From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 20 09:45:36 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B77F16A4CE for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 09:45:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 041C043D1F for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 09:45:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedwin2k (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) j2K9jjb20907 for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 01:45:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 01:45:35 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <129416735.20050319101608@wanadoo.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 Importance: Normal Subject: RE: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 09:45:36 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Anthony > Atkielski > Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 1:16 AM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD? > > > "Tricking-out" a UNIX server just to avoid using Exchange may not be a > wise course of action for an enterprise. I'd be interested in knowing, > point-by-point, exactly how a UNIX solution would provide every feature > provided by Exchange. > Fine, you list the features you think are key ones and I'll provide it. > > Exchange has a much better feature set than any UNIX solution, and that > is a major selling point. No it doesen't. Exchange has a better feature set than MANY of the UNIX solutions but not all. > > > And keep in mind that the only serious coompetitor in Windows > > mailserver server software was Netscape and we know what happened to > > them. > > Netscape's product was garbage, and it was never a serious competitor. > It was garbage but it was a serious competitor, because it was the only company that had the name recognition to build it's product up - if it had been allowed to do it. Exchange in the beginning was garbage also. As I recall Exchange 5.0 couldn't even be configured to disallow promiscious relaying. > > Not true any longer. The latest Exchange versions have good > support for > > non-Windows systems. > > Exchange servers have to be Windows servers. There has been > support for > _clients_ on other platforms for a long time, but Exchange > works best in > a mostly-Windows environment ... at least if an enterprise wants to use > all the Exchange features (which it should, if it's going to pay for > Exchange). > The Exchange webinterface - which is usable from any operating system that you can run a browser on - provides exactly the same functionality as Outlook client with the Exchange Connector to an Exchange server does. Please explain how a Windows environment provides all the Exchange features to the end user and a non-Windows environment does not. > I've never considered a thousand mailboxes to be a large installation. > Exchange can handle a hundred times that without too much > trouble, given > enough hardware. > Not at the level that ISP's have mail passing though their servers. When was the last time that some spammer stuffed your exchange servers outbound queue with spam? Please tell the group how you removed the spam messages when you caught the spammer. And "letting it purge them by itself" is the wrong answer. Ted