> On Wed, 29 Sep 2010, Kent Saunders wrote:
>> Exchange might not be the answer, but I don't think there is any
>> reason to dismiss it off hand with MS bashing.
>> All I'm saying is if you're going to knock it, give valid reasons and
>> offer a better solution.
On 9/29/10 11:50 AM, Mike Austin wrote:
> Absolutely. Well said Kent.
> We will be looking into new products for email, and calendaring soon.
> Exchange will certainly be on the list of systems we evaluate, as will
> other commercial offerings, and some "cloud" based hosted services.
> When we're ready to undertake this project, we'll be inviting wide UVM
> participation in the testing and evaluation phases, so you'll get to
> actually try the technology and provide feedback on how well things do
> or don't work for you.
I actually thought of it more as a word of caution rather than ms
bashing. But if software dysfunctions equally the across the board,as
Kent points out, then client failure is a moot point for judging a
related products reliability. It's just that outlook seems to fail more
often than less integrated offerings, like say outlook express.
There must be a nice neutral evaluator out there somewhere that has
measured important considerations for a mail server, for instance
uptime. If promised/desired features get a really big consideration,
then integration with phones becomes huge. Apparently some folks use
google calendar as they believe it integrates a little more reliably
with iphones than oracle.
So here's two things to put on the eval list: uptime & phone integration.