For non-experts, email\nusually is just about what they see and use, i.e. the email client, typically\nOutlook. In fact, Outlook is what allows users to access messages and calendars\nstored and managed on the Microsoft Exchange server. Basically, these two applications\nwork together, one on the server side (Exchange) and the other on the\ndesktop\/client side (Outlook).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Outlook is the prevalent client\nfor professional email. In 2018, 56% of businesses used the O365 suite which\nincludes Outlook (source<\/a>). Given this figure, you\u2019d expect, or even take\nit for granted, that other email servers should be capable of interfacing with\nthe email client most widespread in businesses, wouldn\u2019t you?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Well no, it\u2019s not that self-evident.\nAs a matter of fact, this implies a true revolution. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Here\u2019s why.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A 1997 memo written for\nMicrosoft Chairman Bill Gates by C++ General Manager Aaron Contorer perfectly\nsummarises the Redmond firm\u2019s technology lock-in strategy: \u201cCustomers\nconstantly evaluate other desktop platforms, (but) it would be so much work to\nmove over that they hope we just improve Windows rather than force them to move\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n This memo dates back twenty\nyears, and one would think things have changed since\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n Take, for instance, Active\nDirectory\u2019s dominance in directory services. The Active Directory-Microsoft\nExchange couple has enabled Microsoft to dominate the infrastructure of almost\nevery company on the planet thanks to a simple principle: if you wanted email,\nyou needed Exchange, and Exchange needs Active Directory to work. <\/p>\n\n\n\n IT departments would just\nbuy both without a second thought. This is how AD and Exchange became the\ninfrastructure of choice in virtually all organisations. Microsoft\u2019s strategy\nwas simple: controlling the backend in order to control the frontend through its\nfamous \u201cembrace and extend\u201d method. IT administrators didn\u2019t have much of a\nchoice: <\/p>\n\n\n\n This strategy has been successful: Microsoft has essentially made its system so rigid that it makes sense for any organisation to use it from end to end (source<\/a>). What\u2019s on the frontend of email? Microsoft Outlook. Outlook is Exchange\u2019s email client. And so, the circle is complete. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Microsoft\u2019s products have\nbeen developed to work in a closed ecosystem. They all need each other and run\nin a never-ending virtuous circle. Virtuous as far as Microsoft is concerned,\nthat is\u2026 On the customer side, however, that\u2019s another story. It goes without\nsaying that this creates a strong technological dependency. Replacing one of\nthe links in the chain implies weakening the others because everything is\ndesigned to be interdependent and compatible with the \u201cM\u201d in GAFAM only. With\nO365 and by offering \u201cpick-and-choose\u201d subscriptions, Microsoft has locked in\nentire IT systems. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Yet there are alternatives.\nFor client workstations for instance, there\u2019s OpenOffice<\/a>,\nwhich offers a complete suite of office IT tools, more or less equivalent to Microsoft\u2019s.\n\u201cMore or less\u201d is the crux of the matter. Take compatibility issues and formatting\ndifferences between Open Office Writer and Microsoft Word. Both are able to\nread and write using the other\u2019s native language (.odt\/.ods for Writer and\n.doc\/.docx for Word), but their compatibility is far from perfect and unpredictable.\nThis page<\/a> outlines the Microsoft office features that\nmay encounter conversion issues with Open Office (with varying results<\/a>). <\/p>\n\n\n\n So, there are alternatives to Microsoft. You may force your users to give up on their MS Office habits to switch to an open alternative, but you will need to manage the transition very carefully: converting all documents, rewriting some, providing support to users, making sure that you will be able to continue working with others outside your company, etc. <\/p>\n\n\n\n As a rule, moving to a new\ntool can put a strain on some users. It forces them to relearn procedures that\nused to be effortless and they may lose time hesitating over unfamiliar options.\nIn addition to lowering productivity, this may be perceived as a slap in the\nface for people who suddenly become incompetent at doing something they used to\nexcel at (Excel macros, for instance). <\/p>\n\n\n\n As far as email is\nconcerned, there are many alternative solutions. In theory, using Outlook with\na server other than Exchange is possible. It can be used with any IMAP server\u2026\nif you want to use email without collaborative features, you are willing to accept\na poorer user experience and you\u2019re not afraid of bugs!<\/p>\n\n\n\n Some IT solutions do try\nand remedy this by offering a connector which, in addition to email, enables\nthe synchronisation of calendar, contacts and shared features. But this changes\nOutlook\u2019s interfaces and introduces technical, functional, deployment and\nhandling issues. For your users, it isn\u2019t Outlook as they see it but a substandard\nversion. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Just like with Calc and\nExcel or Writer and Word, it isn\u2019t exactly<\/em>\nthe same. Email is such a critical tool for organisations and users have so deeply\ningrained habits with it that moving from a typical Microsoft-based\ninfrastructure to another solution is tricky. <\/p>\n\n\n\n CIOs would like to reduce ICT\nlock-in while reducing costs, but when it comes to it, the fear of upsetting\nusers is what drives their choices. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Sound familiar? Users want Outlook. Outlook only works with Exchange. Exchange works with Active Directory. Microsoft locks users into a circle of dependency that strips them of all control. <\/p>\n\n\n\n BlueMind\u2019s approach to breaking\nfree from Microsoft\u2019s grip is user-based. Some users want Outlook, and that\u2019s\nnon-negotiable. This means Outlook as it is familiar to users, i.e. the way it\nworks with Exchange, with no downgrading. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Outlook communicates with\nExchange Server through a set of MAPI protocols \u2013 which are very different from\nstandard protocols (POP, IMAP, which only handle email messages) \u2013 that\nsynchronise all Outlook data (calendars, contacts, tasks and notes as well as\nfree\/busy information\u2026). Substituting Exchange therefore requires the\nimplementation of a MAPI stack on the server side to communicate with Outlook\njust like the Microsoft server does. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This is an issue many businesses have come up against. \u201cIt\u2019s a huge technical challenge\u201d<\/em> explains Thomas Cataldo, BlueMind\u2019s Technical Director, \u201cimplementing all MAPI layers on the server side has required more than five years\u2019 work involving several developers<\/em> . BlueMind\u2019s version 4, which was released in early April, is the only solution in the world that\u2019s fully natively compatible with Outlook without the need of a connector. This is a true achievement, and above all, it finally provides a unique opportunity for businesses to reconcile user satisfaction with enterprise sovereignty.\u201d<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n This latest version of\nBlueMind brings a definitive solution to the current near-monopoly in the\nenterprise email market. By enabling organisations to keep the Outlook client transparently,\nbut also to use other clients such as Thunderbird, webmail or mobile\napplications with the full array of collaborative features, the BlueMind\nsolution offers an open, cheaper, European alternative for email. <\/p>\n\n\n\n As Europe is finally rallying\naround the issue of digital independence, BlueMind is giving organisations the\nfreedom to choose when it comes to their most critical, most-used application. At\nlast, they can keep the Outlook client\ntransparently<\/strong> and move to a European\nopen-source<\/strong> solution. Organisations no longer have to rely on US solutions\nto preserve their users\u2019 habits. User satisfaction and company sovereignty are\nnow compatible in a sector that was believed to be lost to US giants:\nenterprise email. The revolution has begun. \n<\/p>\n\n\n\n To find out more, come and\nsee us at the BlueMind Summit<\/strong><\/a> for a unique opportunity to meet the players in this revolution and\nstart on a path towards healthier, independent and controlled ICTs. <\/p>\n\n\n\nMicrosoft\u2019s lock-in strategy<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Breaking away from Microsoft – 1: what are the alternatives?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Breaking\naway from Microsoft – 2: alienating some users<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Outlook\nwithout Exchange: the MAPI protocol<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nIn conclusion…<\/h2>\n\n\n\n