Help Me Choose a Hosted Exchange Provider
I have a corporate client currently using IMAP mail hosted on Bluehost.com. He wants to move to hosted Exchange since he needs to have better mail & contact synching b/t his devices and he also wants to share calendars w/ his 3 key employees. Since Bluehost is an all-Linux provider, they don't offer hosted Exchange. The other thing is that he has about 35 sales guys that do not really need Exchange, so I was thinking of moving him to a hosting provider that offer a hybrid of Exchange as well as less expensive IMAP accounts.
Both Intermedia & Rackspace offer this hybrid option. I'm thinking of moving him to Rackspace. Although I have more experience with Intermedia, I did work with Rackspace for a former client a couple of years back and they have a good interface system and really good US-based tech support.
The other option is to move all their users over to Office365, even though it's really just 4 employees that need full Exchange functionality. At $4/user/month, that would cost him about $156/month. Rackspace charges $10/month for Exchange accounts and just $2/month for IMAP email. So it would be less expensive. But then there are extra fees for ActiveSync and for going over the basic amount of storage space, so in the end don't know if would be a significant price difference.
Although most of his employees are running Windows, the owner of the company is an all-Mac guy. He runs Mac Mail on his MacBook and Outlook 2011 on his office iMac.
Anyway, would appreciate other expert's feedback and suggestions in picking the most appropriate email hosting provider.
BTW, Google Apps is off the table b/c this client knows someone who had a very bad experience migrating to Google Apps. I myself have not been too impressed with Google Apps thus far. Seems to work very well if you strictly use the webmail interface, but once you introduce a mail client like Outlook or Mac Mail into the picture, all sorts of issues start to crop up.
Both Intermedia & Rackspace offer this hybrid option. I'm thinking of moving him to Rackspace. Although I have more experience with Intermedia, I did work with Rackspace for a former client a couple of years back and they have a good interface system and really good US-based tech support.
The other option is to move all their users over to Office365, even though it's really just 4 employees that need full Exchange functionality. At $4/user/month, that would cost him about $156/month. Rackspace charges $10/month for Exchange accounts and just $2/month for IMAP email. So it would be less expensive. But then there are extra fees for ActiveSync and for going over the basic amount of storage space, so in the end don't know if would be a significant price difference.
Although most of his employees are running Windows, the owner of the company is an all-Mac guy. He runs Mac Mail on his MacBook and Outlook 2011 on his office iMac.
Anyway, would appreciate other expert's feedback and suggestions in picking the most appropriate email hosting provider.
BTW, Google Apps is off the table b/c this client knows someone who had a very bad experience migrating to Google Apps. I myself have not been too impressed with Google Apps thus far. Seems to work very well if you strictly use the webmail interface, but once you introduce a mail client like Outlook or Mac Mail into the picture, all sorts of issues start to crop up.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Hi Diverseit. Thank you very much for your input.
No, I did not mean split domains. That does sound like a recipe for a lot of problems. What I meant is hybrid in terms of having some users running Exchange mail accounts while others would simply use cheaper IMAP accounts.
Thanks for the feedback. It's great to hear from someone who has used Intermedia & Rackspace as well as Office365.
No, I did not mean split domains. That does sound like a recipe for a lot of problems. What I meant is hybrid in terms of having some users running Exchange mail accounts while others would simply use cheaper IMAP accounts.
Thanks for the feedback. It's great to hear from someone who has used Intermedia & Rackspace as well as Office365.
Yeah, no problem!
Does the hybrid model use different Email Servers, meaning are you using: a) the IMAP protocol to connect to the same Exchange Server or b) an Exchange Server with a different IMAP Server?
If you are talking about the latter, I know of no other way then to split the domain, unless of course, you use separate domains, but that would be silly.
Does the hybrid model use different Email Servers, meaning are you using: a) the IMAP protocol to connect to the same Exchange Server or b) an Exchange Server with a different IMAP Server?
If you are talking about the latter, I know of no other way then to split the domain, unless of course, you use separate domains, but that would be silly.
ASKER
That's a good question. And I don't know the answer. I guess we'd have to ask the engineers at Intermedia and Rackspace which of those 2 options they have implemented.
Oh I'm sorry, I thought you were talking about a different solution outside of Intermedia & Rackspace. Both of those companies use the process I was talking about - "spitting the domain". I'd avoid it at all costs...no pun intended. You can go with either of those companies without using domain splitting but if you want to use another server for IMAP (in order to bring down costs by not paying for an Exchange mailbox) then it would be, most definitely, domain splitting, especially with Intermedia & Rackspace.
Hope that clears this up for you! Let me know if you have any other questions.
Hope that clears this up for you! Let me know if you have any other questions.
Anything else I can help you with?
ASKER
Thanks Diverseit. I didn't realize that's how companies like Intermedia & Rackspace do that. So sounds like it's probably better to have the entire company be on just IMAP or just hosted Exchange, not a combination of the two.
What about if you go with Option A (the IMAP protocol to connect to the same Exchange Server) from your posting on 10/11/13? ID 39567614
What about if you go with Option A (the IMAP protocol to connect to the same Exchange Server) from your posting on 10/11/13? ID 39567614
The short answer is yes, use one or the other! In these types of situations where multiple servers are involved (not multiple Exchange servers) it's best to stick with one type.
If you must use this hybrid and understand the risks as specified above, I can provide you with setup instructions...just let me know.
In comment http:#a39567614, I was trying to understand what you were talking about here, and when I said, "...[running] the IMAP protocol to connect to the same Exchange Server..." I was referring to full mailboxes and splitting some of the users between accessing Exchange via IMAP and MAPI. Companies have odd reasons for doing things like this (using superannuated protocols - POP & IMAP). Personally, I'd never run an Exchange account using any protocol other than MAPI, unless, I was forced to by an application's deprecated way of doing things. Irrespectively, in order to run IMAP, or even POP for that matter, it would require a full mailbox.
Cheers!
If you must use this hybrid and understand the risks as specified above, I can provide you with setup instructions...just let me know.
In comment http:#a39567614, I was trying to understand what you were talking about here, and when I said, "...[running] the IMAP protocol to connect to the same Exchange Server..." I was referring to full mailboxes and splitting some of the users between accessing Exchange via IMAP and MAPI. Companies have odd reasons for doing things like this (using superannuated protocols - POP & IMAP). Personally, I'd never run an Exchange account using any protocol other than MAPI, unless, I was forced to by an application's deprecated way of doing things. Irrespectively, in order to run IMAP, or even POP for that matter, it would require a full mailbox.
Cheers!
Everything make sense?
ASKER
Yes, I think so. I will assign points and close now. Thank you.
ASKER
Thank you.
My pleasure. Glad I could help and thanks for the points!
ASKER