Hi,

We're seeing a lot of issues here with Zimbra 5.0.18 and iPhone 3G/3GS devices. Can anyone else confirm they see similar behaviour?

Steps taken:

1. Login via web interface as user and crete a new calendar 'testcal'

2. Via web, create a new weekly appointment at 3pm on Fridays

3. Via web, Go to October 23rd (a few weeks into the future), select the appointment and delete it. When prompted select 'Instance'.

NOTE: Deletion looks good on web based view, but on an iphone using exchange connectivity, it's still visible! (Note that if you use CalDAV, it looks fine, no appointment there...)

4. Via web, move a single instance (drag drop) from Nov 6 to Nov 5. Again, select instance when prompted.

NOTE: The move looks good on the web based view, but on an iphone using exchange connectivity, there are now two appointments - the new appointment on Nov 5, and the old one from Nov 6 is still there! (Note that if you use CalDAV, it looks fine)

So Why don't you just use CalDAV? I hear you ask? Because it's got quirks too:

5. Via web, create a new weekly appointment for you starting on Thursdays at 10am, from Sept 24th

6. Via iPhone, change an after the first week's one (i.e. October 1) to Thursdays at 11am, and select 'Save for future events'.

NOTE: The move looks good on the iphone view using CalDAV, but on the web based for just the date where you started the changed time, you see both appointments times listed! (i.e., one appt at 10am on Sept 24, two appts on Oct 1 - 10am and 11am, and one appt at 11am on Oct 8).

7. Via iPhone, edit the thursday 11am appointment on Oct 8 so that instead of weekly, it's every two weeks, and save for future events.

NOTE: The move looks good on the iphone view using CalDAV, but on the web based view for Oct 8, there's a double entry of the appointment.

8. Via iPhone, edit the Thursday Oct 22 appointment, changing its name to something different. Save for future events.

NOTE: The move looks good on the iphone view using CalDAV, but on the web based view for Oct 22, there's a double entry of the appointment, one with the old name, and one with the new.

We are having a particularly major issue with this as the head of our organisation is experiencing these problems. If someone else can confirm similar behaviour, and assuming bugs don't already exist for them (I can't see any), I'll log them.