Jump to content

Talk:Open-Xchange

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

This thing reads like an advertisement. Good information, but it has that marketing feel to it.

Also this should mention whether the server is MS Exchange compatible, as it clearly targets the same space. Anyone knows? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vsuontam (talk • contribs) 09:47, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Encryption

[edit]

Does Open-Xchange support GPG-Encryption in any way? Wouldn't it be worth mentioning if so or not? --213.183.10.41 (talk) 08:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Free?

[edit]

This page needs to be removed from the category of free email server software, as it is NOT FREE(just a free trial) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.89.126.2 (talk) 17:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. You can use it for free if you're willing to do the setup yourself. This is what the community packages are meant for.
Despite its name, it's still a commercial product. There is many versions available, but no free ones.
Sorry but this is GPL'd software, and is therefore FREE for almost everyone (sorry bsd'ers) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.250.202.25 (talk) 15:29, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, it is NOT free software (anymore). The only flavor that is not trial is OX Community Edition and that one is as a whole not free nor open-source by the definition of the Free Software Foundation. I am e.g. not allowed use that product for hosted services. To make things worse, they wrap free and open source Z-push into "Open-Xchange Connector for Business Mobility" and sell it for money. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.36.70.193 (talk) 04:17, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not Free

[edit]

Why is this page in the free Section? This Software is NOT FREE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.124.7.219 (talk) 04:57, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I Agree. "Open"-xchange is not really open and free. It does a good job at projecting the image of that though. My reasoning? Open-xchange is supposed to be an alternative to Microsoft Exchange. Ok, now lets imagine I have a company full of outlook clients and Open-xchange. I will have to buy it, since Outlook plugin is not free and not open-source. OR I can invest 1000+$ in creating a new plugin. The cost of a standard server is also 1300+$ which is in the same range as MS Exchange. So, where are the gains? Where is the "freedom"? Where is the advantage? All I can see is that it might be possible to change the server, tailor it to your needs... ok. But also the configuration is much much harder than MS Exchange meaning you almost have to buy the support OR pay someone to do it for you. Once again - you can sink thousands of dollars into the xchange server or you might just install MS Exchange and be done with it.
As far as I go, neither alternative is nice. Maybe community open-xchange + thunderbird with plugins? But still, hurdles everywhere. There is so much to set up it takes one man a few weeks. Also people don't like new stuff and since Outlook is most used everybody will resist the change.
I agree that open source must and can make money, but this is false advertising.--Neikius (talk) 08:48, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
**yawn** Of course OX is free. You do not have to pay anything if you want to run OX. You know, GPL backend, CC frontend and depending on OS components - that kind of free. Of course, if you do not want to spend any time on setting it up or simply lack the sysadmin skills, you do not get it for free. But that would be like saying that the LAMP stack is not free because there are companies taking money for setting it up for you. In RL, there are several government agencies running OX on a rather big scale without ever having paid a cent to OX Inc. (though they pay they their sysadmins, one would hope). But it is true, the Outlook connector is commercial (for those who think they need it): No sane person works with MAPI for free. Someone has to pay the therapy sessions of those poor devs after all. 217.6.212.138 (talk) 16:09, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
**yawn back** @217.6.212.138. Simple question to you. Am I allowed to install OX Community Edition on my server and sell emailing services? Answer: No, since the front end is CC-BY-NC! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.36.70.193 (talk) 04:22, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Screenshot ox ox6.png Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Screenshot ox ox6.png, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Screenshot ox ox6.png)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaned up

[edit]

I went ahead and removed most of this article since there seemed like there was some serious COI editing and the whole thing read like an advertisement. The list of features was entirely extraneous, some of the technology section could be rewritten into the overview but for the most part was not encyclopedic. Soapwort (talk) 07:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Soapwort: Thank you very much. Please have a look at the history again, I went a step further and left Christian.egle a conflict of interest warning. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:21, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No separation between company and product

[edit]

The article mixes up the company and its main product called "OX App Suite". Because the page is first and foremost appears to describe the company, I suggest outsourcing the product parts into a dedicated article or their complete removal, if they do not meet the Wikipedia requirements for notability and relevance. PeterThomasHorn (talk) 10:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PeterThomasHorn You can WP:SPINOUT the article and create one for the product if you like, but please use the WP:AFC process to mitigate your COI with the topic. Since you can do this on your own without someone needing to edit this article, I have close this request as answered. Please go to the WP:TEAHOUSE if you have any questions. Z1720 (talk) 01:58, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:52, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:37, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Open-Xchange&oldid=1209526206"