Fully featured Mac desktop client

Idea ID 2781319

Fully featured Mac desktop client

Whilst there are plans to allow native Mac apps to talk to GroupWise for email, contacts, calendar, etc. we still need a fully featured Mac desktop client to replace the one that hasn't been developed since GroupWise 8!
163 Comments
Trusted Contributor.
Trusted Contributor.
producing a linux client for the tiny, tiny group of people using linux desktops would be a waste of resources that could be spent on other more pressing projects.
Absent Member.
Absent Member.
Mike A.; I think you are missing the overall point of my comment. Think of it in terms of a quote from a movie "If you build it, they will come". Or: I'm not going to invest and switch to a different type of car if it is missing critical components that help it to function like other [contemporary] cars; it won't even be considered as an option. Some of the "pressing projects", while nice to have, are akin to putting new artwork in the cabins of the Titanic. My point is: without appealing to a wider base and addressing multiple OS's, the ever shrinking User base will continue to do just that! Will Groupwise be a viable collaboration platform in 2-3 years...... Think the movie is "Field of Dreams" not sure.....................jr
Trusted Contributor.
Trusted Contributor.
JimR: I agree with you for an OSX client. That is an expanding market with a vendor that is on fire. The linux desktop in the business market (which is where Groupwise lives) is ever shrinking and getting less and less relevant, regardless of the religious debates in its favor. A small slice of a really small pie is really, really small.
Absent Member.
Absent Member.
Point well taken!.......jr
Absent Member.
Absent Member.
The work done in GW2014 R2 for Mac (https://www.novell.com/communities/coolsolutions/groupwise-blog-native-mac-integration-groupwise-cornell/) does also benefit Linux as I remember. I've not tested this yet myself nor had Novell at the time it was discussed (last Brainshare) and they doubt it would be official supported @R2 release but these protocols added in R2 should work also with for example Evolution on Linux. This contributes to the idea, which is true for the device market, that a user does want to use the default applications on the device and not want to download another (groupwise) app to access its corporate mail/calerdar/tasks/etc. Well, everybody is more or less happy now we have the GW Mobility Pack. Mind if we would have kept alive the previous Mobile Server solution for GW we still would be stuck in the past. That said, I feel a good basic support for cross platform standards and native clients is essential to get users (basic) access to the system. That means we need a GREAT WebAccess. Now the GW Admin part is finished, its now time to go back to the webacc part and make it on par with or (I prefer) even better than the Windows client! Here in the Netherlands are quite some schools are using iPads and Chromebooks. Those need a full featured WebAcc client. Maybe we could make a small app on those platforms that starts WebAcc in a frame so it looks and feels as a real device app. It should also be able to take care of the 'send to' like functions. Kind of how the Vibe App works. Speaking of the Vibe App... I do not like that one:) As I said we like multiple easy apps with a limited set of functions. The main reason people tend to use those default device apps is they give the best experience managing mail, task, using calendar etc. We do not want apps on a device that do all in one app, cause it makes switching between those functions harder. So, missing pieces of GW while using native applications on a platform could be solved by offering an 'app' that just perform that specific missing piece, but in a neat way. This allows us to give the best native experience without recreating another full featured client... I doubt that a full featured client will ever happen. One of the problems I see if such a project would start is how that would look like; would it look like a Windows GW Client, something new, or platform dependent. I sure would opt for the last one, as I believe a general Windows user would love to see an Windows (read Office) like GroupWise experience. As a mac user I would love to see my GW client look like it was created by Steve Jobs himself (simple!), but on Linux should it use Gnome/KDE/... point is: Micro Focus would -never- be able to make everybody happy. That brings me to what I would do: imo we could take two paths (near at the same time): 1) Make a GREAT WebAccess, that should the be easy part, and Support protocol standards. 2) I would opt to see if it makes sense if the GW Client could be split in an 'cross platform engine' (protocol, local database, authentication, security, integration) part and a 'client' (on Windows that would be the client front end as we know it) part. I would say then start an open source client project to build a cross platform Client/components/widgets and function components. On Windows these functional component fe could be an api allowing easy integration with GW using .NET/Mono and other Win applications. As mentioned Mac is (still) on fire and Apple is not providing a (real) 'server' component for that world. Not only for GW, but also for like OES that is an opportunity. What -I- would do it try to make GW the default collaboration platform for Mac and Linux, but still supporting existing Windows. That would change the playing field where we would not have heavy Windows/Exchange competition. If that means open sourcing (part) of these solutions to get Red Hat and Canonical on GW (and OES) train so be it. I think once the Mac and Linux (desktop/device) world grows even bigger Microsoft will not hesitate to bring Exchange to Linux if they have to... These is another reason I would like to see the the WebAcc development speed up: it would to awesome if we could integrate it with the upcoming LibreOffice Online Solution. This would mean hosting your own online document editor solution integrated with GroupWise WebAccess... on any platform and device. Would be hard to do if using native clients on all platforms today. I vision you could write a GroupWise mail in LOOL and send it off, or access a mail from the 'Open' action select and attachment for editing and reply the message. Well, who knows what the world would look like if we bring Filr, Vibe and OES in this mix...:)
Trusted Contributor.
Trusted Contributor.
Erm, all our Novell servers are Linux based. Yes you can run them on Windows, but not to have an up to date client for the server you are running GroupWise on is just silly. I have to rely on Web Access to access GroupWise (Linux only PC's in our IT Dept), which is great but still lacks features of full client.
New Member.
Our +250 OSX-users are urging for native GroupWise client on OSX.
Absent Member.
Absent Member.
It is ironic that the NetIQ|Micro Focus email "GroupWise Ideas: Post your Feedback Today" shows a picture of an Apple keyboard & Mouse yet a native GroupWise client is still not available.
Micro Focus Expert
Micro Focus Expert
I have appreciated the requests in the IDEAS forum and we do want to see them continue. As you have seen we have been implementing requests from IDEAS in all of our releases since the rollout of IDEAS. We have made a commitment to incorporate IDEAS and community driven requirements as a key factor in release planning. In regards to the Native Mac client, our current direction is to continue with CalDAV/CardDAV as a solution for Mac.
Absent Member.
Absent Member.
is this direction a stop gap due to a lack of resource or do you genuinely not see the benefit of a native client?
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Micro Focus. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation. Certain versions of content ("Material") accessible here may contain branding from Hewlett-Packard Company (now HP Inc.) and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. As of September 1, 2017, the Material is now offered by Micro Focus, a separately owned and operated company. Any reference to the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks is historical in nature, and the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks are the property of their respective owners.