Exchange might be the most popular but is it the best? We test the alternatives.
While I have dabbled with various different Linux- and Windows-based mail systems over the years such as Postfix, Exchange, Domino, and Q-Mail, I keep returning to Sendmail.
The choice for Sendmail and other variants of Linux-based mail servers is fairly obvious -- the operating system. Linux is a very robust operating system to use when facing the public Internet and when running critical online applications.
Particularly so in the days before alternative means of Internet protection such as firewalls, intrusion detection or prevention systems (IDS/IPS).
Linux also has phenomenal reliability and can work with limited resources, we have an Intel PII 233MHZ CPU/128MB RAM server running Slackware/Sendmail which has been running with approx
Don't worry this will not be a pro-Linux rant, we can assure you that we are certainly not a supporters of any one particular platform, operating system or appliance.
Remaining independent and subjective one has to concede that some features not readily enabled in a Linux environment would be seen as attractive to enterprise level IT departments, engineers, and technical staff.
These features are things such as:
- Ease of management and administration (particularly patch and security).
- Wide availability of vendor support and training
- Access to a ready stream of certified, experienced engineers
It also provides easily deployable integrated application options such as:
- Instant messaging (IM)
- Compatibility with advanced e-mail client application/features
- Unified Directory services
- Collaboration services
- Global document management
- Global calendar/diary functionality
- Global personal information management systems (PIM)
- Customer relationship management systems (CRM)
- Journaling or time logging capabilities
- Support for emerging devices and applications such as Blackberries, VoIP and other global system services
As mentioned, while some of these are available as additional applications and plug-ins to various flavours of Linux and its associated mail servers they are not as readily accessible or unified as most of the "other" vendors packages.
Interesting review, however, it misses in a nunber of areas.
1) At the low end of the market, the appropriate Microsoft product would be SBS2003. It is quite difficult to price the e-mail component as a number of products are bundled, however, I suspect the SBS2003 is a more appropriate product when compared with some of the lower end e-mail systems you have reviewed. Are you comparing apples with apples? or apples to oranges?
2) The the high-end of the market where clustering / high availability and a large number of users is concerned most of the reviewed packages couldn't deliver. Where is the indication of where these products sit in terms of number of users?
3) The most important criteria for purchasing an e-mail system has not even been considered, i.e. user understanding and productivity. Given the article asks the question about alternatives to Exchange, surely there needs to be some indication as to why customers continually purchase this product. And the answer is they understand how to use the client interface, i.e. Outlook, and individuals are productive. My feedback from people is they hate Notes (especially after using Outlook / Exchange) and they love the functionality and integration that Outlook / Exchange provides. An e-mail system is provided to enhance user/worker productivity and, essentially, they don't give a stuff about the e-mail server. They want functionality they can easily use on their client device and this is what IT Managers respond to.
4) I would suggest you have under-estimated Notes and Exchange for their back-end automation. Notes is a powerful database / workflow solution that provides much more than e-mail, so if you have such a requirement the other e-mail solutions look very ordinary. Likewise with Exchange, there is a huge amount automation / programming that can be achieved and an organisation with such requirements would seek a single solution rather than 2 separate systems.
Regards,
Russell Sumich