MSU Listserv


MSUNAG Archives

MSUNAG Archives


MSUNAG@LIST.MSU.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV at MSU

LISTSERV at MSU

MSUNAG Home

MSUNAG Home

MSUNAG  February 2008

MSUNAG February 2008

Subject:

Re: EMAILFUTURE

From:

Matt Holtz <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Matt Holtz <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 28 Feb 2008 08:31:58 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (110 lines)

Two things that I think keep getting missed are:

1. The per user client licensing of these systems causes the to become
extremely cost prohibitive when you start to talk about scaling them
into 6 figures worth of users. For the cost of one year of licensing GW
or MS-Exchange we could hire 4-5 engineers to develop a completely new
system. So, if we have all that money, why haven't we hired 4-5
engineers in the past? Simple, we don't have the money.

2. These systems haven't been proven (at least in my mind) to scale to
this size. Everyone "knows someone who knows someone" who has done it,
but as a person who has been running very large scale email systems for
the past 10 years (think 5 times the size of mail.msu.edu) I can tell
you that in that "circle" of people, nobody actually runs GW, or Exchange.

GW and Exchange are designed to be small to large business class
applications. They do a great job of that. They scale to thousands of
mail boxes, but they don't scale to HUNDREDS of thousands of mailboxes.
  They just simply weren't designed to be enterprise class solutions.

There is a reason Comcast just went with Zimbra. There is a reason
AOL's solution is "home grown". It's because they have systems and
designs that are proven to be scalable.

I will never trust a mail system that stores it's messages in a
database. Meta-deta, sure, but not the message bodies. It's just
simply an unnecessary resource hog. There, I said it.




Ray Hernandez wrote:
> John,
>
> In all fairness, I don't think you read my email fully. I _am_ using the
> GW 7 web client. That is the latest client available to me, and as far
> as I can tell the latest version your dept has rolled out. While iCal
> support is nice, it is not CalDav. From my perspective, iCal is a file
> format spec and CalDav is a server protocol. GW does not seem to support
> CalDav, until maybe version 8 or 9.
>
> This is where I am locked into using the GW client. I can't use any
> other client to alter/view my GW calendar. I can use the GW web client
> to do so, but I prefer using something else. The argument that it is
> going to have X feature "in the next version" doesn't really help me
> today. If every user on campus started holding their breath for things
> to be fixed/added in the next version of any software, we'd start having
> a lot of people passing out at their desks.
>
> I'm not trying to knock GW at all, I think it is a great piece of
> software. I am merely trying to point out that it isn't all wine and roses.
> --Ray
>
> On Feb 27, 2008, at 5:31 PM, John Evans wrote:
>
>> Ray,
>>
>> Your assessment is not entirely fair. The older version of the client
>> that you are using had very limited support for iCal. The version of
>> GroupWise that we have on our servers (and the client on our
>> department's desktop) provides full iCal support. Additionally, in
>> the near future, you will be able to publish and subscribe calendars
>> (including your own personal calendars) along with free/busy information.
>>
>> And NO, you are NOT "locked" into using the GroupWise client in order
>> to use your GroupWise account. Other clients will work just fine.
>> Our department supports only the use of the GroupWise client because
>> of support issues; that doesn't mean that other clients will not work
>> with GroupWise.
>>
>> For years, Novell has been providing products that adhere to open
>> standards and operate on multiple platforms. For instance, Novell
>> GroupWise can operate on Linux and Windows servers as well as NetWare
>> servers. How many other email solutions do? Novell products should
>> at least be considered when investigating solutions no matter what
>> environment(s) you manage.
>>
>> ...John
>>
>> (Scott - our Breslin server has been online for over 354 days and the
>> Kellogg server for a mere 218 days.)
>>
>> >>> Ray Hernandez <[log in to unmask]> 2/27/2008 4:02 PM >>>
>> As a Groupwise(GW) user, I think it is just OK. Groupwise doesn't
>> seem to support caldav. This is annoying to me because the biggest
>> thing I use GW for is email and calendaring. It locks me into using
>> the GW client.
>>
>> While the GW web client is, to me, preferable to using the desktop
>> client. I find it lacking in customization. If we are serious about
>> adhering to open standards, as I think we should, I don't see that GW
>> offers us much more than Outlook/Exchange.
>>
>> I don't think GW is a bad piece of software, but it could be better.
>> --Ray
>>
>> On Feb 27, 2008, at 3:45 PM, Scott Foreman wrote:
>>
>> > I missed this post ... I couldn't agree with Don more, GroupWise
>> > has been the most stable, scalable email platform I could ever want
>> > to administer. Run on SLES or OES2 makes it all the better. One of
>> > our Novell servers has been up for over 200 days, the last time we
>> > patched and rebooted was for the daylight savings update in October
>> > or November. I also heard at a conference that if you pay for SLES
>> > maintenance through Novell that you could install and run GroupWise
>> > for free but this probably works differently since we have a site
>> > license. The GroupWise 7.x web interface is very robust and easy to
>> > use, also includes calendaring.
>> >
>>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2023
June 2023
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
December 2021
January 2019
August 2018
June 2018
May 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.MSU.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager