This article is in serious need of an objective re-write. Currently, it seems to have been written by a designer or marketing-rep for the company that created the product.
For example, the first line describes it as: "a web based groupware solution." The use of the word "solution" without first identifying the specific problem being solved is marketing-speak, and conveys nothing at all about the product to a reader who is not already familiar with its intended use. The use of this word also hurts the objectivity of the article, since it implies (without evidence) that the product in question is fully effective at solving some (undefined) problem.
The phrase, "mainly targeting small and medium-sized business" is a statement about the motivations of the company's marketing department. An objective writer would cite a source for such a statement about another person's thoughts.
Page found via link from Open Source Groupware.
I have checked the site and found that strictly speaking this software is not Open Source Software as section 4 of there user agreement states:
(4.) The SOFTWARE PRODUCT is protected by copyright laws and international copyright treaties, as well as other intellectual property laws and treaties. The SOFTWARE PRODUCT is licensed, but not sold.
By its very definition open source software has no copyright because anyone may modify the software in any way they wish.
As a general rule of thumb I have found a few OSS platforms although described as such do not appear to be so.