---

Review of Current Leading Email Client and Calendaring Applications used in Higher Education

Ed Chao Volunteer, Open Source Applications Foundation

---

Abstract: In planning Chandler’s capabilities and formulating our positioning, OSAF identified and reviewed the leading email and calendaring applications utilized in the higher education market. This section presents market overviews and profiles of leading alternatives in each segment. We follow with a discussion of how OSAF would rebut competitive objections to Chandler.

The email and calendaring software marketplace bears all the appearance of maturity. The handful of applications commanding market leadership in higher education have all been in place for over five years’ time. Most of the investment dollars vendors spent over that time have centered on feature extensions, Web-browser enablement, patching security defects, and integration into productivity application suites.

Existing email products generally do a very good job at facilitating the process of sending messages. But, these applications have not kept up with the changing and increasingly multi-purpose nature of email. The fundamental model by which they allow users to interact and manage their electronic communications has not significantly improved in many years. This is becoming an increasingly critical issue as the volume of email continues to soar. The market has expressed its need for a modern email client designed expressly for these issues.

Likewise, the architecture underlying calendaring systems has not evolved beyond a highly centralized client/server model running proprietary enterprise software. The result is that important collaborative technologies remain the province of a select group of large university staff and administrators, excluding many students and small college users. OSAF’s solution - built on open standards, utilizing advanced peer-to-peer networking technologies, and licensed at no charge - offers the best prospect for enabling shared calendaring for the masses.

---

Table of Contents
Email Application Survey		2
	Eudora (QUALCOMM, Inc.)	3
	Mulberry (Cyrusoft International)	4
	Netscape (AOL Time Warner)	5
	Outlook (Microsoft Corp.)	6
	Outlook Express (Microsoft Corp.)	8
	Pine (University of Washington)	8
	EMU Webmail (EMUMAIL Inc.)	9
	IMP (The Horde Project)	10
	Outlook Web Access (Microsoft Corp.)	10
Email Summary		11
Calendar Application Survey		11
	Oracle Calendar (Oracle Corp.)	12
	Meeting Maker (Meeting Maker Inc.)	13
	Outlook / Outlook Web Access / Exchange 2000 Server (Microsoft Corp.)	14
Calendar Summary		15
Other Applications		15
	O.K.I. - Open Knowledge Initiative	15
	uPortal	15
Potential Objections to Chandler		16
	Objection 1: Expensive Migration and User Re-Training Requirements	16
	Objection 2: Lack of Accountability	16
	Objection 3: Significant, Hidden Support Costs	17
	Objection 4: Potential Intellectual Property Issues	17
	Objection 5: OSAF viability	18
References		18
Complete report in Word document format
click link for full document -->	Analysis of Alternatives to Chandler in Higher Education

I just found another application that has similar design philosophies. See

http://haystack.lcs.mit.edu/

Hope this helps. Tony.