Hi Michael,

At the moment this is the best thing we can offer customers.

Vicky Cinelli (Kerio) wrote on Wed, 12 August 2015 23:53

Hi Michael,

At the moment this is the best thing we can offer customers.

I'm not trying to be a pain, but does this mean that Kerio aren't actively looking at speeding up the Outlook Connector?

I'd be happy if we were told that something was being looked at, and to wait, but it seems that from all the responses from Kerio, that you believe that the speed of the connector is sufficient (even though this seems to be the most complained about part of Connect).

Isn't That what the "Kerio Outlook Connector (without offline caching)" does? No local cache, all work done on the server? It is still being kept up so that it works, though it is missing some of the other advantages of the KOFF connector.

it's really not bad. The user get's the possibility to have an "offline" cache (nice with desktops) and it's way faster then a online search/access.

For the KOF EoL ... blame MS for it. They changed Outlook and it's closed source, Kerio has do build around that, that's why the KOFF, because you can't use the offline system of outlook without an exchange.

Also Kerio works fine with their Webclient, because the server caches the files/searches etc. and can use them directly. Outlook KOF can't use it that way and the server has to do it without caches/nice features etc.

The big point for kerio is, that it runs on many different platforms, but it's also the downside, because you have to use programs and tools, that work everywhere.

Maerad wrote on Wed, 19 August 2015 20:45

it's really not bad. The user get's the possibility to have an "offline" cache (nice with desktops) and it's way faster then a online search/access.

That I'm not sure about. I can do searches via the webmail interface and it's virtually instant. Some searches through Outlook take up to 10 seconds or sometimes even more.

Quote:

For the KOF EoL ... blame MS for it. They changed Outlook and it's closed source, Kerio has do build around that, that's why the KOFF, because you can't use the offline system of outlook without an exchange.

Not exactly sure what you're trying to say here, but I do understand that Kerio can't use the same offline cache system that is used with an Exchange server, as they have to use a plugin (KOFF) to access Connect with Outlook. The issue is, that it doesn't seem that the system they're using is very fast/efficient. At least that's what I'm concerned about.

Quote:

Also Kerio works fine with their Webclient, because the server caches the files/searches etc. and can use them directly. Outlook KOF can't use it that way and the server has to do it without caches/nice features etc.

Really? Is there some limitation on KOFF not being able to create a search index? The KOFF backend is always resident while Outlook is running, why can't it create a search index on each PC similar to Connect?

Quote:

The big point for kerio is, that it runs on many different platforms, but it's also the downside, because you have to use programs and tools, that work everywhere.

That's true for the server, but I would highly doubt that the programming required for PC/Mac Outlook is similar for KOFF.

That's because the webmail interface uses the fulltext lucene search service. It's an opensource java application that indexes the mails into a db, so kerio can search the metadata this way.

That's why they had to code / reverse engineer around it.

KOFF cache on our Terminalserver SSD is locally indexed and fast like it should be. Even faster then with exchange we had before.

Yeah, but the server tools are the impact. You can't use MS SQL with the package, what would be needed to speed up a "online" search with outlook and KOC.

Maerad wrote on Wed, 19 August 2015 22:40

That's because the webmail interface uses the fulltext lucene search service. It's an opensource java application that indexes the mails into a db, so kerio can search the metadata this way.

Right... in my experience with the Kerio Connect's that we support, the webmail searches are substantially faster (near instant) than the searches in KOFF. So my question is, if the Lucene search is faster, can this be implemented in the KOFF?

Quote:

That's why they had to code / reverse engineer around it.

I thought the API interface for connecting to Outlook was either open, or Kerio had a licence for it? I would highly doubt they reverse engineered it.

Quote:

KOFF cache on our Terminalserver SSD is locally indexed and fast like it should be. Even faster then with exchange we had before.

All of our clients have SSD drives in their local PC's with the KOFF cache stored locally... and it's still slow...and we still get complaints that it's slower than Exchange.

Quote:

Yeah, but the server tools are the impact. You can't use MS SQL with the package, what would be needed to speed up a "online" search with outlook and KOC.

I have no problem with the speed of any of our Kerio Connect servers, the speed issue is with the Kerio Outlook Connector. (If anything, the servers we manage hardly break a sweat and have processing power and disk speed to spare).

And the only issue that our clients have is basically the search function being slow. I'd ideally love Kerio to implement the search speed of the server onto a client's desktop. As I have mentioned previously, the search speed on webmail is near instant compared to the search speed on an SSD enabled PC running Outlook with the Outlook offline connector.