zimbra, pop/imap
what a joke. firewall guys, we want email on our phones. we need to open the firewall on a few more ports
exchange is database based which makes it easier and cheaper to manage it
Wait, how does Exchange being database driven have anything to do with Firewall ports of POP/IMAP protocols exactly ? Exchange does the same POP/IMAP protocols and if you want your phones to access the system using those protocols on an Exchange server, you'll have to open the same firewall ports... Are your 2 statements even related ? Do you even realise Zimbra's backend is also database driven, except they use a much more standard RDBMS (MySQL) rather than Exchange's proprietary EDB format (which is loosely based on MDB, since both use the JET database engine, a far inferior database format that's more akin to SQLite than to a real RDBMS).
But of course, you know all of this right ?
And are you suggesting that push based e-mail requires a "database driven" backend in any sort of way ? Because that would be quite ludicrous a claim a to make. And of course, are you suggesting only Exchange does push based e-mail ? Because that would be ignoring Zimbra's Z-Push functionality...
The fact is, AD, Exchange, they are so widespread exactly because of what I said earlier : Microsoft got their monopoly from IBM in the 80s and then proceeded to leverage at every chance to make solutions that do not inter-operate well. AD is integrated into Windows client tightly, it's a pain to make it work for anything else as far as SSOs go. Exchange is a success thanks to Outlook's widespread use, which is thanks to Office's dominance, which achieved it through Windows widespread use on the desktop.
This is typical Microsoft modus operandi and why I have ethical and moral reasons to not work with their products as much as I can personally help it.
Your SQL server example is also short-sighted. A 1/4 the cost of Oracle ? No duh, you're getting 10% of the product. Typical though that people look for Oracle when their needs don't even require it. It's just the best there is right now, and of course, you have to pay for that. However, you don't always need the best, in fact, Oracle is overkill for about 90% of RDBMS use out there.
This is all moot, the subject of this thread is Apple hiring a Data center manager, not a product manager, that used to work at Microsoft. I see no problem in this, the guy is probably very qualified.