Opengroupware 280
An anonymous reader writes: "From the OpenGroupware.org site: the OGo project announces its formation and the release today to the worldwide open source development community of its groupware server software. Gary Frederick, Leader of the OpenOffice.org Groupware Project says: 'Just to be perfectly clear, this is an MS Exchange take-out. OGo is important because it's the missing link in the open source software stack. It's the end of a decade-long effort to map all the key infrastructure and standard desktop applications to free software.' There are also plenty of screenshots of Outlook, Evolution, Korganizer, iCal etc. accessing the server."
So... it's what exactly? (Score:3, Funny)
I'm lost. Is this like exchange, or is it secure? : p
WARNING: misuse of terminology in parent post (Score:3, Funny)
Get with the program already!
Yours humbly,
Ta bù shì dà yú
Sure, but... (Score:5, Funny)
How long till Microsoft tries to break it? (Score:3, Interesting)
MAPI? (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft Outlook using the ZideLook plugin and Ximian Evolution using the Connector for Exchange
So does this mean Outlook will work natively or not?
Re:MAPI? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:MAPI? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:MAPI? (Score:5, Insightful)
Can the plugin do all the stuff you need? I don't know, the site is scant on details (In fact its now at the point where I'm not sure if the plugin is Open! It may be closed and only in the "Enterprise" version...)
If OGo doesn't support the stuff you need, its Open Source and it can (And very likely will be) added.
Re:MAPI? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:MAPI? (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, I was wrong (Score:5, Interesting)
The SKYRiX distribution also includes some additional software which is not available as part of the OpenGroupware.org project
[snip]
Outlook Support for ZideStore
So it is not Open Source. However the OGo wire protocol is documented & available; so it is possible to write an Open Source Outlook plugin that can interface to OGo. Now wether someone does that is another matter (No one has written any Outlook plugins for any other OSS groupware projects yet).
Re:MAPI? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:MAPI? (Score:5, Interesting)
Et tu Brutus?
This project is laden with hurdles and I'd be very careful before contributing to it or deploying it. In fact, it needs a serious technical review. We've heard this story before.
Bynari, who has actually replaced Exchange with a Linux server running on the IBM S/390 had some problems with Ximian. Any plugin for Ximian required that one gives the code to Ximian, lock stock and everything.
The Ximian connector no work with anything but Exchange 2000 in "web mode". Not all functionality is present.
In an article in Linux Journal, February, 2003 page 52, the author outlines the components necessary for create this product.
Outlook only works natively with Bynari's Exchange Client Extension and it's Global Address Book. Otherwise, you're looking at an internet mode of Outlook and nothing special exists with that.
MAPI no longer runs the Exchange server, instead the monster runs XML-RPC. It will accommodate some legacy Outlook software, but not much.
Outlook 2000 service pack 3 running on Windows 2000 or XP desktop enables most of the functionality. But Microsoft has pulled off another lock in to obsolete Outlook 97 and 98 and will required installing the .Net framework to enable Outlook 2000 which will wind up on the chopping block once Office 2003 makes it's debut.
I wouldn't want to tackle this project. While the intentions appear good, it's just another me too.
Now, Colab - the German government's well funded project already works albeit with their own client and Bynari's connector which took the place of Steltor after Oracle bought Steltor.
I hope these guys succeed. But look at the carnage. Ever look at the Open Exchange Project. Abandoned by Luke. What about Sendmail.com's fierce announcement that it was going into groupware -- two years ago?
This is a tough customer. One of the worse development glitches, you need Microsoft developers to build parts of the product. Ooh, they just don't mix.
Re:MAPI? (Score:4, Informative)
Wasnt this what the Czar of rome said when his former ally Brutus stabbed him in the back?
The open source movement is hardly an ally of MS Exchange or am I missing out?
Anyway, what I was thinking was that Yes, you are right. Competing with Exchange IS a tough fight mainly because of Outlook being the most popular browser combined with the most widespread and, in my view, one of the most powerful collaboration systems around.
I support, implement and manage (mostly) *nix based systems..... And then we have Exchange. Impossible to get rid of because of two things:
A) Users like outlook
B) No other collaboration tool for the same cost or less impresses management
Now, point A) is easy. Most users tend to love Evolution too since it works in the exact same way but without shared calendars and the like, no change of software. period. Points B kicks in.
Any attempt to solve point B, ANY attempt, is most welcome.
I DO hope this will work since one of the major downsides of Exchange is the crappy protocol MAPI and its successors.
Re:MAPI? (Score:5, Informative)
A: He's usually called a "Caesar" not a "Czar".
B: He was stabbed in the crotch, not the back.
C: According to Plutarch he said kai su, teknon; according to Shakespeare he said et tu, brute.
It's funny, I've noticed how in love PHB's are with exchange because of all the bullet-points it has.
But when I think about it, I've never seen an office use exchange/outlook for anything but email and signing up for the conference room on a single public calendar.
Re:MAPI? (Score:3, Funny)
Stabbing an ally in the crotch is definitely to stab someone in the back.
Re:MAPI? (Score:3, Informative)
Ts,Ts,Ts. Kids today. Never read something else than comics.
A: He's usually called a "Caesar" not a "Czar".He's not called "a" Caesar. He was the Caesar, Julius Caesar. He was killed at the idens of March 44 BC, because he wanted to become imperator of Rome. The terms "Czar", "Zar" and "Kaiser" are derived from his name. And also the month of July and until 1513 the Calendar was named the "julian calendar" because he invented or at least ordered it.
Re:MAPI? (Score:4, Insightful)
Reply from OGo regarding Outlook functionality (Score:3, Informative)
> people will have is how to make Outlook interoperate with
> OpenGroupware.org.
Yes. I would like to point out that OGo is one of the very few
solutions which provide a full MAPI storage provider (aka live access)
instead of just a sync.
> Is the ZideLook plugin free?
No.
> If not, what are the
> licensing costs
AFAIK about EUR 55, depending on the number of users. For exact
information contact sales@skyrix.de.
> and woul
Still not good enough for enterprise... (Score:4, Insightful)
That being said it is nice to see that there is an option for mid-sized businesses finally. They were the ones who really got nailed by the MSFT tax.
Why always "big enterprise"? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm glad to see you're at least giving these guys a chance at the "mid-sized" business market.
Lotus (Score:5, Informative)
I believe Lotus was a full blown groupware suite before Outlook. For all I know, maybe even Lotus wasn't the first. MS is rarely the first to do anything; they are masters at co-opting other proprietary vendors innovations....then claiming them for their own.
Re:Lotus (Score:4, Insightful)
FC Admins may feel otherwise (Score:5, Interesting)
VoIP is already covered... (Score:5, Informative)
Check it out [asterisk.org]. It's stable, easy to work with, and the mailing list is very active.
Buzzwords (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is not techical its social (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Buzzwords (Score:2)
My new most favorite feature:
With a Pocket PC Phone version 2003 and Exchange 2003 (both of which I have), you can have it send you a specially formatted text message when you get new items (read: mail), a
Re:Buzzwords (Score:2, Funny)
More like, excretable. I have to use it at work, and it doesn't work right with Mozilla, so I have to use NS4. Admittedly, it could be the morons that administer it screwed it up :(.
-MDL
Re:Buzzwords (Score:2, Funny)
Reverse situation here, the admin morons screwed it up so well that IE won't logon (domain authentication issues) whilst Mozilla works fine. 8-)
Re:Buzzwords (Score:3, Insightful)
I have far less groupware experience than some of the other posters, but I want to share this in hopes that others can confirm or refute my opinion that the VALUE of groupware is overrated for many (if not most) organizations.
I have installed GroupWise and Exchange a couple of times as a consultant, as well as managing a mid-size GroupWise network for three years.
My experience is that everyone uses the group features in the beginning (for scheduling, conferences, etc.), but over time very few stick
Re:Buzzwords (Score:4, Interesting)
However, at my previous job, we didn't use a groupware package. We had a real X.500 directory server for addressing within the organization, we had an email system that was best of class that tied to the X.500 DSA, we had a calendaring system that was best of class that tied to the X.500 DSA and the email system (at the server). We had shared email folders via the email server and shared addressbooks via the email server also.
EMail as based on IMAP, SMTP, and IMSP and came from a company then known as Esys, later ExecMail, not sure if they even exist anymore). Their server was basically the same as the cyrus code. The calendar was CorporateTime (later Steltor and now Oracle). We used Palm Pilot handhelds that sync'ed with the calendars just fine. And later even added support for Windows CE (I left there before it was renamed PocketPC but I am sure that it worked as well).
We had about 3500 email users (all the full time employees of the organization) and close to 1000 calendar users (most of the professional and management type employees). We had about 90% of the users actually using the systems. Everyone was given a training class on proper usage of the systems by our in-house training staff and everyone was confident that they knew how to use the systems.
I attribute the usage of the systems to three things. First was training the users to use the systems (not every bell and whistle, but what they needed). Second was the fact that we didn't look for everything in one package, but got the best of class for each individual area. Third was that the packages would actually loosely integrate together.
That is what I would look for today, if I were assigned to get a groupware system together for a company. Unfortunately, with too many people interested in getting everything under one hood, it is getting difficult to get best of class applications. This is true in everything including office suites, office automation (otherwise known as groupware), etc. I have, to this day, never found an email client that I liked as well as the client from ExecMail. It had features that I have never found anywhere else. WordPerfect still tries to fall under my fingers occassionally for WordProcessing (however, I never really liked the rest of their suite.
Esys / Execmail (Score:3, Informative)
EMail was based on IMAP, SMTP, and IMSP and came from a company then known as Esys, later ExecMail, not sure if they even exist anymore).
Originally it was called "Simeon" (MUA and MTA pieces), from Canadian firm Esys. Then it was Execmail from Execmail, Inc. Then, there were some mergers involving companies called Isode and Messaging Direct, Inc. (one of which may now own the other; I forget).
In any event, that firm now owns the rights, and could resell it if it wished, but has appare
Re:Still not good enough for enterprise... (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, a mid-sized business was hit no harder than a larger businesses by Microsoft's license 6.0. In fact, Microsoft lowered the entry requirements for Select and Enterprise agreements, which means more mid-size businesses could participate in that particular brand of extortion.
Re:Still not good enough for enterprise... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Still not good enough for enterprise... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Still not good enough for enterprise... (Score:2, Interesting)
Let's not put the cart before the horse. Get a solid open-sourced replacement for basic Exchange Server functionality (Contacts, Calendar, Email, etc...) and the add-ons will happen FAST.
Like this? [exchange4linux.org] I'm not saying it's perfect (closed source MAPI connector), but everything and I mean everything is stored in pgsql and 99% of it is in plain English. I've just been playing with it these past few days (importing 4000 contacts, about 2500 emails, shared folders, calendars, etc.) and checking it out... work
Re:Still not good enough for enterprise... (Score:2)
No problem there; a BlackBerry plugin could be written for OpenGroupware. Just a SMOP - Simple Matter Of Programming.
Re:Still not good enough for enterprise... (Score:2, Interesting)
I've been itching for something like this to come along for a long time, so I can show the Directors what they are missing. OGo, coupled with OTRS [otrs.org] to replace our in-house fault-tracking system, and OOo to replace MS Office, and we'd be almost set. All that is left is somce decent Open Source CRM software to replace ACT! for Not
Documentation? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Documentation? (Score:5, Funny)
- You never talking about what we do.
The second rule of programming.
- You never talk about what we want to do.
The third rule of programming.
- You code first then document.
Re:Documentation? (Score:2)
Re:Documentation? (Score:2, Funny)
- You never finish coding.
I've been way too cynical lately. (Score:2, Insightful)
Good, but (Score:5, Interesting)
It sure would be nice to see these features in an open source alternative!
Re:Good, but (Score:2)
Re:Good, but...secure? (Score:2, Interesting)
Only part of Oracle Collab Suite (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, I have no idea about the stability, hardware costs, and licenses. But, it seems as tho Oracle is already ahead of Titanium - not that that matters much to M$ customers. Still interesting nonetheless.
While I commend the Opengroupware product, I'm not too sure when the OS community will be able to come up with something like the Oracle Collab Suite. Not that they have to, but I guess biz types will be looking for features that exist in a shrink wrapped solution.
Oh my god!! (Score:2, Insightful)
I can't manage to understand where is the real challenge in bringing such things to Mobile ?
Since most of Mobile use WAP or i-Mode, you can display anything on it with format similar to HTML.
In this case, the challenge is: make a good UI, nothing more, I think.
Gentoo ebuild? (Score:2)
This is excellent (Score:5, Insightful)
No apologies for my use of the language of aggression - this is the way of human affairs.
But seriously, this will drive OSS into the heart of mid-sized businesses.
"The circle widens" (Score:2, Insightful)
With the massive database support(Oracle, MySQL, DB2...), the small desktop tools (OpenOffice) and all the network management software (Too... Many... Help!...), the Linux was "only" missing some big back office stuff, as in a large cooperation engine.
Now, if you are really willing, and for the FIRST TIME, you can go end to end Linux.
and you are tight. Now that the backbone exists, all the WAP and WhatNot connectivity modules can be (openly) develloped.
Linux covers all
Re:"The circle widens" (Score:3, Insightful)
It is important for us to make a more general distinction between those things from Microsoft and those things not from Microsoft. In a healthy market, we should be able to focus on going end-to-end with any OS, given that it supports the necessary standards.
Linux is simply an option. A very good option, but by far not the only one. We need choice more than anything else, lest we stagnate once more.
Re:This is excellent (Score:2)
Your post should be modded +5 Funny.
Re:This is excellent (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This is excellent (Score:3)
Note on Outlook compatability (Score:5, Interesting)
To use Zidelook, you must use SKYRiX, and "enterprise distribution" of OpenGroupware. I.e. it's a commercial plug-in.
Of course, I could be wrong, but that's just how it reads.
Re:Note on Outlook compatability (Score:5, Interesting)
The staying power of Outlook is mostly due to the fact that a lot of companies are hooked on Microsoft products anyway. And I guess it will continue to be that way as long as Exchange keeps outrunning open source groupware alternatives. (Which it probably will for another couple of years, since this is a 1.0 version or something like that.)
Re:Note on Outlook compatability (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Note on Outlook compatability (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Note on Outlook compatability (Score:3, Insightful)
For several reasons:
This still costs $$$$$ to connect outlook clients! (Score:3, Interesting)
So this is really just another half-assed payware product. ugh. I hate exchange, I want it's abomination gone, but I'm not going to replace it unless it's with something free, open and stable.
If I'm going to buy closed source products from someone, it's going to be from somewhere tha
Kroupware/Kolab 1.0 (Score:5, Interesting)
Overhead? (Score:4, Insightful)
A drop in replacement for Exchange is great (I love the idea) but how does it perform? It would be silly to assume that just because it's on $FREE_OS it will outperform the Windows counterpart.
Exchange performance... (Score:3, Informative)
We were testing an email application. Send a thousand emails to a tiny free email server on Windows, it swallows and asks for more. Send a thousand emails to our Linux box, it blinks and says 'yeah, so what?' Send a thousand emails to the departmental Exchange server... it crashes and IT support screams at us for 'overloading' their box. Just cracks me up.
Opera Free Software? (Score:2)
` OGo is important because it's the missing link in the open source software stack. It's the end of a decade-long effort to map all the key infrastructure and standard desktop applications -- including ... the browser (Mozilla, Konquerer, Opera) ... - to free software.'
Last time I checked, Opera was commercial software, neither Free (well, the copy I'm using right now is Free-Beer ad-
My search is (hopefully) over! (Score:5, Interesting)
One concern is the selection of client programs. Most need an additional connector ($) or are less then functional (Mozilla Calendar or the web--people always complain about the web access for some reason). It would be my vote that the new split Mozilla works closely on their calendar features with this project. They have a good start already.
Thanks to all the developers and companies that put OpenGroupware.Org together!!!
-m
Independence Day (Score:2, Funny)
Another groupware project - cool! (Score:5, Informative)
Competing with the Outlook definition:
OS foundations Chandler (Calendar focused) [osafoundation.org]
Mozilla Mail (+calendar proj) [mozilla.org]
Evolution [evolution.org]
Open Groupware [opengroupware.org]
kmail/KGroupware [kde.org]
And from the Lotus Perspective:
www.phpgroupware.org [phpgroupware.org]
zope [zope.org]
OpenACS [openacs.org]
And Lotus Domino [lotux.com]which runs on Linux. The client works fine in wine or crossover - but is not officially supported.
I wonder if they can still (Score:2, Funny)
Alternative: Open source web based groupware (Score:2, Informative)
huzzah! (Score:2, Insightful)
Believe it or not, nobody here is aware of the others' appointments...
...and ever since switching every (office) PC down here to Mandrake, it'll all cost my company 0,00 (apart from my measly wage, which they'd have paid anyways)
Not Sun (Score:2)
Middle America, here we come! (Score:5, Insightful)
I know this because I work for one of those corporations, and they're getting killed by the microsoft licensing bullshit that's happening right now. They're still not switching to a more reasonable deployment platform, because they feel they can't live without all of the "state of the art" features in the microsoft package.
But I digress. I also agree that this is a great solution for mid-size businesses. And that's just fine, because the country is not made up entirely, or even mostly, of big business; mid-sized businesses comprise a huge chunk of the market, and they really are the ones who get screwed by the microsoft model. If they come on board to the open source game, then the market comes with them. The large businesses will follow along soon after microsoft loses the market share that small to mid-size businesses comprise.
define requirements (Score:5, Insightful)
For all the posts saying "it still doesn't do every last little thing that Exchange does!", do you really need those things?
You might try defining your requirements based on business needs, rather than the feature set of one piece of software. Or is that a crazy, radical idea?
Reminds me of all those guys doing simple web graphics, who say that Gimp doesn't do {some esoteric prepress color feature} that PhotoShop does, so they just can't use it ;)
Oracle are you watching? (Score:3, Informative)
Interoperability with MS (Score:3, Informative)
I think this idea of having a "drop in" replacement for Exchange is just nuts. Do you think the Apache project would have gotten to where it is today if they decided what they had to do was a "drop in" replacement for IIS? (Yes, I know the chronology of metaphor is skewy, but you know what I'm trying to say).
What we should be concentrating on is making the best possible tool for the job, not making it compatible with existing close-source software. That's the only way to win in the long term.
Evolution must have Connector?? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Evolution must have Connector?? (Score:4, Funny)
Step 3. PROFIT!
Has anyone actually tried installing it yet? (Score:3, Interesting)
But the (apparently) relevant page [opengroupware.org] on their site is just a walkthrough of the major system components, with a note saying
Which means that, apparently, the old ./configure && make && make test && sudo make install is unlikely to work here.
So -- has anyone tried this yet? Has anyone tried it on a non-Linux machine?
Make a new protocol... (Score:2, Interesting)
Exchange is a horrible product... The groupware calendar sharing isn't even real time. Updates are sent in the message queue. I hate Exchange... people are stupid... The only reason it does well is the same reason people buy a combo TV/VCR/DVD/DirecTV/Tivo that is all together... It's simple if it's all in one package.
I think the answer to Groupware problem is not new software; but to create a new protocol standard. Something to replace in a groupware environment by
Re:Make a new protocol... (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is why the world is full of IT staff that wish there was some way to dump it without having to get Accounts to agree to install a whole new set of clients (and possibly OSs).
A backwards compatable replacement is the classic first step to replacing a legacy system like Windows. With the current user base freed from their old system you can then go on to give them all the other things you mentioned.
TWW
Their acronym is a letter off (Score:2, Funny)
Why use Exchange as the template? (Score:3, Interesting)
Notes would be a better template for a groupware solution. From a server point of view anyway.
Another choice (Score:5, Informative)
Drop-in replacement? (Score:5, Insightful)
If it doesn't do all that (I can't tell, site is /.'ed), it may be a wonderful product, but it is definitely *not* a drop-in replacement.
Re:Drop-in replacement? (Score:3, Insightful)
Every place I've ever worked for the past 6 years has had an Exchange server, and at each company, the email and calendaring features were the most used. I am no fan of Exchange, or any MS product, but Exchange does provide a certain baseline of service, right
10 max ftp users? (Score:3, Funny)
A touch niche to break into... (Score:5, Insightful)
The other issue is unification. One search on Freshmeat reveals over sixty related projects. No one wants to band together on something. No one wants to create a "unified" product. It seems that there are a few things that have to be included by default - Exchange compatibility and transition tools.
Look at Oracle's Collaboration Suite, SuSE's OpenExchange Server, and all of the commercial "alternatives" out there. They include transition tools, but you have to hire a consultant to perform the transition. They include "Exchange compatibility" in that you can continue to run Outlook. Well, once you throw in the consultant and the cost of the connection utilities, you cost more than buying Exchange and licensing Outlook outright.
It's an endless cycle. Companies will continue to dump out alternatives, trying to play catch-up with Exchange, while Microsoft continues to add new features, lower their price to be competitive, and offer "free" training with purchase.
What's the solution to this issue? Hell if I know...I just install the stuff. But if we want a competitor that is _competitive_, the community will have to develop both an incentive to switch and the tools to do it.
Re:A touch niche to break into... (Score:3, Interesting)
I think you're forgetting that it is possible that an MS Exchange outfit may very well have a higher TCO than an open source solution. As a result, companies may choose to switch simply because it's cost effective. For example, suppose it cost you x to switch over to another system, but in the long run, it'll save you 2x every year. Sounds like a great deal to me. After all, it's arguments like this
Re:A touch niche to break into... (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, that is not true. Previously invested money should have no bearing on decision making.
If you take any economics courses, that is usually something that is covered early on. People have this instinct to worry about money that has been spent already, but logically it is wrong to do so.
You need to do the math to see if the future value of using an alternate solution is greater than the current
OpenGroupware live CD with German Linux Mag (Score:3, Informative)
Looks like this is exactly what we've been looking for all this time, and Skyrix will offer commercial support for the package as well as nifty add-ons (that cost some money).
Exchange replacement is hard (Score:3, Informative)
But Outlook has to stay. Primarily because no other application is able to do synchronization with PDA:s (both PocketPC and Palm devices) in a decent way. It's a shame that such a basic feature seems so hard to implement in OSS clients.
Mail is easy to replace. Exchange already supports IMAP, and throwing in an OSS IMAP-server (Cyrus for example) is a piece of cake. Tell everyone to configure Outlook to use the new IMAP-server and you're done.
Address book functionality _should_ work with an LDAP-server like OpenLDAP. Read this [onlamp.com].
The calendar thing is the hard part. Outlook supports publishing iCalendar data via WebDAV and FTP, but that's just FREEBUSY-info wich Mozilla Calendar ignores, and Mozilla publishes complete iCal-events which Outlook ignores. Great. Sure, there are closed source plug-ins for Outlook that could do the job, but we're after a completely open source solution at the server end.
I think we're going to replace what we can anyway and just skip the calendar part right now. Hopefully some software will evolve that we can drop in for a complete calendar solution some time in the near future.
It doesn't run on windows (Score:3, Insightful)
Getting open sourced applications to run well on the windows platform is probably the best way of fighting the Microsoft monopoly. It's much easier to convince management to replace propriatory software if can be done radually and in a less high profile fashion.
And when enough open source software have invaded Microsft space, there will be no reason to run windows as your OS. At that time there will be little resistance in replaceing windows with Linux or FreeBSD.
Re:hmmmmm.. comes from LinuxTAG! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:compatabilty (Score:3, Informative)
Hylafax could be set up to do that easily, and has been.
Re:compatabilty (Score:2)
Its when this is possible on a non-windows platform that people will look.
Hehe, I was doing that when MS Windows was still at like version 3.0, I don't even think they had a TCP/IP stack for another five years. As far as I'm concerned that's always been possible in Unix (Linux didn't exist yet). Worship thy google.
Mod parent down, please (Score:2)
> Let them know that SMP may make or break
> whether you can efficiently deploy OpenBSD
Check out KarmaWarrior's posting history - like this post [slashdot.org].
Re:OpenSSL rip.... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:How about finish *one* first? (Score:5, Insightful)