Am Friday 20 January 2012 20:44:58 schrieb André Schild: > Am 20.01.2012 19:44, schrieb Heiner Markert: > > Am Wednesday 18 January 2012 20:16:08 schrieb Ludovic Marcotte: > >> On 18/01/12 01:39, André Schild wrote: > >>> I don't see why we should drop SyncML support, it's working after all > >>> and a OPEN standard... > >>> The Problem with Activesync stuff is always the potential license > >>> question, what if MS will start claim license violations by Z-Push > >>> (Justified or not does not matter) ? > >> > >> I fully agree here about the licensing violation. > >> > >>> There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a > >>> link for download. > >>> I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. > >> > >> We could also import it on our source repository. We did this a while > >> ago from the connector developed by Philipp Kewisch, but he soon after > >> abandoned its development. > >> > >>> The one big advantage I see of ActiveSync is, that you have only one > >>> setup to do for Email,Calendar,Contacts and Tasks and all traffic > >>> flows via HTTP(S) > >>> > >>> There are several disadvantages of ActiveSync compared to native > >>> Cardav/Caldav support: > >>> - Only ONE Calendar, Contacts and Tasks can be synched > >>> - Only one ActiveSync account is possible > >>> - Mail handling is very limited > >> > >> Indeed but it should be compared with SyncML/Funambol, not > >> CalDAV/CardDAV. > >> > >> I would still very much like to open a discussion about this - ie., > >> Funambol (SyncML) backend vs. Z-Push (ActiveSync) backend. > >> > >> To offer a very good mobile experience, I feel we'll have to make a > >> choice and focus our efforts into one or the other. We chose Funambol > >> many years ago. It might have been a good choice back then but it > >> doesn't mean it's still the best. > >> > >> On my end (and speaking for myself only), there are some things I > >> dislike about Funambol such as a worthless bug tracker, patches taking > >> decades to get accepted (or even bugs getting acknowledged), Java-based > >> (enough said here), requires more resources than all other SOGo > >> components and requirements combined together and multiplied by your > >> favorite factor of the day (must be greater than 2), almost impossible > >> to package together with SOGo and more. > >> > >> What I mostly fear about Z-Push is that we'll revisit all the device > >> synchronization bugs we had over the past few years with Funambol/SyncML > >> and we'll have to hack around like we did. This is very valuable time > >> and know-how here. Getting the Z-Push connector up and running can be > >> done in a snap, but refining it will take some time. Also, having the > >> Sword of Damocles on top of my head regarding the licensing agreement > >> doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. > > > > Hello, > > > > despite the issues, I would very much like to see a z-push sogo or even a > > more general z-push caldav/carddav backend. > > In my experience, activesync support is more mature on the phones I > > experimented with, than syncml support is. And almost any phone supports > > it. > > For Smartphones thats completely true, but for non smartphones > you often have only SyncML builtin. (So they don't have to pay license > fees to microsoft for including the active sync protocol in the phones) > > André
Hello, very recently I've seen a rather cheap Samsung feature-phone (around 75€ in Germany) that did come with Activesync, but no Syncml client, so Activesync seems to be arriving at non-smartphones. Even simpler entry-level basic phones, from my experience, ususally have no or nearly unusable calendar application and are not able to sync at all. Best regards Heiner -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
