You are comparing two very difference things. On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 03:39:07PM +0000, Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming wrote: > Good evening from Singapore, > I am torn between deploying Microsoft Exchange 2016 and Linux-based > SMTP servers like sendmail, postfix, qmail and exim.
First, Exchange is a groupware solution. It includes SMTP, MAPI (Microsoft's version of IMAP), calendaring, and a whole slew of additional features and integration points. The SMTP server examples you cite provide only one of those features: SMTP. Incidentally, there is nothing Linux-specific about those SMTP servers, though it happens that Linux is the most common platform for deploying them. > Relative ease of installation and configuration is an important > consideration factor. > Microsoft Exchange 2016, Domain Controller, and Active Directory are > relatively easy to install and configure. Linux-based SMTP servers are > extremely difficult to install and configure and of course, extremely > time-consuming. Many people (not just on this list) would dispute this assertion. If you have lots of experiencing deploying Microsoft solutions and no experience deploying non-Microsoft solutions, your statement may hold for that case. However, I have effectively no experiencing deploying Microsoft solutions and loads of experience deploying non-Microsoft solutions. I would find it much easier to deploy a LDAP + Postfix + Courier (or Dovecot) + CalDAV solution. > One of the features of Microsoft Exchange 2016 is that you can create > additional folders on your Inbox in the server (server-side). Can > Linux-based SMTP servers do that? No. That is not a feature of SMTP. IMAP supports that and any IMAP server you would consider deploying these days should do that. > Does Exchange 2016 offer more user-friendly features or Linux-based > SMTP servers? Depends on your users. Are they all on Outlook? If so, they might like the tight integration with Exchange. > Besides the above considerations, how about security? Traditionally, > Linux is far more secure than Windows. As much as I would like to agree with this, the experience and knowledge of the team deploying and maintaining the solution is a huge influence on this. I have seen insecure Linux deployments and highly secure Microsoft deployments. Personally, I think Linux makes it easier really secure your setup, but I do not think I have enough Microsoft experience to consider that an informed and objective statement. > Judging by security, Linux-based SMTP servers ought to have a higher > percentage of the market share? To properly compare, you need either consider all of the components (e.g., directory, mail transfer, mail delivery, etc.) or a solution that includes all of those. If you want something targeted at Linux or other similar operating systems that has a good level integration, Zimbra Collaboration Suite is a good place to start. I have not looked them in a number of years, but some time back they were quite nice, especially if you were doing a deployment that did not involve Active Directory. > Finally, I can only use Windows Server 2016 Standard Evaluation Copy FREE > for a period of 3 years MAXIMUM. But I can use Linux servers and Mail > Transport Agents (MTA) FREE perpetually. o I suspect that if you read the full text of the license for the evaluation copy of WS 2016 that you will find it does not allow for use in a production environment. Also, depending on which Exchange solution you choose and how you deploy it, you will probably need to purchase client access licenses as well (and also possibly for the OS). > Please advise. > Thank you very much. > I would start by looking at comparisons of groupware solutions, then choose a solution that meets your needs, then choose an operating system that has what you need in order to deploy your solution. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez
