Re: OT: MS Exchange License question

[MKlinke <mklinke axsi com>]

On Friday 30 January 2004 22:44, Richard Potter wrote:
> Totally Off Topic... but I'm sure some Sys Admins on this list have
> been through this.
>
> In a total Linux server shop (samba, sendmail, etc), has anyone
> ever purchased MS Exchange server and let's say 50 CAL licence,
> just so the Windows users could have legal copies of Outlook?
> Exchange would never be installed, we just want legal Outlook
> licences.
>
> I know that I could call MS$ and ask them, but I want a real world
> answer, as compared to a canned response from a MS$ droan.
>
> All the (l)users we have, demand Windows, (We use several
> proprietary Windows only software packages) and are wanting Outlook
> for it's PIM stuff, mostly Contacts & Calendar. So... I had this
> though this afternoon about buying 50 cal Exchange. It *appears* to
> be less expensive than buying Outlook licences direct.
>
> Any thoughts/comments on this?
>
 
As far as I know each Outlook client located on a desktop, for 
instance, must be licensed whether or not it connects to an Exchange 
Server. Therefore you would have two licenses for each desktop, one 
for any MS operating system and one for Outlook.  

An Exchange Client Access License would only be required if you are 
connecting directly to the Exchange software. It seems to me that it 
would be completely unrelated as far as connecting to a linux mail 
server. (Note: a client access license wouldn't be necessary if the 
Outlook user connected to the Exchange Server via the OWA (Http) 
interface)

An exchange server would have two licenses; one for the operating 
system and one for exchange.

I went thought this with NT4 but with Exchange Server 2003 comes a new 
licensing model. Here's a FAQ for your perusal:

http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/howtobuy/LicensingFAQ.asp

Regards, Mike Klinke