The RFP requested that the implementation of the new collaborative computing solution take place in two phases over a two-year period. Although we did not cite specific goals for these two phases to the vendors, when the bids came in, we put backbone, client and remote-access capabilities into Phase I and the advanced features, such as calendaring, workflow, database integration, broadcast fax and pager support, into Phase II. Vendors were asked to submit a migration plan to move MegaSystems from its current environment to the new one with minimal disruption. The solution proposed had to have a fault-tolerant design to minimize single p oints of failure and have backup/redundant data paths. The vendors also were asked to price their proposed solutions.

Each vendor submitted a 500-word high-level solution summary. Network Computing's evaluation of each vendor's RFP follows this summary. We evaluated the vendor responses based on how well their solution addressed the stated objectives, how they resolved the problems detailed in the scenarios, such as broadcast fax, their solution design, how well their products met the technical specifications, their migration plan and overall pricing structure. Pricing for each solution is detailed in the "Pricing Summary" on page 50 so that you can perform a cost-benefit analysis.

Each vendor supplied a detailed list of its solution's features and functions (see "Technical Specifications" online at techweb.cmp.com/ nc/814/814f1.html). The vendor providing the most complete and cost-effective response gets the bid. In this case, the nod went to Novell. Lotus and Microsoft were placed on the "Short Lis t" and the two remaining solutions, Innosoft and Netscape, are presented alphabetically.

Novell's Solution Summary
The Novell Gr oupWise perspective is unique. It puts messaging and collaboration in one, familiar, simple-to-use place: the GroupWise Universal Mailbox. E-mail, faxes, phone messages, appointments, tasks, workflow management, shared documents and images--it's all information management, and it's as simple as e-mail.

The simplicity afforded the GroupWise user becomes apparent when evaluating the competition's products.

· The choice between Microsoft Corp.'s Exchange client and Outlook is confusing, and there are compatibility problems between the two. These include detailed schedule information from Outlook that cannot be accessed by Schedule+ and public folder views using specific Outlook capabilities that are not supported by Exchange cli ent.

· Netscape Communications Corp.'s SuiteSpot component-based architecture lets customers select the components they need, but the loosely integrated result introduces significant challenges both in administration and tool use.

· Lotus Development Corp.'s Notes specializes in handling its own native document formats but is not effective at managing documents created by other applications. This condition makes it difficult for Notes users to take advantage of things such as version control when the document is not Notes-centric. Lotus Notes documents are stored in a Notes database as a record. Each database has a 4-GB limit, compared to a 16-TB GroupWise database limit.

GroupWise is a system administrator's dream. It's integrated with Novell Directory Services (NDS) and ManageWise, so you can administer and monitor the network and GroupWise from a single point of reference. No mindless repetition, and no more looking around. With multiplatform support of Windows NT, Unix and IntranetWa re on both client and server--as well as the industry's most robust gateway set--GroupWise gives you complete flexibility for Internet and intranet messaging in your organization. According to a 1996 research study by International Data Corp., GroupWise provides returns on invest ment of up to 334 percent. In comparison:

To download an Adobe Acrobat .pdf format version of the Pricing Summary, click here.
To download an Adobe Acrobat .pdf format version of the vendor's technical specifications, click here.


Updated July 31, 1997