Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 73

Thread: Yahoo selling Zimbra news?

  1. #51
    fcash is offline Elite Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    281
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Scholes View Post
    You also can't sync your mobile to it and this is becoming a very popular request. I have a Zimbra server at home for my small business but if I want to sync my iPhone I'd have to buy a 25 user license, and renew it every year even though the server never goes wrong and I don't want to upgrade as it does what I want it to do. I would be happy to pay a one off fee for a five user license but only Microsoft gives me that option.
    There are perpetual licensing options available, where you pay once, and can continue to use that major version of Zimbra NE until your server dies. No idea what the lower bound for number of licenses is, though.
    Freddie

  2. #52
    Mike Scholes is offline Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    238
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    dwmtractor, that's makes two of us living in the real world. I too have relatively cheap hardware, normally Dell servers, that have ran for years without issue with far less downtime than the internet connection. A dell server, UPS and two external hard drives for backup is an excellent an inexpensive setup for a small 5 user company. I have a company with 30 users that had a BT fault with the line and no Internet connection for a day and a half. If all their services would have been hosted it would have cost Łthousands in downtime. As it was we still had access to all our existing email, contact info, appointments etc on the in house server. When the internet connection was restored the mail started coming back in having just been queued on remote smtp servers. There's no benefit in your hosted services company's data centres having 100% uptime and 100% connectivity if you can't get to them cause your broadband's gone down.

    I see comments about Zimbra being much more reliable and needing very little attention compared with an SBS server and then they talk about the enormous expense of maintaining in house servers. Which is it, very little attention or an IT dept for every server? I hear how much it costs to have a reliable 24/7 internet connection for your in house Zimbra server but no mention of how much more important (and possibly expensive) those internet connections are with all your data out in the cloud. Sorry, way too much contradiction for me.

    We could disagree all day long about what's best, but at the end of the day I would like to see Zimbra as a real alternative to Exchange and to do that you need to compete at every level. So where do I order Zimbra NE with 5 cals?

  3. #53
    fcash is offline Elite Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    281
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Scholes View Post
    One company I service rejects between 10,000 to 20,000 emails per day. These are mostly emails sent to unknown addresses from spoofed addresses, we are all familiar with this. Using pop3 in this instance would be a joke. It means all these email have to be downloaded in full, analysed and then a reject email sent in full back to spoofed address and then bounce back. Having smtp time scanning of viruses and spam significantly reduces your bandwidth use and therefore increase efficiency and reduce costs.
    Actually, you have that backwards. By putting your SMTP server at the office, you are wasting a tonne of bandwidth for those 10-20,000 e-mail each day. If you had hosted e-mail, none of those messages would go down your Internet connection. However, then you would be using extra bandwidth to transfer each message as you read them. So it's a trade-off.

    And who said anything about POP3? Who even uses POP3 anymore? POP3 limits you to a single computer for accessing your messages.

    You keep your e-mail on your e-mail server, and you access them via IMAP, SOAP, HTTP, etc so that you have full access to all your messages, from anywhere, at any time, using any IMAP/SOAP/HTTP client.

    And any good e-mail program (ie not a web browser) will keep a local cache of messages, so you aren't constantly downloading the same message over and over.

    IOW, if you host your e-mail server off-site, and use an IMAP or SOAP client to access your messages, with a local cache, you get the best of all worlds: you transfer a message across your Internet connection once, and you never waste bandwidth on spam that is blocked at the SMTP level.

    If your email is stored locally it's so much faster. I don't want the frustrating delay in browsing online services.
    This is where a local e-mail client comes in. Using IMAP or SOAP, you get centrally stored messages AND lightning-quick local access.

    I don't want to be sending emails with large attachments out to the internet and then back in again just to reach the guy sat opposite.
    Then don't use e-mail to send large files. If he's sitting next to you, then just put the file on the local network share, or pass him a USB stick.

    I want to upgrade when I want to, not the hosting company. I don't want the hosting company going bust leaving me in the lurch, shall I go on? I can.
    So long as the data is easily retrievable, like it is with Zimbra, that doesn't really matter.

    They need remote access to email, shared address book, shared calenders etc.
    "Remote access" is the same, regardless of where the physical server is hosted.

    You have a lot of good points, but a lot of them don't make sense in the "hosted vs local" debate.
    Freddie

  4. #54
    Mike Scholes is offline Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    238
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fcash View Post

    And who said anything about POP3? Who even uses POP3 anymore? POP3 limits you to a single computer for accessing your messages.
    Yes they do and Linux can easily fetch via pop3 and distribute to local users mailboxes. In fact I have one company with a dynamic IP address and that makes smtp delivery a pain. Too risky with dyndns.

    Quote Originally Posted by fcash View Post

    And any good e-mail program (ie not a web browser) will keep a local cache of messages, so you aren't constantly downloading the same message over and over.
    But I want to use my Zimbra web interface, I want my zimlets, my advanced searching, and all the other great things the web client does. Can you cache contacts and calender items, shared email, shared calendars, shared contacts, briefcase and documents? I don't know the answer to this.

    Quote Originally Posted by fcash View Post

    Then don't use e-mail to send large files. If he's sitting next to you, then just put the file on the local network share, or pass him a USB stick.
    I agree but no matter how much "education" I give some users they continue and always will use email to send large files, even the boss does it and I'm not sure tattooing instructions on the back of his hand would help pay my last invoice!

    Remote access should be just that, when you are working remotely. You shouldn't be working remotely when you are in the office. Ultimately I don't want to risk putting critical company information on the end of a broadband connection. You can't beat your own server.

  5. #55
    linxunet is offline Intermediate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Newport, South Wales, UK
    Posts
    23
    Rep Power
    5

    Default Yahoo selling Zimbra news?

    I have to agree with Mike insofar as to say, it's about time Zimbra took onboard the demands of the SMB's if they are to efectively compete with MS Exchange server or drop the "Exchange Killer" statement.

    Hosting companys are fine where the redundancy level is equal on both sides, something in the UK which is way too costly for most SMB's, thus forces them to use alternatives i.e. in-house email servers.

    Setting up bonded lines, redundancy lines and the required hardware to be able to provide criticle hosted collaboration services is only an option for SMB's who have the money to invest in the local hardware, suppliers and ISP costs in order provide this facility, most do not and to enlist additional outside expert advice brings additional costs to the table.

    I have found that providing SMB's with in-house email servers has been one of the best and rewarding decisions ever undertaken, I have lost count on the number of in-house servers I have installed over the years, most of which are still running to this day in various incarnations from postfix, exim and zimbra.

    Most of the in-house servers went through the same steps of determining the clients needs against the actual costs or providing the services they required as shown below which has changed over the years:

    12 years ago internal email was the biggest request.
    9 years ago internal and remote email was the biggest request.
    5 years ago internal/remote email and appointments.
    2 years ago full collaboration services including mobile access.

    Although I have setup possibly just over a thousand users mailbox's they all treat the email and collaboration services as criticle to the running of their businesses, but simply are not able to afford the Zimbra NE pricing modal or have the technical skills or money spare for redundancy to have hosted services. In fact most of my clients do not trust sensitive information being stored on a hosted service.

    My point being that most of those thousand plus mailbox's SHOULD have been Zimbra NE mailbox's, the question is why wern't they and thats a simple one to answer, Zimbra NE costs. Most of my SMB's are under the minimum NE user requirements.

    Now some of you will counter what about the Starter Edition, it's only 399.00 p/a, yes, but what good is it, no support, no mobile bolton, unable to add additional users.

    If you want to dominate the market as the number one MS Exchange Killer, then take it on properly, get Zimbra out to the SMB's in a licence and pricing modal that allows it. I bet the increases to NE mailbox's would be considerable to say the least.

    I would like to see the following:

    5, 10, 15 and 20 user NE versions with 1 x support issue and mobile bolton (maybe call it ZimbraSMB5 - 20)

    ZimbraSMB prices based on $25.00 per user with mobile bolton based at $35.00 per user per annum.

    Ability to upgrade from ZimbraSMB5 through to ZimbraSMB20 to Zimbra NE.

    Alternatively, have fixed number of professional and non professional mailbox's (i.e. ZimbraSMB5 with 5 x pro mailbox's with outlook and 5 standard mailbox's with the Ajax client)

    Purchase it online.

    Kind regards

    Kerry

  6. #56
    linxunet is offline Intermediate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Newport, South Wales, UK
    Posts
    23
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Klug View Post
    Come on, 5 users company not able to get a dual PSU server do not need collaboration tool 8)
    I completely disagree, all my 5 user SMB's require collaboration services which is criticle to their business and run fine with a in-house single server and UPS with a single internet line and in-house backup scripts, it is not the quantity of users that determine if a business require collaboration service but what the business actually require it's users to use in order to complete their business needs.

    hardware and software specs are constraints of IT budget availability no more no less.

  7. #57
    Klug's Avatar
    Klug is offline Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Beaucaire, France
    Posts
    2,292
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dwmtractor View Post
    With all due respect, Klug, NO.
    8)

    Quote Originally Posted by dwmtractor View Post
    But there is no way that going with a ZCS hosting provider would have been cheaper than the FOSS solution we've been using
    I do agree about ZCS being "so easy to maintain".

    I don't think it's possible to compare in-house OSE and hosted NE.
    In-house OSE is happily used by lots of companies.
    I just don't understand how thay claim "we need collaboration tools and it's very important for our business" and get it along with the "current OSE backup and restore solutions"...

    Quote Originally Posted by linxunet View Post
    I completely disagree, all my 5 user SMB's require collaboration services which is criticle to their business and run fine with a in-house single server and UPS with a single internet line and in-house backup scripts
    That means the 5 users company has a "computer guru" in it, able to write in-house scripts and be confident with them (and time to maintain the server, check the backup, restore them, etc).
    I don't see this as "standard SMB", but I might be wrong...

    Quote Originally Posted by linxunet View Post
    hardware and software specs are constraints of IT budget availability no more no less.
    I do agree!

    I see this discussion like the Blackberry price discussion.
    If you really compare what is needed arround the BB device to get it work nicely with a collaboration server (such as ZCS) and sum up the prices (BB cellular data plan + additionnal VM + W2003 licence + Outlook 2007 licence + BES licence + BES CALs + time to get this work) I really doubt you'll get a lower price than "throw the BB devices in the bin and buy brand new ActiveSync enables phones"...

    From what I saw from the US hosted solutions last time I had a look at them, it was about 7 USD par user per month.
    That's 7 x 5 x 12 = 420 USD per year for 5 users per year.

    I just made a simulation right now on one of the gold HSP's website : for annual payment, 5 mailboxes (with global 10 GB quota and mobilesync) is 250 USD (per year).
    I know it's more expensive that a 150 USD used server but you're not getting exactly the same features...
    Last edited by Klug; 01-17-2010 at 02:33 AM.

  8. #58
    linxunet is offline Intermediate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Newport, South Wales, UK
    Posts
    23
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    I think the BB analogy does not work in this instance for comparrison, it's closed, very costly, flakey and most of the companies I look after have binned them in favour of iphones or windows mobile handsets.

    Most of my SMBs are indeed less then 15 users, many of them 5 users and they all require collaboration, so for me that is the norm, also I think Mike has more or less the same SMB populations as I have here in the UK, I think most of this collaboration mentality is a result to the explosion of the mobile handset industry, i.e. you are now always contactable and businesses are maximizing their employees potential whether they like it or not.

    None of my SMBs have an in-house IT guru, thats all left for me to sort out, the bonus side is that once you have written/modified/pinched backup scripts, there very easy to futher enhance for a particular site, and work a dream.

    There are also other benifits to in-house hosting, you know where your data is located, who has actual access to it, won't be affected by the Internet being offline (apart from pending email to and from the server) and as I previously said not many of my clients (which includes me) like the thought of some other business handling all their collaboration information even more so when most of my clients are Accountants and Solicitors.

    As I have previously said compete with MS exchange at the same user level, let the SMBs show that 5, 10, 15 and 20 user licence packs work, I know for sure that I will be able to sell the ZimbraSMB licences to new and old clients, so come on give it a go, you have absolutely nothing to lose by trying it.

  9. #59
    linxunet is offline Intermediate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Newport, South Wales, UK
    Posts
    23
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dwmtractor View Post
    Again, Mark, you're selling the SMB short I think. I have two different companies running ZCS FOSS--one on surplus IBM x330s that I bought (five at a time) for about $150 each--I have closet-redundancy there for very little money, and the sucker keeps on ticking. My other client runs it on a black-box machine he got from his local computer reseller. Both cheap, both low-power, both running without a hitch for years.

    Sure, crashes happen. But quite frankly, I've seen more outages from some large-company services (RIM, anyone?) in the past five years than I've seen with my own on-the-cheap in-house servers.

    In other words, I think you --and Zimbra-- are selling the SMB a bit short as to what they can do, and what their realistic budget numbers are. There are a lot more of us doing a lot more with a lot less than you appear to believe, and doing it successfully! The right ZCS SMB license (per-user Outlook connector, per-user Mobile, without all the other NE benefits) would be another revenue stream for Zimbra that they now are leaving entirely on the table. A la carte pricing of some of these features could open a whole new market, and I believe it'd be far bigger than Zimbra folks think. . .

    'Course I've sung this same song for an awfully long time now, so I'm not sure why I bother singing it again. . .
    Same here, one day I pray they will take stock and allow the SMBs to show that ZimbraSMB licence packs will work to their and our clients benefits.

    kind regards

    Kerry

  10. #60
    linxunet is offline Intermediate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Newport, South Wales, UK
    Posts
    23
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LMStone View Post
    Hi Dan,

    This is a great thread for a whole host of reasons (no pun intended...)

    Zimbra's licensing strategy is what it is. I don't think you can be all things to all people, and (hosting provider hat on), if Zimbra started selling 5-license NE bundles, we'd welcome that because like I said above, we make more money supporting a premises-based server for a small company than we do providing them Zimbra mailboxes on our hosted infrastructure. But our experience has been that few companies of that size are better off self-hosting their mission-critical email.

    We are also big fans of used equipment too. The IBM x330s are nice, and so are off-lease DL-360 G4/5. For a small enterprise, buying two of those used boxes will cost less than buying a single new current-generation box, and will result in less downtime too when the production fails. (Just take the drives out of the old chassis, pop them in the new chassis, boot it, update the NIC settings to account for MAC address changes and you are good to go.)

    But again, just because you can do something easily and (apparently) inexpensively doesn't always mean you should!

    Above all, we have seen too many small companies grossly underestimate the true costs of self-hosting, of which the cost for the gear is often just a small percentage. The other costs to consider are the costs for downtime, (which comprise not only lost revenues but unhappy customers, suppliers and employees, with all of the concomitant ripple effects therefrom); maintenance, monitoring, backups, D/R and hosting (i.e. ISP and related costs).

    For many of our clients whose business relies on having a reliable connection to the Internet, we are now recommending they have carrier-diverse redundant connectivity in the form of, for example, both a cable modem and a DSL connection. Decent DSL in many cases costs under $100/month, and the incremental cost for a firewall/router/UTM device that can do automated failover/load balancing between the two connections is often less than $150.

    All of these trends make the entry costs for self-hosting much lower it is true, but before you jump into the deep end of the pool we think you should be careful to estimate accurately the full costs of that jump.

    With best regards,
    Mark

    P.S., Just curious what the D/R plan is for your two clients... What happens if their offices burn down? How quickly can you get a working email system back up and running for them with all of their email restored? Or do they accept that they don't need that capability? And if they don't, then email isn't really critical for them - and using a self-hosted FOSS deployment is perfectly fine for a client like that. Not trying to take a poke here, just pointing out that Mike and I were talking about clients for whom email is very mission critical. Different rules apply in those cases I think it is fair to say, yes?
    Without being rude, but how would your clients hosted with your services cope or survive a 9/11 catastrohpic incident near your location, a bit over the top I dont think so, the devestation created to IT companys over the globe by the 9/11 incident proved it, just here in Manchester England a fire in one of the the metro tunnels took out main relay services for over a week effecting thousands of businesses, BT one of our biggest network providers disruption on it's main routing relays again effected thousands of users, this is not scare tactics but does illustrate you are just as vulnerable with hosted solutions and these outages happen a lot more then people are willing to acknowledge. If it were just email then it would not be too bad, but more and more businesses are trusting hosting services with their contacts, calendars, tasks, documents and online storage and like everything it's great when there is no problem, but when it goes bad, it can be devastating for the busnesses effected.

    This does not mean that SMBs are emmune to disasters but when some of the above took place, at least only internet activity was lost, and if a server dies, with the backup scripts created by myself and others within the zimbra community can have them back up and running within an half a day (in most cases we have responded with a system rebuild within a couple of hours) and 99% of our clients are using the Zimbra Community Edition.

    I think that there is a large SMB population that can and would benefit from in-house hosting whether it be OS or NE versions of Zimbra. I also beleive that Zimbra must compete with MS Exchange at the same user level which I call ZimbraSMB packs, and futher beleive that the SMB revenue that they could reap would awesome to say the least.

    How much would it cost Zimbra to implement 5, 10, 15 & 20 ZimbraSMB licence packs a few hundred dollars at most, as most of the work has already been done through the use of the licence keys, compare it to the vast rewards Zimbra would get from it makes no sense for them not to do it, so come on Zimbra open your eyes and let the SMBs prove to you that we can make Zimbra work no matter what environment it's placed, hosted or in-house.

    Kind regards

    Kerry

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. /tmp filling
    By Nutz in forum Administrators
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-22-2008, 02:00 AM
  2. [SOLVED] Clamav problem ? What's happening ?
    By aNt1X in forum Installation
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 02-14-2008, 05:43 AM
  3. Zimbra shutdowns every n hours.
    By Andrewb in forum Administrators
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-14-2007, 08:55 AM
  4. Can't start Zimbra!
    By zibra in forum Administrators
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-22-2007, 11:34 AM
  5. zmtlsctl give LDAP error
    By sourcehound in forum Administrators
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-11-2007, 03:48 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •