zimbra partner with ubuntu

[CyberNerd]

Zimbra is to make it into the ubuntu partner repositories:
Yahoo's Zimbra officially embraced by Ubuntu - ZDNet.co.uk

now theres no reason to keep those aging exchange boxes!

[Midget]

apart from the fact zimbra doesnt work as well as exchange?

Zarafa on the other hand is looking very good (but not free)

[webman]

Excellent news.

Originally Posted by Midget

apart from the fact zimbra doesnt work as well as exchange?

Er, that's a fact? What is your evidence to this? Our Zimbra works more often and better than our LEA's hosted excuse for MSexChange (which has been inaccessible for about two weeks).

[FN-GM]

The only problem i ca see with zimbra is you cannnot get a software based client to automatically configure when you logon. On the other hand exchange you can get outlook to automatically configure.

[DMcCoy]

Originally Posted by FN-Greatermanchester

The only problem i ca see with zimbra is you cannnot get a software based client to automatically configure when you logon. On the other hand exchange you can get outlook to automatically configure.

I find the fact that you don't *need* a sofware based client with Zimbra to be it's most useful feature

[FN-GM]

I know you dont need one, but in my opinion its better to have a software base client while inside the network.

I must say though Zimbra is very good software compared to Exchange. Exchange just doesn't work as well as it should

[DMcCoy]

Originally Posted by FN-Greatermanchester

I know you dont need one, but in my opinion its better to have a software base client while inside the network.

I must say though Zimbra is very good software compared to Exchange. Exchange just doesn't work as well as it should

Why?

Zimbra, I just upgrade the server, job done. The same reason I used to use horde/IMP.

Exchange is a pretty reliable mail server, but I loath Outlook, such a horrible, standards breaking pile of junk.

I used Turnpike as a mail client for many years, and to those that know it, this will explain my hating outlook

[FN-GM]

Well when we used to run using Webmail half of the staff didn't bother checking the messages, now its just one click away on the desktop. Just a case of people being lazy.

[webman]

Zimbra works fine for us - we use Mozilla Prism in combination with integrated pre-authentication to give Outlook-esque login-less email to everybody. Outlook and it's damn DBX files is a PITA; we moved to Zimbra to get away from it.

[Midget]

Zimbra doesn't have a desktop client, which is a pretty bit thing and the AJAX interface is slow and stodgy.

Exchange has the fast, fully useable OutlookWebAccess if you don't like Outlook.

Leaving a browser window open all day is a pain, but with a client it can be minimised to the systemtray and still inform you when a new message arrives.

Zimbra doesn't have the ability to share mailboxes, deligate sending to someone (send as someone else) doesn't have shared calendars, doesn't have meeting arrangements.

As a basic mail server it's fine, but it will never replace exchange due to a lack of enterprise features.

[Ric_]

@Midget: Zimbra does have a desktop client but it's basically just the web interface - which you don't seem to like. If Outlook is an essential business need, you simply plump for the version with MAPI support anyway - therefore allowing you to use Outlook

The shared calendars and meeting arrangements functions are far superior to Exchange IMHO - you are presented with a little temeline for your colleagues which allows you to schedule a meeting for multiple people at a mutually agreeable time.

I haven't looked into sharing mailboxes and using 'send as' because it isn't something I have a need for. The other 'enterprise' features are all there though.

Zimbra also has excellent mobile-browser-based interfaces and there is a J2ME client in development. I believe that push email to Crackberries is also possible in the fully paid for version.

Anyway... take a look at Zimbra - Product Editions - the featureset is insanely rich nowadays!

It's probably pretty obvious that I like Zimbra and use it. tbh, my main reason for choosing Zimbra over Exchange is licensing costs. I found myself in the situatuion where I would need an ECL to publish OWA for external access. The open source edition has all the features I require - definitely comparable to Exchange - and means that I can spend money on things that will directly benefit learning rather than paying VAST sums of money to MS just to let me publish OWA on the web for the little darlings.

[webman]

@Midget - you seem to be sorely mis-informed about Zimbra or shielded by your MS-tinted spectacles.

Originally Posted by Midget

Zimbra doesn't have a desktop client, which is a pretty bit thing and the AJAX interface is slow and stodgy.

That's a good thing that there isn't one client. The web interface works wonderfully in Mozilla-based browsers. Using one single interface for internal and external access is good for usability. Zimbra supports standard IMAP/POP protocols so you CAN use regular email apps if you feel inclined to; and the Network Edition supports Outlook if you really need it.

Originally Posted by Midget

Exchange has the fast, fully useable OutlookWebAccess if you don't like Outlook.

Aha, but AFAIK, you pay extra for that.

Originally Posted by Midget

Leaving a browser window open all day is a pain, but with a client it can be minimised to the systemtray and still inform you when a new message arrives.

Mozilla Prism can minimise to tray and has new message notification.

Originally Posted by Midget

Zimbra doesn't have the ability to share mailboxes, deligate sending to someone (send as someone else) doesn't have shared calendars, doesn't have meeting arrangements.

Yes, it does. It has all of those.

Originally Posted by Midget

As a basic mail server it's fine, but it will never replace exchange due to a lack of enterprise features.

It has many enterprise features comparable to and better than MSexChange.

Antivirus and spam filtering come by default and swear filtering can be added - all at no cost.

[Midget]

I'm actually looking at a way of getting rid of Exchange because we are expanding and it needs to go onto it's own server and I don't want to have to spend £6500 getting it for 70 users

I setup Zimbra about a year ago and used as a basic mailserver for a few dozen people which worked well, but it didnt have all the enterprise features, and my friend is doing the same as tried Zimbra last week to the same conclusion. But we were using ZimbraCE so maybe it's worth a look at the commercial product line.

Although the web says Kolab is better, but I haven't tried it yet.

[Midget]

Originally Posted by webman

@Midget - you seem to be sorely mis-informed about Zimbra or shielded by your MS-tinted spectacles.

Apart from the fact I'm a Linux user and SysAdmin. I guess I MUST be in love with MS

I am currently attempting to actually find a system that works as fluidly as Exchange, in order to allow me to remove the huge cost of separating Exchange onto it's own server (currently on the DC due to the company having SBS2003 when I arrived) without removing functionality from our staff that are highly dependant on alot of it's advanced features. I would LOVE to change over but there are far too many compromises in Zimbra and most of the other FLOSS groupware servers atm. Even linux.com agrees with me.

Linux.com :: Not quite answered: Can open source messaging servers replace Microsoft Exchange?

but i digress, I can only welcome a great improvement in Zimbra that will make it a viable alternative, but it just isn't quite there yet.

[webman]

My apologies then

Like most software, there are many things Zimbra does that Exchange doesn't and some things that Exchange does that Zimbra doesn't. It just seems unfortunate that your end users "require" the features that Zimbra doesn't have yet.