Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 15:03:04 -0600 (CST) From: Duo <duo@digitalarcadia.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MS Exchange server on FreeBSD? Message-ID: <Pine.OSX.4.61.0503201441070.17363@valkyrie.local> In-Reply-To: <509316416.20050320191821@wanadoo.fr> References: <129416735.20050319101608@wanadoo.fr> <266982083.20050320105247@wanadoo.fr> <509316416.20050320191821@wanadoo.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > Duo writes: > >> And you failed to answer his question. Why not stop trying to avoid it by >> answering it. > > I did answer it. I asked for a product that provides ALL the features > of Exchange. And he surely knows what all of the features of Exchange > are, otherwise he could not say with confidence that other UNIX products > provide them. No, you didnt. He asked you *directly* what features we are talking about. you launched into a diatribe. Once again, you cop out by assuming he "surely" knows all of the features. Stop avoiding, go back to the original mail, and answer the question. > >> As for looking for non microsoft solutions, yes. There is a point to >> that. It's called voting with your pocketbook, and its a valid course >> of action in a capitalist society. Choosing to go outside a monopoly >> is a right. > > So you never buy Intel microprocessors, and you never buy anything with > a zipper? (Remember, YKK has a virtual world monopoly on zippers.) I also do not go to Major League Baseball games, what's your point? We are talking software here, your diversionary attempt will not work with me, mon amie. > >> And yes, looking for non MS solutions, for the sake of it, is a valid >> choice. > > Not for many corporate managers. They don't care whether it's Microsoft > or not, as long as it's the best tool for the job. People don't usually > reach the upper levels of management in large corporations by indulging > emotional attachments to one vendor or another. > To extrapolate your mickey mouse attempt at diversion, lets use how you would respond to this: YOU KNOW EVERY SINGLE CORPORATE MANAGER IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD? Who's talking emotion? Nobody mentioned feelings here but you. Bottom line is, other competitive software dosent get better, without a user base to use, offer feedback, etc. >> It's the only way some things get better. > > If you had been using Microsoft Mail (or its inferior predecessor, > Network Courrier, which Microsoft bought, modified, and marketed as > Microsoft Mail), you could have gone to Exchange and things would have > gotten a lot better ... without ever leaving Microsoft. > And now that embrace and extend has worked, Exchange, sits fairly stagnant. >> If for instance, I go with a product of MS, as opposed to a smaller >> OSS project, the OSS Project typically *cares* about the feedback I >> give it. It cares about the features I want and need. > > So does Microsoft. That's how it stays on top. > > It's all a bit amusing, since I remember when Microsoft was the underdog > and the Great Satan was IBM or DEC. The names change, but the game > remains the same, and the flying accusations are just as baseless today > as they were back then. > > It's a pity that no discussion of software can be carried out these days > without degenerating into religious jihads against Microsoft. > >> I need a credit card before MS will talk to me. > > You need a stroke of good luck before someone working on open source > will talk to you. > Heh. With that statement, I have to question why you are even on this list. You are here, talking with people who work open source, shilling a M$ product. You have some balls. > I'm still waiting for solutions to my SATA and SCSI problems. > >> The Exchange solution might be best for a gold partner with M$, but >> overall, a very poor solution, which locks you into a feature set, and >> a company that has shown little concern for its base of customers. > > The success of the product would seem to belie your claim. A lot of > organizations and users really like Exchange. > So, because cockroaches are more successful, are they above humans? >> In regards to its use of JET, Jet2003 cannot handle any other process >> running against its datastore, because it dosent have the ability to cache >> and then commit like a REAL RDBMS. > > There's only one process running against the database in Exchange. > > I have yet to see anything on microcomputers that I'd call a real DBMS, > but perhaps someone out there is coming close. Eventually they'll > reinvent what mainframe programmers knew thirty-five years ago. This is such a non answer, you are about 3 steps away from the ole killfile. > >> This is a problem for things such as virus scanning, and tight >> integration with an AD Environment, which is getting more and more >> replication based. In fact, some types of virus scanning can introduce >> data corruption of the store, which could lead to other issues. > > Step number one in any Exchange database failure is to turn off and > deinstall all the antivirus junk running against it. > heh. you amuse me sir. > I'd tend to prefer to put antivirus stuff on the client, not on the > server. Some users may not want their e-mail scanned for viruses. > Power users, in particular, may not want any virus protections at all, > since they know not to click on attachments and antivirus software all > too often hashes the very system it's supposed to protect. > >> What's more, the virus scanners that do run against Exchange's DB, >> also cost money, and typically require some more hardware. And >> overhead. So now I am running exchange, and a bevy of other stuff to >> prop it up. > > You don't have to run virus scanners. > I prefer to take the choice out of the users hands. MDaemon virus scans mail as it comes in. Users never get a chance to possibly infect their system. >> The whole point of UNIX, and Open Source is a number of people, getting >> together and saying..."It shouldnt have to be that hard" > > Or a number of people drifting apart and saying "I'm tired of working on > this." Or a number of people saying, "Look, I'm not paid for this, if > you have a problem with it, get the source and fix it yourself." Ahhh,so you are a troll. > MS has had YEARS to put a SQL backend onto Exchange, yet have not. > > That was a deliberate choice on the part of MS, mainly because they were > worried about performance and about flexibility. I've always felt that > it might not have been a very good decision, but there you have it. > > Then again, I'm not sure that _any_ kind of database is really a good > idea in a messaging system. You really don't need a full database for > e-mail. Wow, amazing, you can concede one thing. You are a remarkable troll. > >> With its history, and its track record, and indeed, with even most >> recommending a dry SMTP server outside of the regular exchange server, >> exchange is hardly a worthwhile solution. With the number of machines >> you need to run Exchange properly, (basically, 2-3) with freeBSD, I >> can do *alot* more. > > Real-world installations demonstrate that Exchange is indeed a very > worthwhile solution for many large organizations. The rich feature set > it provides more than compensates for its shortcomings, in the eyes of > these organizations. YOU KNOW OF THE SERVICE RECORD OF EVERY SINGLE EXCHANGE INSTALLATION? WOW. YOU MUST BE AN IT GOD. Or a really impressive troll. Which I am pretty convinced on. >> Not quite the "same" featureset as Exchange, but, I am supporting >> developers who *care* about what I want. > > Microsoft cares, too, and many changes and features in Exchange were > driven by customer demand. Companies that don't care go out of > business. > This is such a foolish statement, I cant even find the words. > Open-source developers tend to care about doing stuff that's fun, and > ignoring stuff that isn't. So if the features you want are fun to > write, you'll get them; otherwise you won't. > >> I am voting with my pocketbook ... > > How much are you paying the open-source developers? > Nothing. And, you know what? I get more than I paid for. I use CensorNet, a free proxy web cache package. FREE, is it perfect? no, but its getting there. I use both mdaemon, and postfix. Are they perfect? No, but they are getting there. Point is, at least I am supporting their work, instead of a company that has shown itself to be a most reprehensible player in the standards field. >> ... and, its highly arrogant of you to sit there and thinly accuse >> people of not doing right by their situation by not choosing M$ >> because they dont want to use MS. > > I think it is professionally irresponsible to let one's emotions drive > one's choice of vendor or product--particularly when one is being paid > to make recommendations on these. If one can't choose the best tool for > the job with a cool and objective head, it may be wise to move to > another career that one doesn't take so personally. I also think its entirely reprehensible to troll a list, shill for microsoft, and then attempt to make the people who do work on OSS out to be lazy, self centered nitwits who just work on "fun" stuff. I seriously doubt your credentials as any kind of professional, and I postulate it is you, who is emotional, as you have been the one displaying evasive behavior, as well as spreading divisive troll dust all over the place with your half baked assessments. <verbal masturbation snipped> >> Funny, then you are one of 5 people I know of, who claim to have no >> problem. > > I'm one of the people who knew what he was doing. > So, by virtue, its impossible for someone to have a bad experience, or give a bad technical reason to not run exchange. Because, they wont feel that way if they "know what they are doing". You are an arrogant shill. How sad. Please, spare me. Welcome to the killfile, troll. You are the most uncouth, evasive, unprofessional troll I have seen on this list. One wonders why you are even on it, as you take every chance you get to try to stomp on people who actually work to improve open souce. *plonk* -- Duo Although the Buddhists will tell you that desire is the root of suffering, my personal experience leads me to point the finger at system administration. --Philip Greenspun
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.OSX.4.61.0503201441070.17363>