IceWarp vs OpenText GroupWise comparison

"It's scalable and stable."

"The groupware module is the most valuable feature."

"An effective, functional, very good tool for controlling resources."

"The solution's voice services work well for our company."

"The solution is easy to manage and includes features such as smart documents and the archiving of user data."

"It has great communication capabilities for team chatting and web conferences."

"The solution has a very good log-in to the UI when compared to other solutions."

"The product is used very extensively in my company since we have around 1,500 users using it. Also, there is no requirement for any administrators to manage the product by the people who own the solution."

"Very secure with great storage capacity."

"I like the ease of logging best in Micro Focus GroupWise. I also like its proxy capabilities from a user level. I also like how secure Micro Focus GroupWise is."

"The cost-effectiveness of the solution is most valuable."

"It is difficult to disable user rights on the console so some users accidentally delete their documents or user details."

"The solution should improve the mailing list feature. Google has a similar feature where you can automate sending files to different people in a sequence, but that feature is no longer available in the current version of IceWarp. Other features may also have been removed in the current version."

"Support should be improved. Most of the time, the queries are not resolved within the SLA."

"The exchange compatibility mode is rather limited. Their technical support can also be better. They only provide online support, and there should be some option for escalating."

"The solution has traditional SSL integration, SAML, and Federation Services. In its latest version, it added SAML integration. However, it needs to work on API integration, especially for dashboards or integration with SAP for log and data system management. It doesn't yet have the kind of API that Google and Microsoft provide for synchronizing users with Active Directory."

"I would like to have a trial for mobile applications and more documentation similar to Google Drive with mobile applications."

"The tool's configuration capabilities are not straightforward. Apart from that, if I want to archive emails into a vault so that they can be retrieved again later, the integration doesn't work, and IceWarp crashes."

"The solution needs improvements in security, particularly regarding document management."

"Their support can be improved. It is not as good as it used to be."

"What I don't like about Micro Focus GroupWise is the removal of the Unix client. Micro Focus took that function away about ten years ago because there wasn't enough demand for it."

"The WebAccess feature is somewhat lacking and could be improved."

"The license is based on the number of users."

"I don't see any challenges for the Indian market. For example, 1 GB is available for around 399 INR, and 2 GB for 499 INR. They offer a range of plans, from basic to professional and enterprise, with multiple features. IceWarp's aggressive pricing is competitive compared to other market solutions like Zoho and Microsoft. One significant advantage is that IceWarp does not impose user capping like Google and Microsoft, which allows for substantial cost savings and flexibility in user conversion."

"The solution is inexpensive which is its main benefit."

"Pricing and licensing is very competitive and in some cases, cheap."

"Price-wise, it's a cheaper solution, without a doubt. Price is the reason we are still using the tool."

"It is definitely one of the lowest price solutions."

"Costs far less than other solutions."

"Our licensing is on a yearly basis. There were no additional costs."

"Micro Focus GroupWise is the most affordable solution on-premises. Versus Microsoft Exchange on-premises, pricing is 20:1, so there's no comparison. Micro Focus GroupWise is cheaper, though, for my clients, it's not about the cost but the stability and security of the solution."

"It was a part of the suite, so it was very cost-effective. There were no costs beyond the licensing fee."