OT: Re: Alternative to MS Exchange

[Joshua Martin]

Shall we also consider the costs of anti-virus and anti-spam for Exchange
server?

Zimbra includes ClamWin and spam protection built-in - I know you can get
that for Windows too, but this is out of the box guys...

Also, Zimbra will probably run on fewer servers than an Exchange system...
You know how MS advertises their SQL server does several trillion
transactions per day for some company; they don't tell you how many machines
it takes to do that kind of work... By using Linux (with Zimbra as your
application), you'll probably be more efficient in your processing power...

A good IT consultant will evaluate all of these costs to determine the final
cost of a particular solution; the base software cost, the infrastructure
cost, the security and backup/recovery costs, and the cost of the guys
actually installing and maintaining the thing... Zimbra is by far, cheaper
than the solutions provided by Microsoft (heck, anything open source is
cheaper than Microsoft solutions!)...



On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Rashkae <ubuntu at tigershaunt.com> wrote:

> Joshua Martin wrote:
> > Um... I don't think Exchange is so inexpensive....
> >
> > According to the Microsoft website, the cost of Exchange 2007 STANDARD is
> > $699, that's all well and good but when you calculate that you also have
> to
> > purchase a CAL for each user that needs to connect to the server (let's
> say
> > you have 25 users at Microsoft's cost of $67 per user or device), then
> you
> > have a total cost of $2374!
> >
> > Zimbra does not operate under a service license + CAL for each connecting
> > user; instead you make one purchase of support based on your number of
> > users. This means that for 25 users connecting to the STANDARD edition of
> > Zimbra, with one year of support, you'll only pay $875!
> >
>
> 875 * 5 years (I usually deploy a server for longer) = 4375.  You need
> to pay annually for the commercial version of Zimbra that includes the
> Outlook connector.  And you really don't want to the same comparison
> for, say, 30 users :)
>
> > Factoring in the cost of Windows Server (do you need CALs for users
> > connecting to the server?), the cost of the Exchange CALs, and the cost
> of
> > Microsoft's support year after year, MICROSOFT EXCHANGE IS NOT
> INEXPENSIVE
> > COMPARED TO OTHER GROUPWARE SOLUTIONS...
>
> Microsoft Support? you'd have to be a sucker to buy into that :)  But I
> agree that cost of server + server Cal's is the devil in the details..
> that's why I said earlier that Exchange is not expensive *if* you
> already have server and Active Directory for your users.
>
>
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
>



-- 
_________________________________

Joshua S. Martin

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail message, including any attachment(s),
contains information that may be confidential, protected by the attorney
client or other legal privileges, and or proprietary non public information.
If you are not an intended recipient of this message or an authorized
assistant to an intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to
this message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination,
distribution, or reproduction of this message and or any of its attachments
(if any) by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20081204/fa238a6d/attachment.html>