Quoting Maarten Stolte <maarten.stolte@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > It's the mix of proprietary and open that I was referring to in my > remark about its openness. The plugins for MAPI are indeed for both > proprietary, so thats not really a difference. For kolab you can > indeed only use specific ftp and ldap servers, but they are totally > open. The fact that they offer a MAPI solution should _not_ detract from the fact that it is, indeed, Freedomware at the core, as well as to other Freedomware/Standardware clients. Furthermore, OpenGroupware is designed to work in conjunction with your existing OpenLDAP, MTA, etc... Which makes it an ideal "standard package" from the standpoint of "least intrusive" (_unlike_ other solutions that "take over" your FTP, HTTP, MTA, etc... functionality). It's just like Bynari's solutions. They basically sell a MAPI "workaround" in their InsightConnector, which leverages an IMAP server (and allows it to store than just email over IMAP). You can use whatever IMAP server you want, including InsightServer (which is rather "intrusive"), but you don't have to. > Kolab doesn't do ftp+IMAP spefically, it can do specific things with > ftp if needed for Outlook compatibility, but most is stored in IMAP. The > formats that are used for storing it in IMAP are normal open calendar > and vcard formats, so maybe the good outcome of this discussion can be > that both are rather open? Right. The _only_ solution I know that allows you to store non-Email data over IMAP is Bynari's InsightConnector. BTW, I think people forget that most of these MAPI-Outlook solutions have code that is _licensed_ from Microsoft, or a 2nd party on behalf of Microsoft. As such, they can _never_ become Freedomware or even Standardsware. The problem is the product, it's the Commerceware/Hostageware clients people _expect_ it to work with. If you choose "vendor lock-in" as your enterprise solution (e.g., Outlook, IE, etc...), don't expect vendors to not take advantage of your willing to "pay" to get out of it. -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ [NT-based] Windows itself has never been the primary issue with security. Secure configuration of Windows prevents 98% of Windows software from working properly, especially Microsoft's own. Hence why a secure Windows is not an option for enterprises and consumers alike, since it would prevent them from working.
