Why does anyone even bother with Exchange these days?

L

LoStMaTt

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
3,180
It seems so silly to me. You can outsource e-mail hosting for pennies on the dollar and have almost zero troubleshooting to do.

There are a wide range of apps/sync programs that will keep your calendar and contacts in order between your PC and mobile devices.

Why even bother with Exchange these days?
 
You can generalize that question to: Why does anyone bother to self-host email anymore? The answer is simple, of course; it's all about control. If you go with an externally hosted solution ( I refuse to use the word "Cloud" ), then you place a critical piece of infrastructure in the hands of someone else. All the settings, all the configuration are done by them. Backups, everything.

For some businesses that's an acceptable risk/cost. For others, not so much.
 
Our business is regulated by the FDA. I could see the look on the auditors face when told all of our interoffice communication is hosted in the "cloud". I don't think it would go over well with clients either when part of our mission statement is all about protecting the IP of our clients.
 
It depends on what you mean by why exchange....

If you mean why exchange vs some other generic SMTP with pop3/imap, the core reason is sharing. In exchange you can easily view other people's mailboxes, calendars, etc... You can have shared calendars and address books. Think of a secretary who needs to manage her bosses calendar and inbox, but not see his confidential email folder.

If you mean why host exchange yourself as opposed to a cloud based exchange, there are a variety of reasons dealing with data security. You also maybe have never dealt with sending a 9MB group email to 50 people, in a cloud based solution, you'd send 450MB+ of data across your Internet connection.

Finally, if you do it yourself, you can choose whatever settings and add-ons you want. Do you need a custom footer at the end of every email from the legal department, but a different footer from everyone else? Will your cloud provider do that? What if you get 800 employee's worth of email on that cloud based solution before you find out that they won't? how much will it cost to migrate back?

If someone sues your company, they have to subpoena you to provide email and documents. But if you're email and documents are stored elsewhere, can they subpoena the cloud provider instead? Will the cloud provider hand over data to the authorities without a subpoena? Remember the librarians and the PATRIOT act? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/11/AR2007041102041.html How is this similar/different?

Right now, everyone is all excited about the cloud, but there are significant risks in giving someone else all your data and relying on those people to properly backup, manage, hold confidential and configure those cloud based apps. A lot of issues haven't been settled in court yet.
 
Last edited:
People seem to be tied so hard to Outlook they don't want to even consider anything else.

But I agree there are so many better/cheaper solutions out there whether it's hosted or something you install yourself like Exchange. Exchange is rediculously expensive to license. I don't get it either why companies are willing to fork all that cash. Ask for a spare mouse or keyboard and they'll look at you funny and say "what do you think we have spare money lying around?".
 
LoStMaTt said:
It seems so silly to me.
Why even bother with Exchange these days?
Click to expand...
It sounds like
1) you've never actually managed an exchange server
2) you aren't in any systems administration role where people ask you to do x for person 1 and y for person 2 while maintaining z for department A. Try doing that with cloud based solutions and their shitty control panels.
 
We use a cloud hosted solution, it sucks. Google, I accidentally locked my admin account (my fault), ok 5 days later we will unlock it for you.

I have to manually enter email aliases for each mailbox? We have 400 aliases...le sigh

We also use Rackspace, which today has been having problems. Emails taking about half an hour to get delivered. Not as bad as it could be, but if we weren't in contention with thousands of other mailboxes we wouldn't have as long an outage due to "mail delivery delays"

Google I want to set up shared calendars. Ok just enter this link into your local client: http://google.com/a/2304jasl;df0jawfanvoicxvlnase0gr-934jga;sdf

Google, why are my meeting times 3 hours off? Oh that's an issue with IMAP, can't be fixed.

/rant

Edit: I thought of a few more things

Google doesn't have much support for Macs, yes they have the migration tool etc but it still runs on IMAP which is not nearly as good as Exchange.

I delete a mailbox on Google, I can't recreate that mailbox for 5 days, what a pain.

For each new mailbox in Google, a user has to enter a Captcha phrase which is annoying.

Different Passwords for computers/mail = administration annoyance

Ok I'll stop....we are migrating to Google right now from Rackspace so it is all fresh in my mind.
 
Last edited:
Red Squirrel said:
People seem to be tied so hard to Outlook they don't want to even consider anything else.
Click to expand...

What do you consider a close contender? I've yet to see one. Nothing comes close to the flexibility and control you have with Exchange. Whether it's hosted or local is a different question, but Exchange and Outlook are simply better than anything else currently on the market.
 
The problem (one of many) with any sort of outsourcing is, as mentioned, control, but also liability. Look in the T&C's of almost any hosting agreement and you'll see that the liability of the provider is usually very small - essentially if you have a business worth millions and it's dependent upon email, and you pay $1000 a year for email, worst scenario imaginable the odds are your email provider is liable for refunding you your $1000.

That's before you get into all the fun stuff like where is your data stored, are you happy with the legal ramifications if some foreign government demands access to it because this week it's hosted in a datacenter in their country, etc.

I do think that in SMB or a new business with little existing infrastructure cloud is worthy of serious consideration, not convinced it's the magic bullet people like to think it is.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
I'd rather spend several thousand dollars to keep controll of my own data rather than give it to google or anyone else for pennies on the dollar what it would cost me so they can sift through and ship off who knows what to their advertising partners and archive for who knows how long for who knows what reason.

And this is for my home email account, seriously fuck the cloud.
 
-Dragon- said:
I'd rather spend several thousand dollars to keep controll of my own data rather than give it to google or anyone else for pennies on the dollar what it would cost me so they can sift through and ship off who knows what to their advertising partners and archive for who knows how long for who knows what reason.

And this is for my home email account, seriously fuck the cloud.
Click to expand...



Funny this thread questions the need for Exchange and I have my personal email hosted here on 2 Exchange 2010s (Edge+Hub/CAS/MB+Forefront Protection for Exchange).
 
cyr0n_k0r said:
It sounds like
2) you aren't in any systems administration role where people ask you to do x for person 1 and y for person 2 while maintaining z for department A. Try doing that with cloud based solutions and their shitty control panels.
Click to expand...

Gonna +1 that. We didn't even have great control at an old company with groupwise for managing groups+ users properly. I hated groupwise with a passion. Novell is a shithole.

Exchange just works great in a corporate environment. We have control, we can protect our emails and IP and make sure our employees aren't doing anything shaddy.
 
Actually Office 365 isn't a bad way to get clients exchange functionality if they don't need Exchange's fine grained controls. It's pretty inexpensive if you have Office 07 or 10 already (it doesn't work with Office 2003). You could always "rent" Office 2010 from the service for 12 bucks a month. Office 365 plays nice with mobile phones too.

As far as Sharepoint on Office 365... don't get me started.

EDIT: I prefer on premise Exchange 2010 even for smaller clients. They need a place for the files anyway, so it's not like removing Exchange from the mix magically removes all need for servers.
 
aaronearles said:
What do you consider a close contender? I've yet to see one. Nothing comes close to the flexibility and control you have with Exchange. Whether it's hosted or local is a different question, but Exchange and Outlook are simply better than anything else currently on the market.
Click to expand...

Domino and Notes...if properly configured...is a huge leap ahead of Exchange and Outlook.

Generally though, I dislike the idea of having huge amounts of sensitive data anywhere I cant get access to the disks and physical backups, no matter what assurances are made by the service provider.
 
Langly said:
Gonna +1 that. We didn't even have great control at an old company with groupwise for managing groups+ users properly. I hated groupwise with a passion. Novell is a shithole.

Exchange just works great in a corporate environment. We have control, we can protect our emails and IP and make sure our employees aren't doing anything shaddy.
Click to expand...

Don't forget ActiveDirectory integration, when you have hundreds of thousands of people in your organization, try using something else to try and get a quick enough responding third-party phonebook. :S
 
young_one said:
Domino and Notes...if properly configured...is a huge leap ahead of Exchange and Outlook.

Generally though, I dislike the idea of having huge amounts of sensitive data anywhere I cant get access to the disks and physical backups, no matter what assurances are made by the service provider.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, did I miss the intended joke, or are you being serious? Having worked for one of the largest Notes shops in the world I can say without a doubt that Notes sucks.
 
We use Outlook, Exchange, Project, Webex, Citrix .....all sorts of those apps and they all work together really well. You're talking about a company that has 10 meeting rooms most in constant use and with heavy client interaction. There's no way in hell we could function without all of the seamless integration those packages provide.
 
Wirth'sLaw said:
Funny this thread questions the need for Exchange and I have my personal email hosted here on 2 Exchange 2010s (Edge+Hub/CAS/MB+Forefront Protection for Exchange).
Click to expand...

Only 2 exchange servers for personal mail? I have 3! One edge and 2 Hub/Cas/MB for redundancy lol. Love how much easier it is to setup forwarding domains on 2010 vs 2007.
 
-Dragon- said:
I'd rather spend several thousand dollars to keep controll of my own data rather than give it to google or anyone else for pennies on the dollar what it would cost me so they can sift through and ship off who knows what to their advertising partners and archive for who knows how long for who knows what reason.

And this is for my home email account, seriously fuck the cloud.
Click to expand...

That's the thing with Exchange. You're not spending a couple thousand dollars. You're spending a couple hundred thousand dollars. So you bought Windows Server and Exchange. You paid a couple thousand already, but you did not yet figure out all the Exchange cals, the MS Office licensing, the Windows cals, the mailbox cals, and all the other BS they add in there raping you from every possible angle they can think of. by the time you calculate all that you're looking at hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, depending on the size of the company.


Though to echo others thoughts, I'm also a strong believer and having control over your data and having it in house. I just find it silly that every company goes straight to exchange instead of looking at all the other options. I'm sure there's others out there that are equally as good.
 
Just how big a company are you assuming there talking about MILLIONS, I mean you can get SBS with exchange and an extra 20 CALs for under 2k, thats 80 bucks a seat... If you actually have so many employees that you NEED to spend millions on licenses, chances are pretty good that millions on licenses isn't exactly outside your IT budget.
 
Red Squirrel said:
I just find it silly that every company goes straight to exchange instead of looking at all the other options. I'm sure there's others out there that are equally as good.
Click to expand...
No, there aren't others out there equally good.
Exchange/Outlook is at the top of the list if you want a true enterprise level email system.
 
nobody_here said:
We use Outlook, Exchange, Project, Webex, Citrix .....all sorts of those apps and they all work together really well. You're talking about a company that has 10 meeting rooms most in constant use and with heavy client interaction. There's no way in hell we could function without all of the seamless integration those packages provide.
Click to expand...
Is there even anything that you can integrate BES into like you can with Exchange?
 
Red Squirrel said:
That's the thing with Exchange. You're not spending a couple thousand dollars. You're spending a couple hundred thousand dollars. So you bought Windows Server and Exchange. You paid a couple thousand already, but you did not yet figure out all the Exchange cals, the MS Office licensing, the Windows cals, the mailbox cals, and all the other BS they add in there raping you from every possible angle they can think of. by the time you calculate all that you're looking at hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, depending on the size of the company.
Click to expand...

Not really. Any Exchange I have setup recently has been on a hypervisor (usually Hyper-V) so lets take a look at the cost of exchange for a single server, and then price per user.

Server Hardware: Required is a minimum of a Dual Core with 8GB of RAM, and 500GB of HDD space. Well assuming that I have a hypervisor hardware is a wash, but if I have to buy a dedicated server then I could buy a Dell Poweredge R310 with the required specs for about $2,200

Server OS: As this would most likely be on a hyperviser running either Server 2008 R2 Enterprise or Datacenter, and thus licensing would be a wash, but again if I were buying a server specifically for this and needed a OS license a Server 2008 R2 standard would cost me $700

Exchange: Exchange Standard 2010 is $600

Spam protection: Personally I like LogSat SpamfilterISP which is $600 a license.

Total Server costs: $4100

Deployment time: 5 Hours from start to finish (Under 100 users with less then 500GB of total mail) $125 (Average cost of hourly employee).

User migration time: 5 hours support time (100 employees or less, assumed small things like missing mail, calendar sharing issues etc). $125 (Average cost of hourly in house IT)

Total Deployment Costs: $250

Exchange CAL: $75ea (Bundles get discounts)

Outlook: It would be assumed that as everyone in the office has outlook already as they use MS office as their productivity suite, however if they needed it, Outlook 2010 is about $125 per license.

Total Exchange Cost per seat: $200

Total Exchange Cost For company of 20 (Assuming you had to buy everything from scratch): $8350

Total Exchange Cost For Company of 20 Hosted (Assuming $15 per mailbox per month as standard in industry) $3600 per year.

Total Exchange Cost for existing environment (Assuming hypervisor, therefore no need for hardware or OS licensing, and assuming everyone has a copy of Office Standard 2007 or above already) $2950

As you can see, at the worst possible a company of 20 will spend $8350 on an exchange environment, which if hosted they would end up spending in 3 years. Most environments it is actually cheaper to just host your own if you already have IT staff in house, and the environment in place.

Though to echo others thoughts, I'm also a strong believer and having control over your data and having it in house. I just find it silly that every company goes straight to exchange instead of looking at all the other options. I'm sure there's others out there that are equally as good.
Click to expand...

Everyone goes to exchange for 2 reasons I have found.

1: Standardization. EVERYONE runs exchange, and everything ties into it. Outlook (standard enterprise email tool), Phones (ActiveSync and BES), 3rd party archiving and spam control. Most admins also have exchange experience so when hiring someone you don't have to look specifically for someone who knows communigate or domino.

2: Ties into AD fully. This makes administration a dream. Seriously. I used to work for a shop that used Domino, and it was the biggest pain in the ass. Users hated it because they couldn't sync their AD passwords. New people to the company hated notes because they were used to outlook and couldn't figure notes out. It was a nightmare for us new people to learn domino because it is not remotely intuitive, and smartphone integration was terrible. Just about every small and medium business I know is switching to android now because blackberries are just really not what they were 5 years ago. However this shop is still running BBs and BES because there is really no other good option for domino to have that kind of control over a smartphone.

Yes there are other products out there

Communigate
Postfix
Domino
Groupwise
Apple Mail Server
etc

and all of them have some advantages (cost, integration into non AD environments) but at the end of the day, I want something that works, is simple, has ample support available, and that I can leave to an incoming admin and not have their head explode when the first outage comes.
 
shabazkilla said:
I'm sorry, did I miss the intended joke, or are you being serious? Having worked for one of the largest Notes shops in the world I can say without a doubt that Notes sucks.
Click to expand...

Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Exchange is also a very nice product by the way, its tight AD integration makes it by far and away the easiest to manage for 99% of Admins plus its tight Outlook integration means that it is preferred by 99% of users.
 
Everything has it's place. On premise is great for people who want to have physical access to their data, large companies etc.

Cloud hosted solutions are great for the millions of small business with no IT dept. I'm not saying it's perfect for them, but its better than nothing or the great [email protected] business.
 
thespeakerbox said:
Everything has it's place. On premise is great for people who want to have physical access to their data, large companies etc.

Cloud hosted solutions are great for the millions of small business with no IT dept. I'm not saying it's perfect for them, but its better than nothing or the great [email protected] business.
Click to expand...

lol I see stuff like that here all the time.

Worse is this one I saw, was a pickup truck with company logo and everything. Some kind of IT business. The email was [email protected] LOL or something to that extent, I don't recall the underscores or what not. But... seriously? lol
 
C7J0yc3 said:
Not really. Any Exchange I have setup recently has been on a hypervisor (usually Hyper-V) so lets take a look at the cost of exchange for a single server, and then price per user.

Server Hardware: Required is a minimum of a Dual Core with 8GB of RAM, and 500GB of HDD space. Well assuming that I have a hypervisor hardware is a wash, but if I have to buy a dedicated server then I could buy a Dell Poweredge R310 with the required specs for about $2,200

Server OS: As this would most likely be on a hyperviser running either Server 2008 R2 Enterprise or Datacenter, and thus licensing would be a wash, but again if I were buying a server specifically for this and needed a OS license a Server 2008 R2 standard would cost me $700

Exchange: Exchange Standard 2010 is $600

Spam protection: Personally I like LogSat SpamfilterISP which is $600 a license.

Total Server costs: $4100

Deployment time: 5 Hours from start to finish (Under 100 users with less then 500GB of total mail) $125 (Average cost of hourly employee).

User migration time: 5 hours support time (100 employees or less, assumed small things like missing mail, calendar sharing issues etc). $125 (Average cost of hourly in house IT)

Total Deployment Costs: $250

Exchange CAL: $75ea (Bundles get discounts)

Outlook: It would be assumed that as everyone in the office has outlook already as they use MS office as their productivity suite, however if they needed it, Outlook 2010 is about $125 per license.

Total Exchange Cost per seat: $200

Total Exchange Cost For company of 20 (Assuming you had to buy everything from scratch): $8350

Total Exchange Cost For Company of 20 Hosted (Assuming $15 per mailbox per month as standard in industry) $3600 per year.

Total Exchange Cost for existing environment (Assuming hypervisor, therefore no need for hardware or OS licensing, and assuming everyone has a copy of Office Standard 2007 or above already) $2950

As you can see, at the worst possible a company of 20 will spend $8350 on an exchange environment, which if hosted they would end up spending in 3 years. Most environments it is actually cheaper to just host your own if you already have IT staff in house, and the environment in place.



Everyone goes to exchange for 2 reasons I have found.

1: Standardization. EVERYONE runs exchange, and everything ties into it. Outlook (standard enterprise email tool), Phones (ActiveSync and BES), 3rd party archiving and spam control. Most admins also have exchange experience so when hiring someone you don't have to look specifically for someone who knows communigate or domino.

2: Ties into AD fully. This makes administration a dream. Seriously. I used to work for a shop that used Domino, and it was the biggest pain in the ass. Users hated it because they couldn't sync their AD passwords. New people to the company hated notes because they were used to outlook and couldn't figure notes out. It was a nightmare for us new people to learn domino because it is not remotely intuitive, and smartphone integration was terrible. Just about every small and medium business I know is switching to android now because blackberries are just really not what they were 5 years ago. However this shop is still running BBs and BES because there is really no other good option for domino to have that kind of control over a smartphone.

Yes there are other products out there

Communigate
Postfix
Domino
Groupwise
Apple Mail Server
etc

and all of them have some advantages (cost, integration into non AD environments) but at the end of the day, I want something that works, is simple, has ample support available, and that I can leave to an incoming admin and not have their head explode when the first outage comes.
Click to expand...


Sure, for 20 users, but once you start hitting 500+ users it becomes quite ridiculous. And if you virtualize, there goes support, they wont want to help you. Troubleshooting exchange issues is quite insane too. We have an issue with our exchange environment that we've been pulling our hair about for the past 3 years but because it's virtualized MS wont help us. That's another thing, you pay for a product so you can have support, yet you have to pay for support. WTF? Ms really does find every possible angle to rape you. If I was to start a company from scratch it would be an open source shop from the get go. If a problem is so complex that even the OS community can't help, you have full access to the source code. The time you spend on the phone with someone from India is time you could be spending in a text editor actually fixing the problem.

Exchange is great when it works, but when you start getting issues, it can really be a nightmare. Maybe it's better in 2008, but all environments I've seen are on 2003, so can't really speak for it.

Personally if I was starting a new IT environment I would want something that can expand without any extra cost outside of hardware. These per user type licensing schemes are retarded.
 
If you are running Exchange 2003 in a virtual environment, then sure, MS won't help you, but maybe its time to upgrade, you are already two versions behind and your version is 8 years old. Exchange has bee supported in virtual environments since version 2007 and continues with 2010. I have been installing, managing, configuring and maintaining Exchange since 5.5 and let tell you the product has improved dramatically over the years. 2003 was a great product, a few of my customers are still on it, there is plenty of support out there still and a huge community to help you. Its a lot easier to troubleshoot in 2010 then it ever has been before. Its unfair of you to slam a product when your using an older version, 2010 is a beautiful product and runs perfectly when virtualized.
 
Red Squirrel said:
And if you virtualize, there goes support, they wont want to help you. Maybe it's better in 2008, but all environments I've seen are on 2003, so can't really speak for it. .
Click to expand...
There is your problem right there.
Virtualizing exchange 2003 is not supported.
If you want to virtualize exchange move to 2010. It is fully supported by microsoft.

Your biggest problem is you are basing all your opinions on a software revision that is 8 years old. What was the state of google back in 2003? Did Google Apps even exist back in 2003? I dont think so.

You are comparing google and other cloud based solutions of TODAY with a product feature set from 8 YEARS AGO.
 
Red Squirrel said:
Sure, for 20 users, but once you start hitting 500+ users it becomes quite ridiculous.
Click to expand...

You tried clustering? I can't think of anything that can cluster a mail server. Clustering is awesome when you have 500+ users world-wide.

If you go with an open source solution, if you run into problems, sure you'll have support, but it becomes an issue of trust, if some guy gives you something that works, but embedded some code that will wreck your company, and you don't have competent people to comb the code before production, what good is open source? With my organization, MS organizes training courses and stuff specifically for what we want (Exchange, Server, etc.)
 
Red Squirrel said:
Sure, for 20 users, but once you start hitting 500+ users it becomes quite ridiculous. And if you virtualize, there goes support, they wont want to help you. Troubleshooting exchange issues is quite insane too. We have an issue with our exchange environment that we've been pulling our hair about for the past 3 years but because it's virtualized MS wont help us. That's another thing, you pay for a product so you can have support, yet you have to pay for support. WTF? Ms really does find every possible angle to rape you. If I was to start a company from scratch it would be an open source shop from the get go. If a problem is so complex that even the OS community can't help, you have full access to the source code. The time you spend on the phone with someone from India is time you could be spending in a text editor actually fixing the problem.
Click to expand...

I have over 1000 mailboxes in my hosted exchange environment, I have a CASarray (CAS clustering) and a DAG (mailbox cluster). There were some issues with my cluster, but those have been resolved. As far as virtualization goes, you are right, 2003 it sucked as it wasn't supported. 2007 brought support, and 2010 runs amazingly well virtualized. Not to mention if I were building a new server tomorrow I couldn't even buy a 2003 license if I wanted to so no matter what I am going to 2010. I could also mention that 2003 is coming EOL in the next couple years so just about every shop large and small currently on 2003 is migrating.

As far as paying for support, how is that any different then buying say VMware or BES. You pay for the license, but that comes with no support. You want support you pay more, but MS doesn't want to directly support it, they want their gold partners (like my shop) to support it. We have a direct line to microsoft and don't pay for support for any product because we pay an annual fee.

Personally if I was starting a new IT environment I would want something that can expand without any extra cost outside of hardware. These per user type licensing schemes are retarded.
Click to expand...

Trust me, I have a couple clients who are 100% open source (firewall, to server, all the way to running Ubuntu 10.4 on all their desktops/laptops). Open source isn't any better. At least with microsoft there is a phone number you can call so someone can help you. Open source stuff relies mostly on forum / wiki / IRC support. Yes there are many products that have started offering dedicated support, but guess what, they aren't any cheaper then the big guys. Not to mention when you start looking at like Novell, RedHat, etc their enterprise class stuff all comes with per user type licensing. You could argue that you know open source product x so well you don't need support which is fine, but when you hit the wall and all you have is a thread full of "man that's pretty crazy, I have no idea" posts you will be wishing there was real dedicated support. Personally I have no issue with per seat licensing. Figuring out how many licenses you need and how much room for growth you should buy isn't an issue for most people, and should you outgrow your current licensing you just call your vender and buy more, simple.
 
ShadowStriker said:
You tried clustering? I can't think of anything that can cluster a mail server. Clustering is awesome when you have 500+ users world-wide.
Click to expand...

Clustering is not the hurdle it's been in the past. Between SANs for shared mail stores and IMAP/SMTP gateways/proxies you have several options for creating a clustered mail service. Nothing too tricky, but it does require a competent admin and good internal controls/documentation to prevent it from getting ugly. I presume the same could be said about Exchange however, when it comes to the amount of users that require clustering.
 
to reiterate what's been said:

  • AD integration
  • domino sucks
  • DAG/cluster
  • compatibility (attachments, plugins, message formats)
  • domino sucks
  • inherent "cloud" flaws - users understand the occasional send/receive outage. god help you if they are unable to access their inbox at any point though.
  • domino sucks
 
demografik said:
to reiterate what's been said:

  • AD integration
  • domino sucks
  • DAG/cluster
  • compatibility (attachments, plugins, message formats)
  • domino sucks
  • inherent "cloud" flaws - users understand the occasional send/receive outage. god help you if they are unable to access their inbox at any point though.
  • domino sucks
Click to expand...
  • Groupwise sucks
  • Novell sucks
  • Groupwise sucks
 
cyr0n_k0r said:
  • Groupwise sucks
  • Novell sucks
  • Groupwise sucks
Click to expand...
Oh hell yes. I managed to find two jobs in row that used novell shit. I'm finally free of it, but it was a scarring experience.

Someone mentions zenworks, I start twitching.
 
young_one said:
Domino and Notes...if properly configured...is a huge leap ahead of Exchange and Outlook.
Click to expand...

LOL!

Wow.

HAHAHA!

OK, anyway, there are lots of reasons. It's safe to say the OP has never managed an enterprise email/calendering/application shop. He doesn't know what he doesn't know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top