Solved Email server options
-
@scottalanmiller
Good point. Let me rephrase: I trust the ones deploying and servicing the software -
@dave_c said in Email server options:
@scottalanmiller
Good point. Let me rephrase: I trust the ones deploying and servicing the softwareYeah, that's what I was trying to say.
My issue there is that Docker makes that so much "assumed blind." Docker installs scare me because the assumed reason for using Docker is so that it is easy to install, but hard to fix - like driving front wheel drive in snow. It sounds like a great idea till you hit ice, start to skid, and realize that the ability to deploy easily comes at the cost of control in production.
Not that Docker can't be managed, but the logic behind it is skipping all the knowledge and effort of configuring a setup and just saving "issues" till production time. I'll take a lot of headache during deployment over outages in production anyday.
-
@scottalanmiller Or you could standardize on the two platforms that practically every business uses - G Suite or Exchange. Out of the hundreds of businesses I support I encounter two different kinds of businesses - those already on exchange/G-suite or those using the e-mail platform included with their web hosting which is a few GB of storage and basic POP/IMAP support. Any client I've picked up and converted to exchange is always thrilled with the ability sync their contacts/calendar items and the added bonus of a Apps for their smartphones/tablets that are polished and a joy to use in comparison to what they're used to. I don't know any other MSP/IT firm in the area that's pushing for any other solution. EOP1 licenses are cheap, it work's and ANY IT person can support it.
-
@scottalanmiller
It seems like I am very bad communicating. So I edited my reply @FATeknollogee to: It is to me and my use case -
@frodooftheshire said in Email server options:
Or you could standardize on the two platforms that practically every business uses - G Suite or Exchange.
Have used both, both are so much worse. We know Zimbra is better than those for us. Standardizing on "what everyone does" is a bad process. That's how you get bloat and expense. "Most people" make decisions based on a sales person's profit margins, not what is good for them. We know that our uptime with Zimbra beats O365, and that the product is nicer for us to use and manage. It saves us money month to month, and it lowers our support cost.
-
@scottalanmiller From what I'm reading in the last couple of threads, sticking with Zimbra seems the way to go.
-
@frodooftheshire said in Email server options:
Out of the hundreds of businesses I support I encounter two different kinds of businesses - those already on exchange/G-suite or those using the e-mail platform included with their web hosting which is a few GB of storage and basic POP/IMAP support. Any client I've picked up and converted to exchange is always thrilled with the ability sync their contacts/calendar items and the added bonus of a Apps for their smartphones/tablets that are polished and a joy to use in comparison to what they're used to.
We consider those "hobbies". We really never run into that. We find those on O365 and G Suite, sure. And on alternatives. And lots on O365 considering other options.
If those are the only things being compared, of course O365 seems great. And it's fine, but that makes it seem like an obvious choice rather than "just a contender."
-
@frodooftheshire said in Email server options:
I don't know any other MSP/IT firm in the area that's pushing for any other solution. EOP1 licenses are cheap, it work's and ANY IT person can support it.
That's because almost all MSPs you know are not MSPs but VARs and they make money selling those solutions. I know almost zero that recommend it and don't make money on it. As an ITSP I can tell you that supporting Zimbra is easier than supporting users on O365. And I can tell you that logic like "ANY IT person can support it" is a terrible reason, because that isn't what any business wants, they want something that makes sense. That even really bad people can support it makes no business logic and is a sales trick that people use to make VARs see dollar signs in being able to deploy cheap labor and charge a lot per hour. But an IT department should know that one good person is way, way more cost effective. It's the bottom line in the end.
EOP1 aren't cheap, they are "decent." There is no email platform worth looking at that doesn't have plenty of support in the market, even Exchange which is the most difficult. So availability of support is never a factor, there is more support available in the market than is needed across the board.
-
That's not to say that ITSPs that aren't VARs never recommend it. We do recommend O365 from time to time, but it's just one of many solutions. Are up to 400% the cost of Zoho, which is arguable a nicer platform anyway, it can be hard to justify. We have customers who want enterprise, hosted email, but are moving off of the O365/GSuite family because it just doesn't make sense for them.
As the cost of hosting has come down, the email providers aren't lowering cost (not the big two, anyway) making them priced more and more out of the market.
-
Just updated my mailcow server to the latest version
-
So the client is sticking with Microsoft, because their other systems are also Microsoft.
Here are the final numbers, unless someone freaks, they will be going with Office 365 Exchange Online Plan 1.
-
@JaredBusch said in Email server options:
So the client is sticking with Microsoft, because their other systems are also Microsoft.
Here are the final numbers, unless someone freaks, they will be going with Office 365 Exchange Online Plan 1.
WTF do they want both O365 and onprem exchange? Just glanced quick, but seems they could cut the cost by 80%.
-
@Obsolesce it's a cost comparison, he isn't having both, from what I can see?
-
@StuartJordan said in Email server options:
@Obsolesce it's a cost comparison, he isn't having both, from what I can see?
Yah I realized that later and wrote it in the telegram group.
-
@Obsolesce said in Email server options:
@StuartJordan said in Email server options:
@Obsolesce it's a cost comparison, he isn't having both, from what I can see?
Yah I realized that later and wrote it in the telegram group.
The comparison is interesting though.
-
This comparison misses taking it beyond year 5.
If you add SA to the original licenses - because you know the plan is the keep using Exchange going forward - it will raise the costs noticeably in the beginning, but come renewal time it will make it significantly less. Less enough to be under O365? not likely, hell, even the 5 year plan would be more expensive for onprem vs O365... but it might lower itself over time because of the SA difference.
Of course, non of this takes into account hardware costs (included in O365- though could be arguably negligible if a server platform still has to exist onsite) HVAC costs (included in O365 - though could be arguably negligible if a server platform still has to exist onsite), UPS costs (included in O365 - though could be arguably negligible if a server platform still has to exist onsite) HA costs - likely don't exist because licensing would be much higher.
-
@Dashrender said in Email server options:
This comparison misses taking it beyond year 5.
Why take it beyond 5 years? Because if it is on premises, it will need to be upgraded again.
@Dashrender said in Email server options:
If you add SA to the original licenses - because you know the plan is the keep using Exchange going forward - it will raise the costs noticeably in the beginning, but come renewal time it will make it significantly less. Less enough to be under O365? not likely, hell, even the 5 year plan would be more expensive for onprem vs O365... but it might lower itself over time because of the SA difference.
SA is a scam to get more money. Always has been for the SMB. With negotiated pricing for Enterprise, it is the right thing.
-
@JaredBusch said in Email server options:
@Dashrender said in Email server options:
This comparison misses taking it beyond year 5.
Why take it beyond 5 years? Because if it is on premises, it will need to be upgraded again.
@Dashrender said in Email server options:
If you add SA to the original licenses - because you know the plan is the keep using Exchange going forward - it will raise the costs noticeably in the beginning, but come renewal time it will make it significantly less. Less enough to be under O365? not likely, hell, even the 5 year plan would be more expensive for onprem vs O365... but it might lower itself over time because of the SA difference.
SA is a scam to get more money. Always has been for the SMB. With negotiated pricing for Enterprise, it is the right thing.
If you're a company that only upgrades once every 10 years - then yeah... SA is a waste of money, but you're already talking about upgrading again in 5 years, so SA could very much make financial sense - show me the numbers before you poo poo it.
