MailEnable - what's your opinion?

Discussion regarding the Standard version.
Post Reply
HIMALAYANs
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:36 am

MailEnable - what's your opinion?

Post by HIMALAYANs »

Hello,

Got a gig, where my first task is basically to update the whole IT infrastructure of a small company. About 200 users (with more coming in the future). Windows 2000 and 2003 servers, Exchange 2003, no virtualization of any kind, a lot of ancient hardware. Backup system that broke up few years ago. You get the idea.

Anyway: I already have the plan how to upgrade hardware and 2000/2003s. That leaves email. And very little budget. Exchange + CALs - "too expensive". Same thing with O365/GSuite (BTW, they don't really care about Office). So I've started looking for alternatives and found MailEnable - the pricing looks nice. Or at least within the budget. And it has all the stuff my employer would like to have, at least on paper.

claudioszykman
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 4:07 pm

Re: MailEnable - what's your opinion?

Post by claudioszykman »

I use mail enable for shared hosting purposes and it is very capable of handling traffic
Professional Version is very complete. I use Standard version as well... both are reliable.
kind regards,
Claudio

Bartk
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2019 4:33 pm

Re: MailEnable - what's your opinion?

Post by Bartk »

Both for personal use and at my former employer, MailEnable was used. Personally the Standard edition is enough, within the employer the Enterprise functionality was required.
I'd say MailEnable is the best invention since sliced bread. There's almost nothing why you would choose Exchange over MailEnable in my opinion. The integration in an Active Directory might not be as flawless as Exchange, though with the provided plugins and such it's the next best thing.

And me/we also tried other products like SM, hmailserver and such, 'it was just not IT'. Feel free to hit me up if you have more (specific) questions.

Post Reply