Open Sources | Rodrigues & Urlocker » Exchange, but without its problems (like Microsoft :-)? Try PostPath

May 09, 2006 | Comments: (0)

Exchange, but without its problems (like Microsoft :-)? Try PostPath

TAGS: Applications, Microsoft

So, I've been following a cool startup called AppTran for nearly a year now, but a few months ago the company (which had been in stealth mode) dropped completely off the map. The premise behind the company? An Exchange server that runs on Linux, runs better than Exchange, and looks/feels like Exchange (without Microsoft, Exchange administration headaches, etc.). It's what EnterpriseDB is to Oracle databases: a drop-in replacement at a fraction of the cost (and administration nightmares).

So, it was a very pleasant surprise when Duncan Greatwood, the CEO (and someone I knew back in my Lineo days), pinged me to announce that, in fact, AppTran is not dead. It's just been busy. It's got a new name (PostPath, but the same game plan: give companies all that's great about Exchange without all the hassle that comes with it.

Keep in mind that most enterprises can't use Exchange alternatives because existing alternatives are not drop-in compatible. To achieve drop-in compatibility, an email server alternative must have network protocol compatibility (like Samba has for Windows file and print).

Everyone assumed that this was impossible for Exchange - but PostPath has done it and made it work. Let's just say that there must have been one heck of a lot of packet-sniffing going on in the PostPath labs (a bit like glue-sniffing, but with better effects).

This is the sort of compatibility that Alfresco has achieved with Windows CIFS (file system) - which even Microsoft SharePoint lacks (same company, different planet) - I can tell you from our experience: this is not a feat for the weak of heart and it's a huge barrier to entry, because there's no easy way to achieve this kind of compatibility. It's a ton of work.

How compatible is PostPath with Exchange? It's real:

1. Full Outlook functionality with no plug-ins;
   
2. Use Active Directory tools to manage and migrate users;
   
3. Compatible with ecosystem apps like Blackberry/Sharepoint;
   
4. Server-to-server compatibility so new systems co-exist with the old.

In short, it's cool. It's useful. I'd buy it.

To the best of my knowledge, no one has ever done this before - those that appear to do so use client-side plug-ins, which don't solve the compatibility-lock problem for enterprises with a lot of Microsoft desktops and infrastructure.

Beyond simple cloning of existing Exchange technology (which is cool in and of itself for those who don't want to be forced to live in a Microsoft universe, even if they choose to do so), PostPath offers some cool, innovative features. Like the fact that it stores data in the file system, uses open systems for backup restore, archiving, redundancy and replication. Oh, and it's 5x as fast as Exchange. (Translation: More email in less time - maybe this isn't a good thing.... :-)

For something this cool, you should pay big money, right? Yes, you should, but being the generous souls that they are, PostPath allows enterprises to divide "hard" costs associated with Exchange by 4. (I was an English major, but I think that means it's 75% cheaper than Exchange. :-)

Other cool features? LIke Zimbra, it has a nice AJAX web-client (also included for non-Outlook uses). I haven't seen the client yet, and I suspect it will be hard to match Zimbra's web client, but the real value in PostPath isn't in the web client. It's in the server. Perhaps Zimbra + PostPath partnership would be a match made in heaven?

At any rate, this is one of the coolest companies to emerge from the Valley for some time. Not because it's sexy to look at, but because it takes a very big pain-point (Exchange costs, from administration to license to support) and solves it at a huge performance, support, stability, and cost savings boost. What's not to love?

Posted by Matt Asay on May 9, 2006 08:56 AM

RATE THIS ARTICLE: