On Dec 10, 2013, at 9:49 , Robert Schetterer wrote: > Am 10.12.2013 15:42, schrieb Charles Marcus: >> My question has to do with the POLITICAL aspect of this question of what >> constitutes 'normal' for mid to large(r) companies. > > what means political ? such as > with closed source you never know about backdoors ?
You have been lucky where you work then:) The "political" nature comes in when some Executive @ the company gets it stuck in his head that we *HAVE* to switch to Exchange but does the dog and pony show of letting the IT department trial several alternatives (Zimbra, etc.) only to ignore all of the facts that prove Exchange is the only option that doesn't meet any of his criteria and choose it anyway. So now that company has an Exchange server used by everyone EXCEPT the IT department and the critical web application (which still use the Cyrus + Postfix server). And the Exchange server has to be rebooted once a month. And the rest of the employees (including the owner of the company and that one Executive) gripe and complain about how they loath Outlook, but he's the one who wanted it in the first place.. The political aspect is all about irrational non-logical conclusions made by non-IT people in a company. So you really have to stack the deck proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the ROI on Exchange doesn't exist. Now if they are wanting things like "push" or native Outlook integration.. take a look at z-push, openchange and SOgo. which all run on-top of your existing infrastructure to add those features. (all open source too) Edward Rudd OutOfOrder.cc Skype: outoforder_cc 317-674-3296
