Re: Any news regarding new generation of WebMail templates

re: new webmail ... it is progressing well but no eta at
this time, we do appreciate how important it is.

re: caldav... we have no immediate plans for this, but it is
on the wish list and your request is definitely noted.

	ChrisP.


surgemail-listnetwinsite.com wrote:
> I agree with this completely, and have been waiting and
hoping for this future enhancement.  The current webmail is
very outdated compared to other modern web mail interfaces. 
I also have many users complain about the speed of web mail,
and when I check it out, most is due to them having
thousands of messages.  The one web mail I always say to
look at as a model is Zimbra.  I was VERY impressed by
Zimbra's web mail.
> 
> The second most requested feature of mine is a
universal way to access the calendar server.  CalDav would
probably be the best I see right now.
> 
> I think Surgemail has the best backend (SMTP, IMAP,
POP) around, which is why I use it, but really hope they
don't forget about the webmail and calendar areas. These are
important areas since that is what the user is exposed to,
and where we get complaints about.
> 
> I will keep my fingers crossed I see a new version with
an updated web mail and CalDav support in the near future
 
> 
> "Adeeb" <adeebkhayal.com> wrote:
> I have read posts over the past year that mention that
you are working on new versions of the WebMail templates
that are more inline with other modern web mail interfaces
(Yahoo, iMail, Gmail, etc). Is there any news?
> 
> This remains our customers' biggest complaint regarding
Surgemail. In particular Look & Feel and very slow
performance with mailboxes with thousands of messages.
> 
> Thanks.  
> 

As I've noted before, the factors that may indeed force me
in 2008 to 
potentially move away from Surgemail are
1) Lack of standards compliant Calendar
2) Clunky webmail
3) Lack of easily supported restore on demand message
archiving.
Our company may potentially become part of a public entity
soon, and 
various compliance rules are going to make it a hard sell. 
I put 
Surgemail in place due to it's absolutely rock solid and
extensible 
architecture, but those factors mean very little to the
organization 
from a standpoint of Corporate executives and regulations. 
The 
development of these things is going to be critical in the
future. 
Ben

Support ChrisP wrote:
> re: new webmail ... it is progressing well but no eta
at this time, we 
> do appreciate how important it is.
>
> re: caldav... we have no immediate plans for this, but
it is on the 
> wish list and your request is definitely noted.
>
>     ChrisP.
>
>
> surgemail-listnetwinsite.com wrote:
>> I agree with this completely, and have been waiting
and hoping for 
>> this future enhancement.  The current webmail is
very outdated 
>> compared to other modern web mail interfaces.  I
also have many users 
>> complain about the speed of web mail, and when I
check it out, most 
>> is due to them having thousands of messages.  The
one web mail I 
>> always say to look at as a model is Zimbra.  I was
VERY impressed by 
>> Zimbra's web mail.
>>
>> The second most requested feature of mine is a
universal way to 
>> access the calendar server.  CalDav would probably
be the best I see 
>> right now.
>>
>> I think Surgemail has the best backend (SMTP, IMAP,
POP) around, 
>> which is why I use it, but really hope they don't
forget about the 
>> webmail and calendar areas. These are important
areas since that is 
>> what the user is exposed to, and where we get
complaints about.
>>
>> I will keep my fingers crossed I see a new version
with an updated 
>> web mail and CalDav support in the near future 
>> "Adeeb" <adeebkhayal.com> wrote:
>> I have read posts over the past year that mention
that you are 
>> working on new versions of the WebMail templates
that are more inline 
>> with other modern web mail interfaces (Yahoo,
iMail, Gmail, etc). Is 
>> there any news?
>>
>> This remains our customers' biggest complaint
regarding Surgemail. In 
>> particular Look & Feel and very slow
performance with mailboxes with 
>> thousands of messages.
>>
>> Thanks. 
>

Yes I have demod Zimbra - and a number of the other major
web2 type email 
interfaces and extracted a fair few ideas already.

At this stage the main focus is webmail but I am setting it
up to be as 
generic and extensible as possible whilst maintaining
simplicity and 
efficiency. The "new webmail project" has only
really been assigned to me a 
couple of weeks back so I am still reviewing implementation
details and 
pulling together techniques and ideas from a variety of
sources.

I'm am spending as much time as I have available on it and
the plan is to 
get a functional interface out as soon as I can to start
getting feedback 


Personally I think that improved calendaring is an important
part of this 
interface but there are other improvement aspects which
still have a higher 
priority.

Marijn

--------------------------------------------------
From: <surgemail-listnetwinsite.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 11:10 PM
Newsgroups: netwin.surgemail
Subject:  Re: [SurgeMail List] Re: Any news regarding new
generation of 
WebMail templates

> Does the upgrade to the web mail your working on
include an upgrade to the 
> SurgePlus web section?  Would be nice, since you could
link the two, like 
> being able to right click on a date in an email and
tell it to add to 
> calendar. An updated web calendar would be nice until
something like 
> CalDav was supported for clients for various OS'es.
>
> A good example web based email and calendar product to
look at for 
> suggestions I always suggest is Zimbra.  You can demo
it at: 
> http:/
/www.zimbra.com/products/hosted_demo.php
>
> PS:  Sorry if this got posted twice, I was not sure if
the first one 
> posted or not.
>
> 

surgemail-listnetwinsite.com wrote:
> Does the webmail upgrade your working on include an
upgrade of the SurgePlus web based section, or only the
webmail section?  It would be nice if both were upgraded so
that they could be linked better.  For example, being able
to right click on a date in an email, and telling it to add
to the calendar.

No, initially the webmail upgrade will be webmail only.

(thanks for all the suggestions, all are appreciated and we
are going to adjust our future priorities to try and cater 
for these things, sorry I can't give anything more specific
but I don't wish to pre-announce anything that might not 
eventuate as that would not be fair)

	ChrisP.

I'll respond to this.

No. No.

And hell no.

I went through this with CommuniGate Pro and I don't want to
do it again. 
What I want is a quality mail server. Everything is totally
secondary. You 
want a Microsoft Exchange Server, go buy a Microsoft
Exchange Server. I do 
not understand this fascination people have with wanting to
have a "just 
like Microsoft Exchange Server" without having a
Microsoft Exchange Server. 
If that's the functionality your clients want, buy the real
thing.

I want a quality mail server. Everything else is fluff.
Period.

Russ Pagenkopf

webmaster1usa.com wrote:
> Please talk to businesses who use MS Outlook shared
calendaring & shared 
> address book - on a MS Exchange Server.  If Netwin
could duplicate those 
> functions, it would hit 80% of the market. 
> Don't you think... guys?

Dang. Everything *else* is totally secondary.

Russ

Russ Pagenkopf wrote:
> I went through this with CommuniGate Pro and I don't
want to do it 
> again. What I want is a quality mail server. Everything
is totally 
> secondary. You want a Microsoft Exchange Server, go buy
a Microsoft 
> Exchange Server. I do not understand this fascination
people have with 
> wanting to have a "just like Microsoft Exchange
Server" without having a 
> Microsoft Exchange Server. If that's the functionality
your clients 
> want, buy the real thing.

I am in complete agreement, except in the corporate world,
it might not 
matter a bit when it comes to getting buy-in from the
bosses. My 
concerns don't stem from a differing viewpoint, they come
from the very 
real possibility of being forced to buy some Exchange server
nonsense at 
the expense of the quality mail server.
Ben
>
> I want a quality mail server. Everything else is fluff.
Period.
>
> Russ Pagenkopf
>

"they come from the very real possibility of being
forced to buy some 
Exchange server nonsense at the expense of the quality mail
server."

For a clueless boss, if it doesn't say MS than it is no
good. You show 
that guy the best look-alike, works better product in the
world and you 
will get no where with him. Guys like him say with pride,
"We are a 100% 
Microsoft house."

Remember the old saying about no one ever being fired for
buying an IBM?



Ben Hanson wrote:
> I am in complete agreement, except in the corporate
world, it might 
> not matter a bit when it comes to getting buy-in from
the bosses. My 
> concerns don't stem from a differing viewpoint, they
come from the 
> very real possibility of being forced to buy some
Exchange server 
> nonsense at the expense of the quality mail server.
> Ben
>>
>> I want a quality mail server. Everything else is
fluff. Period.
>>
>> Russ Pagenkopf
>>
>
>