Outlock connector

[jdcarson]

shared folders/public folders

[alexz]

Subscription pricing models are popular now because of the speed at which technology and features are evolving. My company has been implementing MS Exchange and associated mobile wireless solutions for a very long time (8+ yrs) - in addition to Microsoft NOS platfoms. The reality is that Exchange is stable and very well supported. It's a great platform and provides functional groupware features that have so far eluded every competitor (in my opinion).

HOWEVER - despite the fact that Microsoft makes most of its revenue from selling Exchange CALs, which are essentially MS Outlook licenses, innovation doesn't happen fast. Consider that the last major upgrade was almost 3 years ago (Outlook 2003). That's not exactly "Internet speed". Although they do improve on the back-end features via service packs, the most visible component is Outlook and it hasn't changed in 3 years.

The point is that people are more likely to pay for a subscription model nowadays - partially for the cash flow benefits that KevinH explained - but also if they have some sort of guarantee that features and functionality will increase more rapidly.

I want to mention one example - Good Technology vs. RIM/Blackberry. For years Blackberry has sold perpetual licenses. You pay one fee and you own the software forever. Good comes out with GoodLink, which blows away Blackberry in terms of functionality, but uses a subscription model. Some companies got scared away and paid one time for an inferior technology on a proprietary platform that hasn't changed since the first Blackberry was introduced. But a substantial amount of people chose the subscription way (and for other reasons like choices of devices, features, etc). And Good has delivered innovative updates more rapidly as promised while Blackberry still operates on the same equipment with the same UI.

The point is that as long as innovation takes place and value-added features are added then people won't mind the subscription model that includes support and software updates. Zimbra is going one step beyond and offering the source code - which no one with equal functionality has ever done (to my knowledge). Although practically speaking, the source code is not that great of a value if there is no one to customize the application. It's more of a benefit to enterprises. In the small/midsize community it's very difficult to get much use for source code since companies of this size don't typically seek software modification or are willing to pay for it.

Sincerely,
Alex

[ivo_toshev]

To alexz:

I will agree with all that you mention about subscription type licensing, but ...
from the point of the end-user.
Because end-user software is this software which users continuously expect to improve ( there is not spell-checker here - so excuse me if i misspelled the words).

According to Server Software and Collaboration/GroupWare - you cannot expect to upgrade any year. The only one which you can expect is pathces about some security/stability issues.

[Andy from Zimbra]

> there is not spell-checker here - so excuse me if i misspelled the words

Ivo, out of interest, which version of Zimbra are you using? The latest Milestone 2 release includes spell checker (in either the free open-source version, or the Network Edition). Just wanted to ensure you're aware of that....

[andreychek]

Originally Posted by Andy from Zimbra

> there is not spell-checker here - so excuse me if i misspelled the words

Ivo, out of interest, which version of Zimbra are you using? The latest Milestone 2 release includes spell checker (in either the free open-source version, or the Network Edition). Just wanted to ensure you're aware of that....

Hey Andy,

I think he may actually be referring to the forum software, rather than Zimbra.

Ivo, if you can spell "continuously", you don't need a spell checker ;-)

For those in the US, have a great holiday,
-Eric

[adobrin]

Moving on. Time to get started with this.

[Aderium]

Originally Posted by KevinH

At this time there are no plans to open source the Outlook MAPI connector. One reason is that we've used a 3rd party mime parser that we don't have rights to open source.

I 've found this interesting web page for MAPI connections
http://www.omesc.com/modules/main_module/

It is a MAPI open Source framework, have u guys taken a look at this for MAPI connections ?

Also I see some people mention the issues with slowness of MAPI connector when it performs local cache.

From a user standpoint, local cache is a good feature that guarantees better performance for mobile users not connected to the enviroment or for users with thosands of emails.
Some of our users have mailboxes with well over 2 Gb.

It would be nice if the connector could give us the choice ( from server or client) to enable or disable the local caching according to employee needs.

Also I beg !!!! --- a solution for Entourage, Mail or and app on the Mac Side

Kerio offers this for Entourage, Zimbra should be able to offer the same

Thanks

[KevinH]

Originally Posted by Aderium

I 've found this interesting web page for MAPI connections
http://www.omesc.com/modules/main_module/

It is a MAPI open Source framework, have u guys taken a look at this for MAPI connections ?

Also I see some people mention the issues with slowness of MAPI connector when it performs local cache.

From a user standpoint, local cache is a good feature that guarantees better performance for mobile users not connected to the enviroment or for users with thosands of emails.
Some of our users have mailboxes with well over 2 Gb.

It would be nice if the connector could give us the choice ( from server or client) to enable or disable the local caching according to employee needs.

Also I beg !!!! --- a solution for Entourage, Mail or and app on the Mac Side

Kerio offers this for Entourage, Zimbra should be able to offer the same

Thanks

A couple points. First our plugin/connector doesn't talk MAPI. It's native connector that speaks the same SOAP/HTTP(S) that our web client speaks. It works extremely well in cached mode, and in off-line mode. I personally have over 20,000 emails in my INBOX alone and the Outlook connector works just fine. It is sync based (ie only the changes are passed between the Outlook and our server after the initial sync). Sam can provide some more advatages to this apporach.

Better Mac support is coming. We are in an internal alpha with our iSync adaptor. This gives you true two-way sync of caledar and contacts. IMAP is then used for mail. This provides good Mac support with the native apps that ship with your Mac. No need to buy Entourage or the likes.

[sam]

It is a MAPI open Source framework, have u guys taken a look at this for MAPI connections ?

We are aware of the Brutus project. Their aim is to provide cross-platform programmatic access to Microsoft Exchang servers. We have no use for this functionality in our ZCS Outlook Connector.

It would be nice if the connector could give us the choice ( from server or client) to enable or disable the local caching according to employee needs.

In what scenario would you prefer to have an online mode vs a cached mode? To clarify, cached mode is a two-way replication between and end-users machine and a mailbox on the server.

[Aderium]

Originally Posted by KevinH

Better Mac support is coming. We are in an internal alpha with our iSync adaptor. This gives you true two-way sync of caledar and contacts. IMAP is then used for mail. This provides good Mac support with the native apps that ship with your Mac. No need to buy Entourage or the likes.

Uhmmm... will that allow delegations and Public folders ?

Also it would be nice to see some effort in integration with Open Directory...