The End of In House Email
-
This is a key piece of why I have been preaching against in house email for years. This is nothing new. When NTG ran in house email many years ago this was already a huge problem and it is only getting worse. No matter how much time and money and expertise you put into running your own email infrastructure you are always at risk of not having the volume and clout necessary to strong arm the blacklisting services and individual email operators into allowing email from you to come through.
It is as simple as "reliable email delivery is not possible as an independent in-house email operator." It is just the nature of the market. You can make in house email cheap and stable but there is no way to get the delivery reliability of Gmail, Office 365 or Rackspace.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I'm not sure what the article means by handling. We use a third-party filtering service (GFI) for all our incoming and outgoing e-mail. So we still maintain an in-house e-mail server, but it doesn't communicate directly with the outside world, it only communicates with GFI's servers.
That qualifies as not really being in-house. Your SMTP (email) terminates with a huge, external host. Only your mailbox handling is internal. The email protocol is handled externally, only your backend manipulation is in house. That has and will remain an option for a long time, maybe forever. There are lots of good reasons to get that hosted too, but the reasons for that are much different and almost all financial.
-
I have been debating on killing email as a function of website hosting. I have seen other hosting companies drop email hosting in favor for O365 email hosting.
Worst part of running a web server for clients is the email issues that arise. I could offload that to another cloud service and they can choose between Google Apps and O365.
-
@technobabble maybe the answer is coaching clients that web hosting doesn't imply email hosting and the two should never be tied together.
-
With solutions like Office365 being so cheap, why would anyone want to host in-house email anymore?
-
@thanksaj said:
With solutions like Office365 being so cheap, why would anyone want to host in-house email anymore?
Especially when you realize that Rackspace email is half that cost!
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thanksaj said:
With solutions like Office365 being so cheap, why would anyone want to host in-house email anymore?
Especially when you realize that Rackspace email is half that cost!
True. If you need strictly email, Rackspace is dirt cheap.
-
On premise Exchange can still work out much cheaper I would guess, even factoring in the cost of 3rd party filtering
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@technobabble maybe the answer is coaching clients that web hosting doesn't imply email hosting and the two should never be tied together.
I think the reason I haven't done anything is I don't know who to EOL their existing web mail and how to transfer that to their new mail server since most are not using a desktop client.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
On premise Exchange can still work out much cheaper I would guess, even factoring in the cost of 3rd party filtering
It can but not easily. If you want to have extensive storage, backup, failover and other features of Office 365, you can't. But if you are willing to skimp on those things you can, but you can only save so much. Maybe $1/user/mo. which is 25%, which is something certainly, but only so much. But it comes with a lot of risks - both in things like downtime but also in things like the risk of misguessing licensing needs or update cycles or the amount of admin time needed.
-
@thanksaj said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@thanksaj said:
With solutions like Office365 being so cheap, why would anyone want to host in-house email anymore?
Especially when you realize that Rackspace email is half that cost!
True. If you need strictly email, Rackspace is dirt cheap.
Zoho offers a free email hosting package. I use it with my domains
Free up to 10 users (25 mailboxes) with NO ADS
-
@technobabble said:
I think the reason I haven't done anything is I don't know who to EOL their existing web mail and how to transfer that to their new mail server since most are not using a desktop client.
Even if they don't use a client, you can still use IMAP for a transfer.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@technobabble said:
I think the reason I haven't done anything is I don't know who to EOL their existing web mail and how to transfer that to their new mail server since most are not using a desktop client.
Even if they don't use a client, you can still use IMAP for a transfer.
Thanks...will keep that in mind. My goal is move email off my web server by end of Q1
-
And you can do IMAP without a client, per se. We had a script that we through together in Ruby long ago that did migrations for us.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@technobabble maybe the answer is coaching clients that web hosting doesn't imply email hosting and the two should never be tied together.
@thanksaj said:
With solutions like Office365 being so cheap, why would anyone want to host in-house email anymore?
@scottalanmiller said:
@thanksaj said:
With solutions like Office365 being so cheap, why would anyone want to host in-house email anymore?
Especially when you realize that Rackspace email is half that cost!
And if you are a Non Profit, it' is very much an education thing - and O365 is completely free for basic E1 class accounts.
-
@g.jacobse said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@technobabble maybe the answer is coaching clients that web hosting doesn't imply email hosting and the two should never be tied together.
@thanksaj said:
With solutions like Office365 being so cheap, why would anyone want to host in-house email anymore?
@scottalanmiller said:
@thanksaj said:
With solutions like Office365 being so cheap, why would anyone want to host in-house email anymore?
Especially when you realize that Rackspace email is half that cost!
And if you are a Non Profit, it' is very much an education thing - and O365 is completely free for basic E1 class accounts.
And the E3 is only $5/user/month! Crazy cheap!
-
Our Host (email & site) is giving each email account 1GB of space. in the transition we jumped to 50GB per person,.. which doesn't include OneDrive and SharePoint.
-
I have a better question - without having read this thread -
WHEN IS THE END OF EMAIL in general? This protocol needs to die! The lack of accountability and security (yes I'm aware that you can do SMTP over SSL - not good enough).
-
@Dashrender said:
I have a better question - without having read this thread -
WHEN IS THE END OF EMAIL in general? This protocol needs to die! The lack of accountability and security (yes I'm aware that you can do SMTP over SSL - not good enough).
Honestly, it's pretty good. People need underlying ad hoc communications. Email is that. There isn't even a serious proposal for an alternative because, at the end of the day, email is like what we've always used. Mail, telephone, human speech... these things don't have that security and they work because of it.
-
The bigger problem is that people use email when they shouldn't. It's not that email is bad or should go away, it's that other tools need to exist for those occasions when secure communications need to happen.
