Mac-friendly alternatives to Exchange?

On 6/26/07, Tim Hodgson <thnewspobox.com> wrote:
> The current thread on MS Exchange, and recent personal experience of
> institutions switching from unix mail servers to Exchange server, set me
> wondering: what are the alternatives?
>
> If an institution wants/needs calendaring and the other Exchange bells
> and whistles, is it worth even suggesting that they consider open-source
> packages like Zimbra and Horde? (Those are the two names that Google
> brings up most often; are there others?)

Zimbra is quite capable and does most of what Exchange does (well, at
least of the basics of email and calendaring). Horde, AFAIK, is
email-only.

Google offers hosted email and calendaring, including shared
calendars, meeting requests, and room reservations for $50/user (or
free if you don't need all those features). I believe Yahoo offers
something similar.

You can also look at splitting up email and calendar and use, say,
iCal for calendaring and your IMAP server of choice for email. OSX
Server is a good product to host it, but you can do it with any
Unix-like OS (and probably Windows). (It looks like MacOSX Server 10.5
will have better support for shared calendars, thanks to CalDAV.)

It just depends on your needs for integration with other applications
and services (Exchange can work with SharePoint, Team Server and other
Microsoft products) and whether you need/want calendaring joined at
the hip with email.

And, of course, let's not forget that old groupware standby, Lotus
Notes. It's as costly as Exchange but does have a solid Mac client and
gives you email and calendaring. As someone who uses it every day, I
have to admit that I'd be a lot happier with Exchange/Entourage than
Notes, but your mileage may vary.

--Nik

On Jun 26, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Tim Hodgson wrote:

> f an institution wants/needs calendaring and the other Exchange bells
> and whistles, is it worth even suggesting that they consider open-
> source
> packages like Zimbra and Horde? (Those are the two names that Google
> brings up most often; are there others?)

It's worth suggesting, but the IT management doesn't want to shrink
the size of the IT staff (and thus their own pay) by that much.

At least, Exchange can now be configured to be a decent citizen when
connected to the Internet--that's new as of Exchange 2003.

   --John

On 6/27/07 16:05 PM, "Nik Friedman TeBockhorst" <nikinik.net> wrote:

> If an institution wants/needs calendaring and the other Exchange bells
>> and whistles, is it worth even suggesting that they consider open-source
>> packages like Zimbra and Horde? (Those are the two names that Google
>> brings up most often; are there others?)
>
> Zimbra is quite capable and does most of what Exchange does (well, at
> least of the basics of email and calendaring). Horde, AFAIK, is
> email-only.

Zimbra is great on the Mac with two caveats: You can live with a web-only
interface, or you will never need more from a client than what you get from
Apple. Currently, the only true "groupware" client Zimbra supports
is....Outlook. This, to put it finely, sucks. Sorry, but a Web only UI
doesn't cut it for everything, although the offline featureset helps here,
but there's stuff I do with Outlook AND Entourage that Zimbra's Web UI
can.not.touch.

> You can also look at splitting up email and calendar and use, say,
> iCal for calendaring and your IMAP server of choice for email. OSX
> Server is a good product to host it, but you can do it with any
> Unix-like OS (and probably Windows). (It looks like MacOSX Server 10.5
> will have better support for shared calendars, thanks to CalDAV.)

The problem with Leopard Server is that the Outlook support requires
client-side plugins, (now THERE's a support nightmare in the making. Nothing
like three vendors blaming each other for every problem), and most of the
CalDAV clients I've seen kinda blow from an integration POV, unless you like
writing tons of data import/export scripts.

>
> It just depends on your needs for integration with other applications
> and services (Exchange can work with SharePoint, Team Server and other
> Microsoft products) and whether you need/want calendaring joined at
> the hip with email.

Kerio makes a hell of a product, runs on a Mac, supports Open Directory and
Active Directory out of the box, has server support for Outlook, Entourage,
Evolution, Mail, iCal, etc.

It's only current drawback is no clustering support. It gets that at a
reasonable price, and Apple is going to have some serious SMB competition.
It's the only product I've seen that I'd WANT to use as a drop-in
replacement for Exchange in an SMB environment.

>
> And, of course, let's not forget that old groupware standby, Lotus
> Notes. It's as costly as Exchange but does have a solid Mac client and
> gives you email and calendaring. As someone who uses it every day, I
> have to admit that I'd be a lot happier with Exchange/Entourage than
> Notes, but your mileage may vary.

I wouldn't wish Notes on people I hate. It's the only product I've seen with
a UI designed to be as barely usable by anyone who isn't a DBA as possible,
and every Mac version of the client has been slower than Word 6, only with a
worse UI.

--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwelchbynkii.com

On Jun 27, 2007, at 5:05 PM, Nik Friedman TeBockhorst wrote:

> On 6/26/07, Tim Hodgson <thnewspobox.com> wrote:
>> The current thread on MS Exchange, and recent personal experience of
>> institutions switching from unix mail servers to Exchange server,
>> set me
>> wondering: what are the alternatives?
>>
>> If an institution wants/needs calendaring and the other Exchange
>> bells
>> and whistles, is it worth even suggesting that they consider open-
>> source
>> packages like Zimbra and Horde? (Those are the two names that Google
>> brings up most often; are there others?)
>
> Zimbra is quite capable and does most of what Exchange does (well, at
> least of the basics of email and calendaring).

I company I worked with for a few months used Zimbra, and for
WebMail, I thought it was very good. However, and it could have been
that the company didn't have the best administrator, although the
calendar was good, there was no group calendaring.

Marilyn

I would suggest having a look at FirstClass. It includes email, calendar, contacts, collaboration, web publishing, and much much more. The Server side can be hosted on Windows, MacOS X or Linux, and clients for all of those OSs are available.

<http://www.firstclass.com/>

On 7/3/07, edleslie <edleslieealeslie.ca> wrote:
> I would suggest having a look at FirstClass. It includes email, calendar, contacts, collaboration, web publishing, and much much more. The Server side can be hosted on Windows, MacOS X or Linux, and clients for all of those OSs are available.

FirstClass is, however, extremely antiquated in its approach to
everything. On every platform is behaves like an OS 9 (heck, maybe 7!)
application. I had to use it throughout my MBA program, and it was
nothing but trouble compared to a simple IMAP server.

It does, however, have excellent integration of all its modules,
provided you can put up with how they behave.

--Nik

... or, if you're stuck using an Exchange server, you can at least use Groupcal <http://www.snerdware.com/groupcal/> to enable you to use iCal for your Exchange-based calendaring and meeting/resource scheduling.

On 7/5/07 09:52 AM, "tidbits-list" <tidbits-listderman.com> wrote:

> ... or, if you're stuck using an Exchange server, you can at least use
> Groupcal <http://www.snerdware.com/groupcal/> to enable you to use iCal for
> your Exchange-based calendaring and meeting/resource scheduling.

Groupcal is...okay, in the "better than nothing" sense. But it's still a
second-tier solution on the Mac, and you still have to get the Exchange
administrator to leave IMAP/SMTP open for Mail to work with it.

If you are on a Mac in an Exchange environment, the best choice on the
platform for an Exchange client is Entourage. There's finally a decent
E'rage blog out there doing something to help counter the reams of vaguely
correct, or out and out incorrect information floating around there:

<http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/>

E'rage is not a perfect Outlook replacement, (and you can't 100% replicate
Outlook without Windows anyway), but it still is the best choice on the Mac.

--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwelchbynkii.com

On Jul 6, 2007, at 9:33 AM, John Welch wrote:

> On 7/5/07 09:52 AM, "tidbits-list" <tidbits-listderman.com> wrote:
>
>> ... or, if you're stuck using an Exchange server, you can at least
>> use
>> Groupcal <http://www.snerdware.com/groupcal/> to enable you to use
>> iCal for
>> your Exchange-based calendaring and meeting/resource scheduling.
>
> Groupcal is...okay, in the "better than nothing" sense. But it's
> still a
> second-tier solution on the Mac, and you still have to get the
> Exchange
> administrator to leave IMAP/SMTP open for Mail to work with it.

Actually, only WebDAV is required to be enabled.

http://www.snerdware.com/groupcal/faq.html

As WebDAV is also requires for Outlook Web Access, it is not unusual
for it to already be enabled. Actually, I think WebDAV is also
required for Entourage to be used as an official Exchange client.

> If you are on a Mac in an Exchange environment, the best choice on the
> platform for an Exchange client is Entourage. There's finally a decent
> E'rage blog out there doing something to help counter the reams of
> vaguely
> correct, or out and out incorrect information floating around there:
>
> <http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/>

Helpful. It seems to confirm my recollection that Entourage needs
WebDAV for Exchange support.

http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/2007/05/
why_did_microsoft_replace_outl.html

> E'rage is not a perfect Outlook replacement, (and you can't 100%
> replicate
> Outlook without Windows anyway), but it still is the best choice on
> the Mac.

As the closest thing to Outlook on the Mac, yes, and if I was
currently expected to to participate in Exchange it's what I would
choose. But I am also glad there are efforts such as Groupcal to
attempt joining other applications to Exchange as a communication
conduit and data store.

I just run Outlook in Windows XP under VMware, since my exchange server requires a VPN connection. That way I only connect the Windows side to the VPN, while the Mac side can use the open internet connection.

On 7/8/07 05:31 AM, "Curtis Wilcox" <tidbitscognize.org> wrote:

>>> ... or, if you're stuck using an Exchange server, you can at least
>>> use
>>> Groupcal <http://www.snerdware.com/groupcal/> to enable you to use
>>> iCal for
>>> your Exchange-based calendaring and meeting/resource scheduling.
>>
>> Groupcal is...okay, in the "better than nothing" sense. But it's
>> still a
>> second-tier solution on the Mac, and you still have to get the
>> Exchange
>> administrator to leave IMAP/SMTP open for Mail to work with it.
>
> Actually, only WebDAV is required to be enabled.
>
> http://www.snerdware.com/groupcal/faq.html

Last I checked, GroupCal did not do email, so unless you have a DAV email
client that isn't E'rage sitting around, or you plan on never sending email
via Exchange you're going to kind of have to deal with that aspect of it,
and what I'm seeing here is !Entourage which means IMAP/SMTP/Etc.

>
> As WebDAV is also requires for Outlook Web Access, it is not unusual
> for it to already be enabled. Actually, I think WebDAV is also
> required for Entourage to be used as an official Exchange client.

OWA is not exactly DAV, but it's close, and yes E'rage requires either OWA
or DAV/LDAP. However, unlike Groupcal E'rage doesn't need another
application for email.

>
>> If you are on a Mac in an Exchange environment, the best choice on the
>> platform for an Exchange client is Entourage. There's finally a decent
>> E'rage blog out there doing something to help counter the reams of
>> vaguely
>> correct, or out and out incorrect information floating around there:
>>
>> <http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/>
>
> Helpful. It seems to confirm my recollection that Entourage needs
> WebDAV for Exchange support.
>
> http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/2007/05/
> why_did_microsoft_replace_outl.html

That's not been a dispute.

>
>> E'rage is not a perfect Outlook replacement, (and you can't 100%
>> replicate
>> Outlook without Windows anyway), but it still is the best choice on
>> the Mac.
>
> As the closest thing to Outlook on the Mac, yes, and if I was
> currently expected to to participate in Exchange it's what I would
> choose. But I am also glad there are efforts such as Groupcal to
> attempt joining other applications to Exchange as a communication
> conduit and data store.

Indeed, however, Groupcal is not a complete solution. It really only deals
with calendaring, possibly contacts. There's a bit more to this than that.

--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwelchbynkii.com

Perhaps I missed something - and I am a bit late in replying ...

How about Kerio Mail? www.kerio.com It works great for me with approx 20
clients. They can serve very large client bases. Integrates perfectly with
Outlook including mail and calendaring.

Several key benefits ... Simple to administer, includes backup and archive
capability, doesn't require a dedicated computer to run on, nor does it
require a certified IT person to administer.

Dean

FirstClass 9 is *much* improved over previous versions and offers an excellent option for Mac (and Windows and Linux) users. The integration of features is significant: email, calendar, web publishing, blogging, podcasting, collaboration, IM are all included. Ease of admin/management is another important point as is scalability (a single off-the-shelf server can host thousands of users).

FC is a great communications product (and it also supports voice mail integration). <http://www.opentext.com/2/sol-products/sol-pro-unified-communications/pro-firstclass.htm> <http://www.firstclass.com/FC90/> <http://www.firstclass.com/support/SupportCommentary/9.0What%20to%20Expect#New%20Features%20and%20Functionality>

On Jul 5, 2007 7:52 am Nik Friedman TeBockhorst wrote -

Re: Mac-friendly alternatives to Exchange?

On 7/3/07, edleslie <edleslieealeslie.ca> wrote:

I would suggest having a look at FirstClass. It includes email, calendar, contacts, collaboration, web publishing, and much much more. The Server side can be hosted on Windows, MacOS X or Linux, and clients for all of those OSs are available.

FirstClass is, however, extremely antiquated in its approach to everything. On every platform is behaves like an OS 9 (heck, maybe 7!) application. I had to use it throughout my MBA program, and it was nothing but trouble compared to a simple IMAP server.

It does, however, have excellent integration of all its modules, provided you can put up with how they behave.