[opensuse] Which is better? Exchange 2016 or Linux-based SMTP Servers?
Good evening from Singapore, I am torn between deploying Exchange 2016 and Linux-based SMTP servers like sendmail, postfix, qmail and exim. Relative ease of installation and configuration is an important consideration factor. Exchange 2016, Domain Controller, and Active Directory are relatively easy to install and configure. Linux-based SMTP servers are extremely difficult to install and configure and of course, extremely time-consuming. One of the features of Exchange 2016 is that you can create additional folders on your Inbox in the server (server-side). Can Linux-based SMTP servers do that? Does Exchange 2016 offer more user-friendly features or Linux-based SMTP servers? Besides the above considerations, how about security? Traditionally, Linux is far more secure than Windows. Judging by security, Linux-based SMTP servers ought to have a higher percentage of the market share? Finally, I can only use Windows Server 2016 Standard Evaluation Copy FREE for a period of 3 years MAXIMUM. But I can use Linux servers and Mail Transport Agents (MTA) FREE perpetually. Please advise. Thank you very much. ===BEGIN SIGNATURE=== Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming's Academic Qualifications as at 30 Oct 2017 [1] https://tdtemcerts.wordpress.com/ [2] http://tdtemcerts.blogspot.sg/ [3] https://www.scribd.com/user/270125049/Teo-En-Ming ===END SIGNATURE=== -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
You got answers on the centos list. Why do you crosspost?
Good evening from Singapore,
I am torn between deploying Exchange 2016 and Linux-based SMTP servers like sendmail, postfix, qmail and exim.
Relative ease of installation and configuration is an important consideration factor.
Exchange 2016, Domain Controller, and Active Directory are relatively easy to install and configure. Linux-based SMTP servers are extremely difficult to install and configure and of course, extremely time-consuming.
One of the features of Exchange 2016 is that you can create additional folders on your Inbox in the server (server-side). Can Linux-based SMTP servers do that?
Does Exchange 2016 offer more user-friendly features or Linux-based SMTP servers?
Besides the above considerations, how about security? Traditionally, Linux is far more secure than Windows.
Judging by security, Linux-based SMTP servers ought to have a higher percentage of the market share?
Finally, I can only use Windows Server 2016 Standard Evaluation Copy FREE for a period of 3 years MAXIMUM. But I can use Linux servers and Mail Transport Agents (MTA) FREE perpetually.
Please advise.
Thank you very much.
===BEGIN SIGNATURE=== Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming's Academic Qualifications as at 30 Oct 2017 [1] https://tdtemcerts.wordpress.com/ [2] http://tdtemcerts.blogspot.sg/ [3] https://www.scribd.com/user/270125049/Teo-En-Ming ===END SIGNATURE===
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-- L. de Braal BraHa Systems NL - Terneuzen T +31 115 649333 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 07/18/2018 11:32 AM, Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming wrote:
Good evening from Singapore,
I am torn between deploying Exchange 2016 and Linux-based SMTP servers like sendmail, postfix, qmail and exim.
Relative ease of installation and configuration is an important consideration factor.
Exchange 2016, Domain Controller, and Active Directory are relatively easy to install and configure. Linux-based SMTP servers are extremely difficult to install and configure and of course, extremely time-consuming.
One of the features of Exchange 2016 is that you can create additional folders on your Inbox in the server (server-side). Can Linux-based SMTP servers do that?
Does Exchange 2016 offer more user-friendly features or Linux-based SMTP servers?
Besides the above considerations, how about security? Traditionally, Linux is far more secure than Windows.
Judging by security, Linux-based SMTP servers ought to have a higher percentage of the market share?
Finally, I can only use Windows Server 2016 Standard Evaluation Copy FREE for a period of 3 years MAXIMUM. But I can use Linux servers and Mail Transport Agents (MTA) FREE perpetually.
Please advise.
Thank you very much.
===BEGIN SIGNATURE=== Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming's Academic Qualifications as at 30 Oct 2017 [1] https://tdtemcerts.wordpress.com/ [2] http://tdtemcerts.blogspot.sg/ [3] https://www.scribd.com/user/270125049/Teo-En-Ming ===END SIGNATURE===
If you're already considering commercial solutions, then you may as well consider a few other, namely IBM's HPUX, whatever Apple's server is called, IBM's AIX, and Oracle's Sun, all different versions of UNIX and so quite similar to Linux. I never found Linux server software difficult to install, at least not since RPMs and before systemd, but if you find Windows easier, it may be because Windows strictly stipulates conditions for both hardware and software, making their environments more controlled. Linux, on the other hand, can be installed on anything, from a supercomputer to a smartphone... which is a good part of the reason Linux can be tricky sometimes-- that it's much wider in its environment makes the software more complex. Commercial UNIXes are also more controlled, indeed, even requiring their own proprietary hardware. I found installing their server software to be very easy. Their support was nearly always stellar and documentation well written. IBM's documentation was especially good. One overriding advantage that Linux has above and beyond *all* the commercial products is that you can try it out for free and for as long as you want. You can always switch to something else later. Windows claims to offer that (for three years only), but the problem with that is, however, is that after a year or two you'll have accumulated a lot of data and Windows generally doesn't make it easy-- or even possible-- to export all that data over to any of its competitors' systems. So their three-year free trial is kind of a sham. With Linux, though, I've found there's always a way to export data to a text file. The worst I've had was to write a quick bash script to do it. Just another few factors to consider. PS. It's understandable, even admirable, that you're seeking as much advice and input as possible. Yours is an important decision with long term repercussions. Good luck. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 18/07/18 11:32 AM, Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming wrote:
Good evening from Singapore,
I am torn between deploying Exchange 2016 and Linux-based SMTP servers like sendmail, postfix, qmail and exim.
Relative ease of installation and configuration is an important consideration factor.
Hmmm.
Exchange 2016, Domain Controller, and Active Directory are relatively easy to install and configure. Linux-based SMTP servers are extremely difficult to install and configure and of course, extremely time-consuming.
I'm sure many dispute that. I would. I think it is a matter of experience and background. I'd have trouble doing all you say.
One of the features of Exchange 2016 is that you can create additional folders on your Inbox in the server (server-side). Can Linux-based SMTP servers do that?
yes, and no. You don't understand the difference between a MTA and a MUA. A mail TRANSFER agent and a mail USER agent. Mail TRANSFER agents transfer mail between machines, handle queueing and retries, name resolution, routing and implement delivery policy. You can think of them as sophisticated PIPES. Please note: I said "delivery policy". A MTA may not always deliver to a an INBOX. And to answer you question, yes a MTA can deliver to a sub-folder (sub- directory) of the main INBOX. There are a number of ways that can be done including by specifying in the 'To:' field, and by controls the user can set up The SMTP protocol is one of the many transfer protocols that MTAs like Postfix make use of. A MUA is the tool the user uses to access the mail. There are, again, a number of protocols that the MUA can use. I use Thunderbird and Thunderbird itself can create new 'sub-folders' as needed as well. I also use Thunderbird in IMAP mode to access mail via a Dovecot server. That too can handle and manage sub-folders as needed.
Does Exchange 2016 offer more user-friendly features or Linux-based SMTP servers?
You are missing the point entirely. In the Linux world the philosophy becomes "each thing does one thing and does it well" That is not followed by Exchange. Exchange tries to do everything in one program, and does other things that are not connected to email handling as well. While Postfix looks complicated, it is complicated only in the top end of what it can do, and because it deals with many aspects of doing it well like implementing security and dealing with other relicant servers that don't properly implement the protocols (like Exchange). This focus on 'just t one thing' actually makes things simpler over all, once you get away from the absolutely trivial case. There are many advantages with this 'component-ware' approach. The Linux tools are much more scalable, can work well in distributed settings and more.
Besides the above considerations, how about security? Traditionally, Linux is far more secure than Windows.
Quite apart from the 'security of Linux" because of better access controls in Linux, there are security considerations about the separation of duties. SoD is often described in terms of human roles because the term is inherited from the accounting world, but it applies equally well to software.
Judging by security, Linux-based SMTP servers ought to have a higher percentage of the market share?
I think they do. Once you start looking at places like ISPs and major business gateways rather then SMB or departments service a plethora of PC running Windows. As business shifts away from Windows to the MAC or to Chromebooks and other 'mobile computing' the shift to Linux based servers for email will become as apparent as it is for the web and web services. Simply put, it is more easily scalable. not just in terms of 'ending up big' but the steps of incremental growth along the way are easier.
Finally, I can only use Windows Server 2016 Standard Evaluation Copy FREE for a period of 3 years MAXIMUM. But I can use Linux servers and Mail Transport Agents (MTA) FREE perpetually.
Actually more than that. You can take the drive that you've been using in the ten year old PC you found in the closet along with other junk like CRTs that were replaced by flat screen a decade ago that you used as a 'skunk works' project running free Linux, free Postfix, free DNS server ... onto a more recent chassis with a 4core CPU and DDS2 memory and other improvements without any licence problems. And in due course you can add a SSD first as a cache then as a main drive. The add a separate DB server to use as a more easily managed for the sheer numbers of accounts, then drag that old chassis back and run it beside the newer one doing load balancing and sharing the DB. And you'll find this is actually all pretty easy and there are a lot of people that have done it before you and can advise. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2018-07-18 17:32, Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming wrote:
Good evening from Singapore,
I am torn between deploying Exchange 2016 and Linux-based SMTP servers like sendmail, postfix, qmail and exim.
Relative ease of installation and configuration is an important consideration factor.
Exchange 2016, Domain Controller, and Active Directory are relatively easy to install and configure. Linux-based SMTP servers are extremely difficult to install and configure and of course, extremely time-consuming.
I strongly disagree. You find Exchange easy because you are used to it. I did some Windows admin training course, some 500 hours perhaps, and one of the exercises was setup Exchange. Only one or two in the class of 15 got it done. I did not. We all did the same things, but for some it randomly failed to install and configure successfully. I know one participant on this list that is on holiday now, but he maintains professionally some mail server, and he would perhaps say what he thinks of Exchange. Horrible for starters, I guess. Horrible even for people that do not admin it, but simply uses it. I used it as client years ago, over a modem line, on a very serious Telecom industry. It was horrible. Everybody in the unit said so.
One of the features of Exchange 2016 is that you can create additional folders on your Inbox in the server (server-side). Can Linux-based SMTP servers do that?
Your question tells me that you do not know what SMTP is. You have to learn first what is SMTP, IMAP, POP etc. And what is a MUA, MTA, etc. Most importantly, in Linux each protocol is served by a different package. Or at least a group of protocols. SMTP just sends emails from one machine to other via an MTA, a Mail Transfer Agent. Thus it can not create any folders, has no idea what a folder is. That would be done by the IMAP server, for instance. So you would need an MTA - for instance, Postfix An IMAP/POP3 server - cyrus, dovecot... An antispam/virus filter - amavis new Your difficulties with setting up a mail server in Linux stem from not knowing about this basic stuff. Windows hides it from you, even from admins - with often disastrous results. I would suggest reading these first: <https://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Mail-Administrator-HOWTO.html> <http://en.tldp.org/HOWTO/Mail-User-HOWTO/> They are old documents, there are new tools and protocols, but the basics are there.
Does Exchange 2016 offer more user-friendly features or Linux-based SMTP servers?
Besides the above considerations, how about security? Traditionally, Linux is far more secure than Windows.
Judging by security, Linux-based SMTP servers ought to have a higher percentage of the market share?
Market, when you don't pay anything, is very difficult to judge on Linux spread. It is impossible to actually count how many people install a Linux based mail server. It is possible if you purchase a business solution like SLE, but as there are several vendors of Linux based solution the total is unknown. I know, for instance, that my ISP is currently using dovecot as IMAP server, because I can read mail headers. Lastly, you have to consider what your clients actually need and want... because maybe they expects things like having a calendar and address book handled by "the mail server", too, and then you may have to search proprietary solutions or roll your own setup. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.3 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)
Am 18.07.2018 um 21:26 schrieb Carlos E. R.:
Judging by security, Linux-based SMTP servers ought to have a higher percentage of the market share?
Market, when you don't pay anything, is very difficult to judge on Linux spread. It is impossible to actually count how many people install a Linux based mail server. It is possible if you purchase a business solution like SLE, but as there are several vendors of Linux based solution the total is unknown.
I know, for instance, that my ISP is currently using dovecot as IMAP server, because I can read mail headers.
while this discussion is a lot about SMTP (which is bogus but anyway I'd like to point you to a market share survey for the IMAP-Server component which is a big part of the story of a mailserver: http://www.openemailsurvey.org/ The number is number of servers not user accounts. Exchange is number 5 there. Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2018-07-18 22:16, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
Am 18.07.2018 um 21:26 schrieb Carlos E. R.:
Judging by security, Linux-based SMTP servers ought to have a higher percentage of the market share?
Market, when you don't pay anything, is very difficult to judge on Linux spread. It is impossible to actually count how many people install a Linux based mail server. It is possible if you purchase a business solution like SLE, but as there are several vendors of Linux based solution the total is unknown.
I know, for instance, that my ISP is currently using dovecot as IMAP server, because I can read mail headers.
while this discussion is a lot about SMTP (which is bogus but anyway I'd like to point you to a market share survey for the IMAP-Server component which is a big part of the story of a mailserver:
http://www.openemailsurvey.org/
The number is number of servers not user accounts. Exchange is number 5 there.
The percent difference is staggering :-) Curious, there are still uw-imap servers out there. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.3 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)
Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2018-07-18 22:16, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
Am 18.07.2018 um 21:26 schrieb Carlos E. R.:
Judging by security, Linux-based SMTP servers ought to have a higher percentage of the market share?
Market, when you don't pay anything, is very difficult to judge on Linux spread. It is impossible to actually count how many people install a Linux based mail server. It is possible if you purchase a business solution like SLE, but as there are several vendors of Linux based solution the total is unknown.
I know, for instance, that my ISP is currently using dovecot as IMAP server, because I can read mail headers.
while this discussion is a lot about SMTP (which is bogus but anyway I'd like to point you to a market share survey for the IMAP-Server component which is a big part of the story of a mailserver:
http://www.openemailsurvey.org/
The number is number of servers not user accounts. Exchange is number 5 there.
The percent difference is staggering :-)
I have to wonder how accurate/representative those stats are. Virtually all of my SME customers use Exchange (local, hosted or Office365). I don't think we have even a single Dovecot. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (21.3°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Am 02.08.2018 um 09:26 schrieb Per Jessen:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2018-07-18 22:16, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
while this discussion is a lot about SMTP (which is bogus but anyway I'd like to point you to a market share survey for the IMAP-Server component which is a big part of the story of a mailserver:
http://www.openemailsurvey.org/
The number is number of servers not user accounts. Exchange is number 5 there.
The percent difference is staggering :-)
I have to wonder how accurate/representative those stats are. Virtually all of my SME customers use Exchange (local, hosted or Office365). I don't think we have even a single Dovecot.
I mean counting based on IPs can only tell you this anyway. It does not tell you how many mailboxes are on which IMAP. On the other hand I hope that all the "one mailbox on my home device" do not open their IMAP port to the public. I do not think that the numbers are wrong but they just show what is described: The type of IMAP server behind that number of IPs. For example what portion of your customers have opened the IMAP port for Exchange anyway? I guess it's still using something proprietary towards Outlook which would not be detected by scanning for IMAP servers. Also Office365 would probably count for 1 Exchange server (or a few more depending how many IP addresses expose the service in the end). Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
Am 02.08.2018 um 09:26 schrieb Per Jessen:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2018-07-18 22:16, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
while this discussion is a lot about SMTP (which is bogus but anyway I'd like to point you to a market share survey for the IMAP-Server component which is a big part of the story of a mailserver:
http://www.openemailsurvey.org/
The number is number of servers not user accounts. Exchange is number 5 there.
The percent difference is staggering :-)
I have to wonder how accurate/representative those stats are. Virtually all of my SME customers use Exchange (local, hosted or Office365). I don't think we have even a single Dovecot.
I mean counting based on IPs can only tell you this anyway. It does not tell you how many mailboxes are on which IMAP.
Right and that's okay - just knowing the number of servers is not bad.
On the other hand I hope that all the "one mailbox on my home device" do not open their IMAP port to the public. I do not think that the numbers are wrong but they just show what is described: The type of IMAP server behind that number of IPs.
Agree, I'm sure that is correct - the question is if it is really useful? What is perhaps interesting is how high up on the list Exchange is. 1.5% is probably very, very good.
For example what portion of your customers have opened the IMAP port for Exchange anyway?
None, I would expect. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (21.6°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 07/18/2018 10:32 AM, Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming wrote:
Good evening from Singapore,
=> Trolls are generally shot-on-site. That said, yes, Linux SMTP (imap) can do that natively. As to my preferred config, postfix dovecot procmail/spamassassin/razor I run with that for well over a decade. As far ease of config, I find configuration on Linux much, much easier than trying to navigate 30 nested dialogs with little or no comprehensive documentation while remembering which control gets a right-click and which a normal left-click to get where the option is burried. On Linux you have a couple of text files to edit, and comprehensive documentation to assist in the setup. The only real challenge is due to the flexibility each tool offers and the different ways each can be tailored to meet your needs. It's up to you of course, but I've never been impressed with any exchange offering. For groupware, it's hard to beat apache mariadb eGroupware -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming wrote:
Good evening from Singapore,
I am torn between deploying Exchange 2016 and Linux-based SMTP servers like sendmail, postfix, qmail and exim.
It may not be an issue for you, but if you ever have a need for supporting wildcards on a domain, I've been told that Exchange doesn't support it. A wild card would mean any email sent to a specific domain address could be 'caught' and funneled into 1 user mail box. I was told this by the comcast business support staff with the reasoning being that MS always wanted to be able to charge per user (coincidentally, so does comcast). If you could have infinite users at a domain, this would theoretically allow one to use 1 mailbox for many users, potentially an entire company, though I would find that a bit of a stretch. However, MS has traditionally wanted to charge companies based on the number of people who might be using their software at the same time. With virtualization and multicores, MS has already taken their first step toward getting more money out of their 1 OS/machine model. Starting with windows 10, but applying it to all versions of windows going back at least to windows 7, they now offer a 4-core license of windows and one that allows more than 4 cores. I expect that will be further fleshed out and differentiated as time goes on. Also MS with the most recent update of Win10, MS removed any installation using the cygwin version of ssh and replaced it with a microsoft version. While one user who noticed this didn't find it too difficult to re-download and reinstall the cygwin version, I would find it annoying that they deleted a non-ms version something that could let multiple users login to a supposed 1 person workstation and allow the ssh person to bring up a remote, X-based desktop. I assume the MS version of ssh would disallow that and force logoff of the local user as does their remote desktop facility. I'd suspect that MS might try to make it more difficult to use free software on their OS and "their machine" in the future. I've already wondered about the workability of porting a user-mode samba client to windows, for example, to obtain some of the newer SMB3.1.1 benefits allowing parallel user connections for file transfer. If you go with MS, you might find them tightening their terms later on or using 1 piece of their software to inspect usage on their other software packages. Just something to consider. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 23/07/18 11:23 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming wrote:
Good evening from Singapore,
I am torn between deploying Exchange 2016 and Linux-based SMTP servers like sendmail, postfix, qmail and exim.
It may not be an issue for you, but if you ever have a need for supporting wildcards on a domain, I've been told that Exchange doesn't support it. A wild card would mean any email sent to a specific domain address could be 'caught' and funneled into 1 user mail box.
And one thing about UNIX/Linux is that the concept of what is a mailbox is very, very flexible. It may read, at the user end, something that pipes though another process | /home/$USER/bin/antoherprocess Or that "one mailbox" may be similarly implemented for the domain by the MTA, Postfix or Sendmail/Proofpoint or Exim. And they *ALL* have *EXCELLENT* and comprehensive documentation that outshines Microsoft, plenty of examples in the docco and on-line, support access control lists, content scanning, encryption, routing controls, and can make use of any one of a number of different databases to support various aspects of their configuration. In terms of capabilities and documentation they put Microsoft to shame. And more to the point: they are both open and consistent. They use openly documented mailbox formats. I recall trying, for a client, to convert from Outlook and truing to extract the bulk of the messages from the (undocumented) message store. There was a 3rd party app for this, $$, but it didn't work. Microsoft had changed their store format without telling anyone. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming wrote:
Good evening from Singapore,
I am torn between deploying Exchange 2016 and Linux-based SMTP servers like sendmail, postfix, qmail and exim.
Relative ease of installation and configuration is an important consideration factor.
Exchange 2016, Domain Controller, and Active Directory are relatively easy to install and configure. Linux-based SMTP servers are extremely difficult to install and configure and of course, extremely time-consuming.
Given that statement, I think you have already decided. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (21.2°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Hi,
Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming wrote:
Good evening from Singapore,
I am torn between deploying Exchange 2016 and Linux-based SMTP servers like sendmail, postfix, qmail and exim.
Relative ease of installation and configuration is an important consideration factor.
Exchange 2016, Domain Controller, and Active Directory are relatively easy to install and configure. Linux-based SMTP servers are extremely difficult to install and configure and of course, extremely time-consuming.
Given that statement, I think you have already decided.
what is really important ist the fact that the licenses are expensive - you need a server installation license and access licenses for each and every client. You are allowed to install everything to test it, but you can't use it even for your single business mailbox without paying. Besides that, *in my opinion* Exchange is the best groupware server you can get at the moment. But I'm biased on this, because I administer and use Exchange servers for 20 years now, for years in a very large environment :) The important feature here is *groupware*, not *mail*, because the mail functionality is only the smallest part of the capabilities of an Exchange server.
-- Per Jessen, Zrich (21.2øC)
Bye. Michael. -- Michael Hirmke -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 02/08/18 04:58 PM, Michael Hirmke wrote:
The important feature here is *groupware*, not *mail*, because the mail functionality is only the smallest part of the capabilities of an Exchange server.
Yes, agreed. it is a fully integrated all-in-one program that does all that and propitiatory protocols and storage formats. The UNIX/Linux is, always has been, separate functions. The old "each thing does one thing and does it well". The MTA is not a database, but you can plug into it any one of a number of database system. The message repository is not a database unless you want it to be and is often, in simpler systems just a file store using a well known storage format on any of of a number of fully open file systems. Similarly with calendaring systems and more. There is no need to master them all in one bite. There is no need to upgrade them all in one bite as your needs grow. If you don't like one you can try another. As far as I can see Microsoft offers none of these 'alternatives'. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
participants (10)
-
Anton Aylward -
Carlos E. R. -
David C. Rankin -
ken -
ldb＠braha.nl -
Linda Walsh -
mh＠mike.franken.de -
Per Jessen -
Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming -
Wolfgang Rosenauer