Quote:
|
Originally Posted by gmsmith Years of IT Management experience tells me when I am trying an application such as Zimbra, I do so on a machine that can be scrapped and rebuilt without impacting any production resources.
There was something obviously wrong with your machine/install if it was slow for 2 users and you were using anything close to a modern processor and had normal resource availability.
Zimbra is a complex application and interacts with the operating system. If you can't understand it, you have no business complaining about it if it doesn't work the way *you* expect it to work. |
Nope. That wasn't it.
The issue wasn't about how the system works, or how it performed, or whether I understood how it worked. The issue was about fallback.
I didn't care so much that I had to remove it from my system -- for whatever reasons you may care to attribute that decision -- it was simply that removing it from the system was more complex and insidious than I expected based on the "good advice" of someone on this list who thought I should take the very approach you suggested.
Let's say for a moment that the system I tried out Zimbra on really was a "scrap and rebuild" machine. Let's say the system tested out OK and I deployed it to a live production machine. That's where the rub is.
The installation instructions indicate that Zimbra should be the only application on the system. And it was in my case. I think the real lesson here is that, in the future, I will stay away from turn-key solutions like this that cannot co-exist with others or be rolled-back in a straight-forward fashion.