[CentOS] Which is better? Microsoft Exchange 2016 or Linux-based SMTP Servers?
galtsev at kicp.uchicago.edu
Wed Jul 18 16:45:17 UTC 2018
On 07/18/18 11:03, mark wrote:
> Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming wrote:
>> I am torn between deploying Microsoft Exchange 2016 and Linux-based
>> SMTP servers like sendmail, postfix, qmail and exim.
>> 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
> Based on experience at a number of jobs, Exchange may appear to be easy to
> configure, but as soon as you get past the utterly basic configuration,
> when management or other departments want more, it then becomes a major
> I work for a US federal contractor these days, on site (civilian sector)
> and they just gave up, and moved to M$ cloud for it. And most people HATE
> Searching, if you're not using Outlook, is either terrrible or nonexistant
> (they've started auto-archiving here, and I'm hearing there is no search).
> In addition, if you go to 365, you are NOT BUYING the software, you're
> renting the service. You will be paying every year, and a service contract
> will cost, and, presumably, cost more every year.
> Linux, once you get over the learning curve, is not that difficult to
> administer. and there's a lot of online help (just don't expect us to do
> your job for you, as a few folks who've posted here over the years seeem
> to expect). You can also get contract help. If that's important, you might
> consider upstream, who do provide paid support.
> And it will cost a lot less than M$.
>> One of the features of Microsoft Exchange 2016 is that you can create
>> additional folders on your Inbox in the server (server-side). Can
>> Linux-based SMTP servers do that?
> I don't know of any mail system that you cannot do that in. Every one
> allows that.
>> Besides the above considerations, how about security? Traditionally,
>> Linux is far more secure than Windows.
> Yup. And fixes come a *LOT* faster, often in hours or days, as opposed to
> M$'s "there's no probem, it's your fault (insert one week to three
> months), ok, ok, we've got a fix
>> Judging by security, Linux-based SMTP servers ought to have a higher
>> percentage of the market share?
> Back in the last century, the old mainframe line was "nobody ever lost
> their job by recommending IBM"; since the nineties, it's been
> "recommending Windows", because that's all they know. We won't say how
> much M$ pays, both for advertising, FUD, and illegal under the table
> payments to manufacturers.
In my observation it stems from the practices of hiring IT
professionals. Department or company personnel manager who has no IT
knowledge (and shouldn't!) has to hire IT manager. Here is where
certifications came into play (and MS Certifications are plentiful
around...), so the top guy in the IT position is most likely MS-trained
guy. And that defines the field of knowledge of the whole IT team
Incidentally, I contradicted myself above, did anybody notice? I told
about IT manager "trained", and training is different from knowledge,
simply speaking you just know which buttons to push. But between people
who possess knowledge (therefore can look deeper even when following
manual doesn't work) I know almost no one who has even single certificate...
>> 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.
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
More information about the CentOS