> The Exchange connector plugin for Evolution has been free software for something like 5 years, so the solution you describe, while still based on crappy MS protocols, would be 100% free. Ya. It's also shit. The thing works by a combination of webdav and scaping the web-based version of Outlook. Outlook-Web itself also sucks, which leads to much of the problems. It's slow, it's broken, and it does not have the same functionality as real outlook. It frequently hangs and locks up on emails and all sorts of things. The native protocol for Exchange is MAPI. Using MAPI is how you can get all the same features with Exchange that Outlook does. MAPI support for Linux is coming along and the MAPI plugin for Evolution is nearing a working condition. It requires SAMBA4 functionality (provided through libs) since MAPI has Microsoft version's of kerberos and LDAP as a hard requirement. OpenChange is the project behind the MAPI advancements and is closely tied with SAMBA4. It's goal is to be a open source _replacement_ for Exchange. Zimbra and all that are _alternatives_ to exchange and can provide goodness to their users, but it does not replicate the functionality of Exchange nor does it have the same native Windows integration and Active Directory integration that Exchange has by default. OpenChange, when it matures, should be able to provide a drop-in Exchange replacement. Clients configuration and behaviors need not change to deploy Linux. Also it can act as a proxy for Exchange taking the Exchange and transforming it something more 'linuxy' (ical, imap, etc). Also it has client capabilities. -------------------------- And yes Microsoft has won. They won years ago when they stole the market away from Novell back in the late 1990's/early 2000. Microsoft stomped all over Novell. Now it's up for Linux and open source to start working on the desktop. In order to do that you need to work with what people already use. What people already use is Active Directory and Exchange. That is the challenge. It's a Total Cost of Ownership thing for Linux. Currently Linux offers nothing that compares to the integration that you get when you use Windows. Microsoft Windows is pre-configured to work with Active Directory. You need Microsoft Office to get Outlook. You need Outlook to talk to Exchange. You need Active Directory to get Exchange. You need Exchange, Active Directory, the Windows desktop, and Windows server to get Sharepoint. etc etc. All this stuff 'just works'. It's all integrated, etc etc. And if you remove one component (say Office or AD) then the whole thing turns into a huge pile of shit and is very costly to maintain. That is LOCK-IN. But people will still do it. Why? Because Active Directory and the natural and easy configuration, support, and integration of Microsoft software is superior to every other thing out there. Nothing in Linux-land holds a candle to Active Directory right now. Sure you have Kerberos and OpenLDAP or 360 LDAP server. But you have to understand it's _not_the_fucking_protocols_ that matters. What matters is the natural integration, working default configurations, AND user interfaces that Microsoft offers. For example say you setup Kerberos and OpenLDAP using open source solutions. In a orginization who is the ones that manage users? If you say 'administrator' your fucking wrong. It's the Human Resources folks. The people have NO CLUE about computers or protocols or anything. And can you imagine trying to train a HR person to log into a SSH server and manually add users to the Kerberos master and then run shell scripts to add a new user to LDAP based on modifing templates? That is just one _tiny_ example. Once you get your scripts and hacks and work-arounds in place you have a monster. What are you going to do use 'Puppet' for configuration management? Lets see... LDAP, Kerberos, Puppet, Web Mail, calendering, Gnome/KDE desktop management, PolicyKit, etc etc.. plus dozens of scripts and whatnot. You have a expert Linux administrator (expensive and hard to find) working for months to get the system perfected and you end up with something that only has _part_ of the functionality that Microsoft Offers vs Get a A++ certified geek (cheap and easy to find) to come down and spend 2 days setting up Small Business Server. Soo... A) Use Open Source and pay $0 dollars on licensing, but spend $18000 on labor and get a less functionality and a frustrating user experience. or B) Use Microsoft and pay $1000 for licensing and $500 in labor and get easy integration, more features, and a familar user experience. THAT is how Linux vs Windows looks to the common IT person. And you know what? THEY ARE RIGHT. Sooo... It's up to Linux to work with Microsoft. Linux Desktop is the small guy, the unfamilar guy, the expensive guy. Not Microsoft. Anything to make it easier and cheap to use Linux in Microsoft-land is a slam dunk. Also SAMBA4 is probably the single most important Linux desktop feature in the past 10 years. Using Samba4 you can take any Linux system and create a drop-in replacement for AD. AND it's a easy way to deploy a Linux-based Domain system for small and medium businesses. It's absolutely CRITICAL. Using Samba4 and if people like Ubuntu naturally integrate into it (as in no extra configuration and 'just works') then this would MASSIVELY reduce the costs associated with running Linux inside and outside of a Windows environment. Since Windows has 90%+ penetration into the business market then the importance of it can not be overstated. But I have a feeling that most people dismiss is becuase it's "M$" stuff.