to use the MS exchange as my primary
mail server. But its functionality for syncinig calenders, documents and
so on, seemed to a nice simple way of dealing with my situation
here. I have to
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
Not really true unless you do an apples to oranges comparison.
Comparing Exchange to groupware products _is_ largely an
apples-to-oranges comparison.
Despite what Microsoft says, Exchange is essentially a messaging
system--an e-mail server. It does that very
Christian Tischler writes:
Thanks for all the replies. I will take a look at the, more or less,
open solutions. I never intended to use the MS exchange as my primary
mail server. But its functionality for syncinig calenders, documents and
so on, seemed to a nice simple way of dealing with
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Christian Tischler writes:
Thanks for all the replies. I will take a look at the, more or less,
open solutions. I never intended to use the MS exchange as my primary
mail server. But its functionality for syncinig calenders, documents and
so on, seemed to a nice
One option is to use communigate. It allegedly works with the outlook
mapi client and should work on freebsd.
http://www.stalker.com/content/solutions.htm
I've heard from a lot of people that swear by it, particularly in the ISP
space.
Jerry
Thanks for all the replies. I will take a look at
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 07:52:19 -0500 (EST), Jerry Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One option is to use communigate. It allegedly works with the outlook
mapi client and should work on freebsd.
http://www.stalker.com/content/solutions.htm
I've heard from a lot of people that swear by it,
Christian Tischler writes:
Actually the number of users will be quite small, and bandwidth is not
an consideration.
For small installations, I don't think Exchange is really
cost-effective. It's quite a monster. Easy to justify in a large
organization where all IT projects are monsters,
Anthony,
I referenced the Novell GroupWise product. I'm not sure what you
were referencing with the generic Groupware that you mentioned.
It's clear that you have little knowledge of this technology and may
want to spend some time learning about it before making blanket
statements about it.
On Saturday 19 March 2005 04:03 am, Christian Tischler wrote:
Thanks for all the replies. I will take a look at the, more or
less, open solutions. I never intended to use the MS exchange
as my primary mail server. But its functionality for syncinig
calenders, documents and so on, seemed to a
On Sat, 2005-03-19 at 16:22, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Christian Tischler writes:
Actually the number of users will be quite small, and bandwidth is not
an consideration.
For small installations, I don't think Exchange is really
cost-effective. It's quite a monster. Easy to justify in
I'll second that the calendar/email functionality has become a utility
service in many organizations. Exchange/outlook, for all their
shortcomings, have really changed the way companies work.
At my day job, we have 9 exchange servers around the world, with about
1500 mailboxes, so not a huge
Nick Pavlica writes:
I referenced the Novell GroupWise product. I'm not sure what you
were referencing with the generic Groupware that you mentioned.
Within this context they are roughly the same thing.
It's clear that you have little knowledge of this technology and may
want to spend some
Jim Durham writes:
Personally, I wouldn't wish Exchange on my worst enemy. It uses a
database to store mail and, if that database becomes corrupted,
you can lose all the email for the company.
All e-mail systems use a database of some type; the only differences are
in how visible the
Mike Jeays writes:
I have to disagree with this! In my organization, a government
department with about 6,000 staff ...
I said FOR SMALL INSTALLATIONS, not organizations of 6000 people.
I'm thinking more of small businesses with a single geographic location
and perhaps in the range of 100
Jerry Bell writes:
I'll second that the calendar/email functionality has become a utility
service in many organizations. Exchange/outlook, for all their
shortcomings, have really changed the way companies work.
They get spoiled. I suppose there's no harm in that intrinsically, but
it does
I really doubt that it is possible. I would look at OpenExhange:
http://mirror.open-xchange.org/ox/EN/community/
Christian Tischler wrote:
Hi,
I would like to run an MS exchange server. But I am not at all willing
to set up an MS box at all. As I know I could run something like
VMware virtual
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 08:06, Christian Tischler wrote:
Hi,
I would like to run an MS exchange server. But I am not at all willing
to set up an MS box at all. As I know I could run something like VMware
virtual server or Wine, but I do not know if such an combination would
be stable (sopken
Mike Jeays wrote:
...
Basically, if you have to hold your nose to run Exchange, you may as
well hold it a little tighter and run Windows. If not, look at
FreeBSD/Sendmail-or-Postfix/Evolution as a very reliable mail service.
Indeed. Anyway, if you're running VMWare with Windows inside it, you
Am Freitag, 18. März 2005 14:06 schrieb Christian Tischler:
Hi,
I would like to run an MS exchange server. But I am not at all willing
to set up an MS box at all.
??? Windows is a really good, well maintained standardized and secure piece of
software compared to Exchange. I can't imagine why
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 08:06, Christian Tischler wrote:
Hi,
I would like to run an MS exchange server. But I am not at all willing
to set up an MS box at all. As I know I could run something like VMware
virtual server or Wine, but I do not know if such an combination would
be stable (sopken
That is truly one of the most disturbing things I've ever read (about
technology, anyway). Must be careful not to frighten small children, or
all but the most experienced sysamins, with that one.
Tom
Ean Kingston wrote:
As someone who has inhereted an Exchange server I have a few hints for
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 11:45:25AM -0500, Ean Kingston wrote:
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 08:06, Christian Tischler wrote:
Hi,
I would like to run an MS exchange server. But I am not at all willing
to set up an MS box at all. As I know I could run something like VMware
virtual server or
Don't you all want to at least mention Open Groupware?
http://www.opengroupware.org/
How about something that supports MySQL?
--
Chris.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 21:11:24 +0200, Chris Knipe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't you all want to at least mention Open Groupware?
http://www.opengroupware.org/
How about something that supports MySQL?
why use MySQL when it supports a much more robust solution like PostgreSQL?
-p
--
Don't you all want to at least mention Open Groupware?
I was mentioned in the first reply i think:
--
From: Ryan J. Cavicchioni [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:06:32 -0600
I really doubt that it is possible. I would look at OpenExhange:
Ean Kingston wrote:
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 08:06, Christian Tischler wrote:
Hi,
I would like to run an MS exchange server. But I am not at all willing
to set up an MS box at all. As I know I could run something like VMware
virtual server or Wine, but I do not know if such an combination would
Christian Tischler writes:
I would like to run an MS exchange server. But I am not at all willing
to set up an MS box at all.
Microsoft Exchange Server runs only on Windows server operating systems.
Any hints or suggenstions would be great.
Buy a server version of Windows, or choose a
Emanuel Strobl writes:
??? Windows is a really good, well maintained standardized and secure piece of
software compared to Exchange. I can't imagine why someone is even
considering exchange when he knows about FreeBSD and it's programs.
Exchange is the best choice for intra-organizational
I have had excellent results with Novell GroupWise.
--Nick
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 00:44:36 +0100, Anthony Atkielski
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Emanuel Strobl writes:
??? Windows is a really good, well maintained standardized and secure piece
of
software compared to Exchange. I can't
87 matches
Mail list logo
