ie8 fix
madison

Why I'm letting someone else run my Exchange 2010 server

By | November 9, 2009, 12:22pm PST

Summary: Microsoft officially released Exchange Server 2010 today. I could go download the code from my MSDN or TechNet account and install it in-house. Instead, I’m planning to let someone else handle the heavy lifting for me, and I suspect I have a lot of company. The biggest objection to a complex but powerful server product like Exchange is the hassle of managing it locally. Using a third-party hosting company eliminates those hassles and adds benefits like redundant data storage and simplified administration.

Microsoft officially released Exchange Server 2010 today. As an MSDN and TechNet subscriber, I could go download the code for free and install it on my in-house Windows Server 2008 R2 box. But I have no plans to download those bits or install them.

Instead, I’m planning to let someone else handle the heavy lifting for me, and I suspect I have a lot of company. The biggest objection to a complex but powerful server product like Exchange is the hassle of managing it locally. Using a third-party hosting company eliminates those hassles and adds benefits like redundant data storage and simplified administration.

For the past few years, I’ve kept all my personal and business e-mail, calendar, and contact information in an Exchange account hosted by Mailstreet, a division of Apptix. (Previously, I used unmanaged POP/SMTP servers for e-mail and stored messages, contacts, and calendar information locally in Outlook PST files.) Mailstreet’s service has been first-rate, including a recent trouble-free upgrade from Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2007. For our collaborative work on recent book projects, my co-authors and I have also been using SharePoint and Exchange 2007 as part of the Microsoft Business Productivity Online Suite, which has also been easy to use and extremely reliable.

The first third-party hosting company to cross the Exchange 2010 finish line is Intermedia, which announced availability of its hosted Exchange 2010 product (a custom-developed solution) within a few seconds of Microsoft’s announcement. So far, neither Apptix nor Microsoft’s BPOS division have announced definitive plans to make the latest version of Exchange available as a hosted offering. According to an Apptix spokesperson, being first isn’t necessarily that big of a deal:

Microsoft has not announced an official release date for the hosted version for Exchange 2010, but as a long-time member of Microsoft’s Technical Adoption Program, Apptix has been working successfully with Exchange 2010 in their lab for over a year.  They will be more than ready to offer Exchange 2010 to customers once the hosted version, with the appropriate features and functionality for multitenancy incorporated, is made available - sometime next year.

Until that time, Apptix will continue to offer its proven hosted Exchange 2007 service that customers can rely on for mission-critical email communication needs. … Most end-users won’t even notice the enhancements of Exchange 2010, as the new features are primarily datacenter-centric. Microsoft’s new end-user benefits are really available in Outlook 2010, which Apptix will offer immediately to customers when it is commercially available.

I spoke last week with Intermedia’s Chief Operating Officer, Jonathan McCormick, about the company’s plans and its infrastructure. They currently boast a quarter-million users and expect the biggest source of growth in the hosted Exchange market – the “sweet spot” – to be companies with 200 to 500 users that are currently running the aging Exchange 2000 or Exchange 2003 and dread the prospect of an in-house migration.

Cost is an issue, of course, but data integrity is even more important to those business customers, McCormick told me: “They care about their data,” he said. Those Exchange repositories don’t just contain simple e-mail threads; they also include PowerPoint presentations, business contacts, and details of contracts. A server crash can paralyze the business for days, which is why Intermedia has multiple replicated platforms in data centers on opposite coasts, with rapid restore capabilities and a 100% Data Protection Guarantee.

Intermedia also touts its custom development skills, which allow them to simplify administration tasks via a custom control panel (shown here) instead of using the generic Microsoft-provided admin tools. One example is the ability to quickly perform a remote wipe of a stolen or compromised mobile device such as a Blackberry.

One misconception I had when I started investigating hosted Exchange options is that they are expensive and only appropriate for large businesses. As it turns out, most hosting companies offer plans for small companies, and both Mailstreet and Intermedia have single-user plans appropriate for sole proprietors like me. Including ActiveSync support (which works with both Windows Mobile and the iPhone) and spam filtering, I pay roughly $14 a month for a 2GB mailbox. Businesses with multiple users can get significantly lower per-user pricing.

Speaking personally, the biggest advantage of the Exchange platform for me as a small business owner is its ability to work on multiple platforms. Ironically, my recent experiments with Apple products have been especially successful with Exchange. After Mailstreet migrated my hosted account to a server running Exchange 2007, I was able to connect the Snow Leopard Mail client and an iPhone to the server and begin syncing immediately. If I send or receive a message, create or edit an appointment or contact, or trim the contents of my inbox on any PC, Mac, or mobile device (including a Windows Mobile phone), those changes are reflected on any other device. I don’t have to think about synchronization, and I don’t have to worry about a local server failure causing me to lose important data. Given how well my setup is working, I’m in no hurry to migrate to Exchange 2010, but will probably take a closer hands-on look at Intermedia’s offfering shortly.

Clearly, Google’s entry into the market (along with some very clever marketing and a halo effect from their search success) has made an impact on competitors for managed e-mail and apps, especially for small businesses. Their presence is undoubtedly responsible for Microsoft’s decision to slash its BPOS prices in half recently. It wouldn’t surprise me to see third-party hosting companies start cutting their prices as well.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications.

Disclosure

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is a freelance technical journalist and book author. All work that Ed does is on a contractual basis.

Since 1994, Ed has written more than 25 books about Microsoft Windows and Office. Along with various co-authors, Ed is completely responsible for the content of the books he writes. As a key part of his contractual relationship with publishers, he gives them permission to print and distribute the content he writes and to pay him a royalty based on the actual sales of those books. Ed's books written prior to fall 2011 have been distributed by Que Publishing (a division of Pearson Education) and by Microsoft Press. As of November 2011, Ed is a partner in the independent publishing company Fair Trade Digital Exchange, which exclusively publishes his books.

On occasion, Ed accepts consulting assignments. In recent years, he has worked as an expert witness in cases where his experience and knowledge of Microsoft and Microsoft Windows have been useful. In each such case, his compensation is on an hourly basis, and he is hired as a witness, not an advocate.

Ed does not own stock or have any other financial interest in Microsoft or any other software company. He owns 500 shares of stock in EMC Corporation, which was purchased before the company's acquisition of VMware. In addition, he owns 350 shares of stock in Intel Corporation, purchased more than two years ago. All stocks are held in retirement accounts for long-term growth.

Ed does not accept gifts from companies he covers. All hardware products he writes about are purchased with his own funds or are review units covered under formal loan agreements and are returned after the review is complete.

Biography

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications. He's served as editor of the U.S. edition of PC Computing and managing editor of PC World; both publications had monthly paid circulation in excess of 1 million during his tenure. He is the author of more than 25 books on Microsoft Windows and Office, including the recently released Windows 7 Inside Out.

103
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Why I'm letting someone else run my Exchange 2010 server
JACOBSONR 14th Oct
Good day to confirm this comment I would appreciate T h e b e s t o f Z D N e t d e l i v e r e d your website very nice to everyone Yes, Oracle is the only one with shared-disk architecture, but that is there advantage. It means you can add or remove nodes and the database lives on. In a shared nothing architecture, if you lose a node, you lose the system. I'm sure Oracle appreciates EMC highlighting their advantage.I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate Awesome post! Thank you very much || thanks for nice content this is really benefit to me.
0 Votes
+ -
Why ironic?
isulzer 9th Nov 2009
Given that exchange is the de facto standard in business email/cal having their products working as
perfectly as possible with exchange is a must. Not only that, they advertise this functionality. Did you
expect it to fail miserably? Your expectations must have been low. Heh.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
It took years
Ed Bott 9th Nov 2009
Native Exchange support was only added in Snow Leopard, less than two months ago. It took a very, very long time. But it is ironic that this particular bit of Microsoft software works so well with Apple's software. That isn't always the case, as the many, many iTunes-related episodes show.
0 Votes
+ -
Lost me there.
isulzer 9th Nov 2009
It's out of beta. They added it. They advertise it. It works. Not surprising. I do agree
that Apple has long testing periods...

They also have to license this tech from Microsoft. Mayhap this is the reason it took so
long? They did this for the iPhone, recently, and have added it to snow leopard, the
most recent release. I'm sure they could have added it to leopard... but that would
remove incentive to upgrade wouldn't it?

But you did lose me with the iTunes mention... what are you referring to?
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
They could have licensed it years ago
Ed Bott Updated - 9th Nov 2009
And as for iTunes, you're kidding right? I've personally experienced data loss and serious crashes caused by iTunes.

Blue Screen Of Death caused by iTunes:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=536
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=543

Not to mention the unwanted software installed without consent:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=554

The Bonjour service (installed with no notice or consent along with iTunes) has wreaked havoc on some networks. I had a client who lost all internet access via their DSL modem thanks to Bonjour (quick uninstall fixed it).

So, no, I don't expect an initial release of an Apple program to work well.
0 Votes
+ -
K.
isulzer 9th Nov 2009
'They could have licensed it years ago' is not a fact, is it? Don't treat is as one. It is
only a few years ago that the EU forced microsoft to open up many of it's server
protocols to the competition to prevent 'lock in', whatever they really meant. We do
know that it was first implemented for the iPhone due to the need to use it in a
business environment, and that the iPhone isn't THAT old. Furthermore go check
microsoft press releases for a date:

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/dec08/12-
18EASLicencingPR.mspx?rss_fdn=Press%20Releases

The earliest it could have occurred was early 2008, but Microsoft only finished
publishing documentation for active sync by december 2008. So less than one year for
adding and testing support in the iPhone is a pretty fast rate. Add a bit more for the
release of Snow Leopard.

Your examples have nothing to do with OS X though. Given that it's in their best
interest to provide working, but not so great software for the Windows ecosystem...
Just like Microsoft does for the Mac OS ecosystem. Which in turn forces Apple to
license exchange just to get decent exchange support for their OS... get the picture?
Just two corporations fencing... why should you expect them to release software with
massive problems for their own OS?

None of the links you posted were initial releases. Furthermore none of these were on
OS X. Why would you expect their initial release of exchange support on Mac OS to be
bad then? Especially when they had been testing support on the iPhone for quite a
while. It already worked. Why would it suddenly have a crop of problems pop up?

I think you were just projecting. But thanks for explaining why you were surprised.
0 Votes
+ -
Nokias have worked with ActiveSync
LiquidLearner 9th Nov 2009
since shortly after SP2 for Exchange 2003, which is when they added push e-mail support. In fact they worked before but you had to check mail from the phone every so often.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
2003 is my understanding
Ed Bott 9th Nov 2009
I think you're confusing a few issues. As LiquidLearner points out separately, there were other devices that licensed ActiveSync as early as 2003.

But I am not well versed on this issue and think it's mostly a sidetrack. My original point was that I was pleasantly surprised and found it ironic that Exchange support on Apple hardware made this platform even more valuable to me. For some reason you saw that word as a negative. That certainly wasn't my intent.
Not sure what iTunes has to do with an Exchange discussion but since you mentioned it...

Never has a bigger piece of junk ever been installed on my Windows machine. It literally brings to a halt everything else I am trying to do whenever I launch the thing. I wish there was something "else" I could use to manage the stuff on my iPhone, especially since it "forgot" everything in my iTunes library and now I have to build it again from scratch before I can sync again.
0 Votes
+ -
re: Native Exchange Support
WarhavenSC 9th Nov 2009
Ed, I haven't used Snow Leopard much yet because our servers are still Leopard, but I know in Leopard it has Exchange support -- email anyway. I presume by native support, you mean that iCal works alongside Mail and such to integrate seamlessly with Exchange?
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Differences
Ed Bott 9th Nov 2009
Leopard supports Exchange via IMAP. SL adds native support. Works very well (tho not perfectly).
@Ed Bott

You complete a acceptable assumption arrange weight loss pills, advantageous job!
0 Votes
+ -
Roughly 40% or so of Corporations use the "other" e-mail Platform, IBM/Lotus Notes.

Roughly 40% run the POS known as Exchange.

The other 20% use other solutions.

Exchange = JUNK.
0 Votes
+ -
Found a GREAT Email server
use_linux 9th Nov 2009
http://www.icewarp.com

Awesome!

It runs on RHEL/Cent...
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
So, I have to download this server and run it in my shop? And be responsible for data backup and security and management? How many third-party hosting companies are offering this awesome software as a service to enterprises? How much does it cost on a per-user basis?

Did you actualy read this post or just use your caveman "Ugh, Exchange BAD!" button?

Did you notice that IceWarp proudly offers Exchange ActiveSync compatibility? Oh wait. No they don't. An August 2008 press release said they would be including that much-needed feature in version 10, which the press release said was due in October 2008. Then in May 2009 they said it would be coming in "summer 2009."

And yet here it is November 2009 (I am pretty sure summer is over now) and no sign of version 10 or ActiveSync support. The download page is still offering version 9.4.2.

Go ahead, read the press releases for yourself:

http://www.icewarp.com/press/

Sheesh.
0 Votes
+ -
IceWarp is superior to Exchange
Use_More_OIL_NOW 10th Nov 2009
So in your words, MS is the best nothing
is better, so I guess the amount of downtime
from Worms/Viruses from MS based OS'es is
of no concern.

IceWarp is used by Nortel, Cisco, MIT, Siemans
oh yeah they can't deliver!

Whatever.... Another paid MS bot...

http://www.icewarp.com/about_us/customers/
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Another ad for IceWarp
otaddy 10th Nov 2009
Sorry but Exchange is an excellent product and one that has continually improved.

PS: Exchange is used by as many and more big companies than IceWarp...and no downtime due to worms/viruses is not a big issue.
0 Votes
+ -
Icewarp is okay
LiquidLearner 9th Nov 2009
but as a comparison to Exchange? Not even close. Sendmail is perhaps on the same playing field.

You have two big players, Notes and Exchange. Note has its uses but if you think Exchange requires "a lot" of management you have no idea what you're in for with Notes.
0 Votes
+ -
IceWarp is > than Exchange
Use_More_OIL_NOW 10th Nov 2009
IceWarp is awesome, at least it can
run without being down with Viruses/worms.
0 Votes
+ -
Why even bother, anymore
GuidingLight 9th Nov 2009
You are so anti-Microsoft, that you have been found to make many things up to support your "facts"

Comments are allways welcome, but yours are the ususall "LET ME TELL YOU ONCE AGAIN THAT I HATE, HATE, HATE, MICROSOFT"

Fact: IBM/Lotus Notes =JUNK

wink
0 Votes
+ -
If it helps...
zkiwi 9th Nov 2009
Most everyone I know will bag on Exchange, or Notes, whichever they are using. So, I'd add to the mix:

Fact: Exchange = Notes = Junk :P
0 Votes
+ -
Someone who complains about their job?
LiquidLearner 9th Nov 2009
No way! I'd never expect such a thing.

Mail admins sit and deal with incredibly stupid end users almost all day, every day and deal with complex systems of multiple servers. So from high end to low end, they deal with it all. More so than most admin groups in large companies. Maybe that's why they complain, no matter what system they use. At least that's my experience.
0 Votes
+ -
"IBM/Lotus Notes = JUNK" - I agree. We just
TheBottomLineIsAllThatMatters 10th Nov 2009
switched here from years of SLOWtus Notes to Outlook 2007. The users and the switch was painless and wonderful. ..I was a Notes developer way back when...they just did not stay competitive.
0 Votes
+ -
My condolences
itguy08 10th Nov 2009
You will have issues with the POS known as Exchange. It's just a matter of time.
0 Votes
+ -
40% uses Lotus Notes?
condelirios 10th Nov 2009
I haven't seen anyone using that in years other than IBM themselves. Who would still use that? It is horrible.
0 Votes
+ -
Plenty do.....
itguy08 10th Nov 2009
Don't have the #'s but it's still 40/40 Exchange Notes.

And Exchange still has a few things to learn from Notes.
0 Votes
+ -
Here you go:
itguy08 10th Nov 2009
http://www.dominopower.com/issues/issue200901/00002315001.html

More organizations
This year, IBM has some good news to announce. IBM today announced that the number of global Lotus Notes licenses has reached 145 million, including purchases by many industry leaders exchanging Microsoft licenses for Lotus collaboration software.

Over the past 15 months ending in the third quarter of 2008, more than 12,000 new organizations bought their first Notes/Domino licenses, and more than half of the Fortune global 100 now use Lotus Notes and Domino. This includes more than 80 percent of the largest banks, consumer product, electronics, insurance, pharmaceutical and telecommunications companies - as well as more than 50 percent of America's largest 100 companies.

Let's be clear here. IBM has seen a market share growth for Notes in what's probably the worst economic storm we've seen in years. While other markets are crying out for help, the Notes market has remained strong and vibrant.

Quarterly growth
Driven by sales of Notes and Domino, IBM has reported consecutive quarterly growth for its Lotus collaboration software brand for four years through the third quarter of 2008, its last reported quarter, with much of it coming at Microsoft's expense. Lotus has averaged double-digit growth over the first three quarters of 2008. While marketshare estimates vary, Gartner Dataquest's most recent report from 2008 indicates a 40 percent share worldwide for Lotus Notes, compared to Microsoft's 48 percent for Exchange, a narrowing gap.

Now, of course, IBM isn't reporting Q4 - and Q4 has been a crazy quarter. But, even so, throughout the first three quarters of 2008, most business experienced some challenge, but our market is remaining remarkably strong. It says a lot not only for IBM's offerings, but for each of you, adding value to their products.

Pushing back Exchange
IBM reports that a number of customers that Microsoft had previously announced would migrate to Exchange are now stalling or abandoning those plans. These organizations recognize the higher cost of potential migration to the competing product and the benefits of deploying Notes/Domino 8 through 8.5 versions. In some cases, the cost of upgrading Notes/Domino has shown to be 20 percent or less of what companies were projecting for migration costs to Exchange.
To be fair, though, IBM is not reporting anything about how they're doing compared to SharePoint ? that's something we'll be watching over the next year.

New big name customers
IBM has won many new Lotus Notes customers, the biggest increase since the release of Notes Domino 8.0 in August 2007, and has benefitted from renewed commitments from existing customers. New Lotus Notes wins over Microsoft include The Coca-Cola Company, Nationwide, Southern California Edison, Linde Group, Global Hyatt Corp., CEMEX, 3M, The Hartford, Banco do Brazil, Banca Intesa Sanpaolo and Petrobas, among others.

In addition, a number of customers worldwide have chosen to standardize on Lotus Notes over Microsoft Exchange, as well as migrate their existing Exchange environments to the latest versions of Notes/Domino 8. They include Minolta, Toshiba, Continental AG, EVONIK, Caja Espana, Bank of New York Mellon, Kendle, Kohl's, Constructora San Jose, Banco do Brazil, Banco Antonveneta, Hitachi, Freightliner, Manulife, Sherwin Williams, Belden Wire, Ministry Of Finance Belgium, John Hancock, Ton Yang, Air France, Danone, SunTel, INEOS, Werner Enterprises and Payflex.

Here's another:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10145045-16.html

If one looks to neutral analysts to be the line judge in this discussion, the water becomes even murkier, as eWeek points out:

Market share estimates vary widely for Exchange and Lotus Notes. Gartner Dataquest's most recent report from 2008 shows Notes narrowing the gap on market leader Exchange, with IBM's Notes owning 40 percent share worldwide and Microsoft grabbing 48 percent for Exchange.

IDC's annual market share analysis of collaborative environments puts Microsoft's market share at 52 percent, with IBM's market share slipping 5 percent to 37.7 percent. A Ferris Research survey of 917 organizations worldwide found Exchange in 65 percent of those shops.
===============================
Exchange = Money Pit = High TCO = Junk.
===============================
0 Votes
+ -
Nationwide Insurance for one...
msuper69 10th Nov 2009
$21.832 billion in annual revenue, 36,000 employees

Not exactly a bit player.
Altogether The People know, online slots along with these online casino slots canister act a lot of advantage qualification you accomplish it consistently.
0 Votes
+ -
Best not to use Exchange at all.
itguy08 9th Nov 2009
It is GARBAGE and not to be relied on.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
And yet...
Ed Bott 9th Nov 2009
It has served my needs perfectly for several years without any failings.

Just goes to prove the old adage: One troll's trash is another man's treasure.
0 Votes
+ -
LOL!
GuidingLight 9th Nov 2009
Just goes to prove the old adage: One troll's trash is another man's treasure.

And to think he probally believes that no one is on to him. happy

Now, our parent company runs the Exchange server, and have found it to be very easy to manage, a slight hickup every now and again appears to be fixed within ninutes.

Are you saying that you are letting someone else run your server because it is more difficult to manage then past releases, or that it just a good time to do the whole thing at once?
0 Votes
+ -
Don't understand this myth about Exchange
LiquidLearner 9th Nov 2009
I handle quite a few Exchange servers for businesses ranging from 15 users to a school district that is now up to 600 mailboxes. The school district I see maybe 3 times a year and almost never for Exchange issues, it's more likely something changed on their firewall.

Exchange is one of the more care-free products I support. Sure when it has problems it can be a PITA but that is so rare that it's hard for me to even remember all the eseutil or powershell commands.
...who I migrated to Exchange. The previous tech told the owner it was a mistake to move to Exchange as it was "unreliable and too complicated". After the migration that Exchange server has experienced zero problems with a minimum of maintenance. The client couldn't be happier (they had all kinds of e-mail trouble with the old setup). The interesting thing was, after a while, the previous tech acknowledged to the owner the success of the move.
0 Votes
+ -
Agree - The difference is.....
djmik 10th Nov 2009
The difference is in experience. Exchange is the most worry-free server in my shop. I have performed many a problem-free migration for myself and customers. I have managed Exchange in many different configs; Multi-site, clustered, front-end / back-end, etc. If you are a) experienced, and b) do your homework, you will rarely have a problem with management and migration. I suspect all of those who complain about what crap Exchange is are those same ones that work for companies that pay me to come and fix their mess.

I undertand why you (Ed) would not want to manage Exchange at home. Afterall, you are just one person and probably don't want to spend $$ on redundant hardware, etc, but from a corporate standpoint, It is my opinion that you can't beat the AD integration, and because of this, managing the user aspect of Exchange is not much more detailed than managing AD accounts. In fact, I would hate to lose that integration if we had outsourced Exchange to a network outside of our infrastructure.

Is there a way to maintain this integration in an outsourced Echange environment? Not too familiar with it yet.
0 Votes
+ -
Can't remember the last mail outage
itguy08 10th Nov 2009
we've had. And we don't use Exchange. We use the "other" big name software. And it's been 100% reliable for the past 9 years.
0 Votes
+ -
LOL - have to remeber that one - Thank you - NT
TheBottomLineIsAllThatMatters 10th Nov 2009
NT
Eddie wrote, "And yet...
It has served my needs perfectly for several
years without any failings."


So do these "needs" include privacy regarding
data/communication?

I just can't see any business not needing
privacy, especially on email.. Business
proposals, brain storming, business
opportunities, employee/employer communication,
planning, etc. A 3rd party email hosting
arrangement does not offer privacy regardless
of what a contract states. Additionally, you
are at the whim of the hosting company and have
no clue as to who can see your data or how long
it sticks around (data retention policies). If
one of their employees is selling your stuff to
a competitor. Hence the reason I run my own
exchange server and will never go to cloud
services for anything.

Exchange 5.5 was ok at the time, 2003 was a lot
better, 2007 was even better, and 2010 is
better still, and the new migration tools and
OWA are very slick... I have never had any
problems administering any of my exchange
servers. They are actually very simple and easy
to take care of. And with a robotic tape
library, mixed with month end/year end backups
and offsite storage, life on Exchange is
actually easy.

Yes I still hate Microscum with a passion. All
of the BS problems they have purposefully
caused over the years has hurt consumers all
over the world. Windows 7 does not impress me
at all, it's even more of a OSX rip off than
Vista (granted it is better, and lets not
forget the windows 7 number one breakthrough,
"Stable".)

But the fact is that Microsponge happens to own
the market on office apps. Until I see
something better rise up, I'll stick with
Office and Exchange. I just make sure that my
disaster recover plan is rock solid... But I do
that with everything I run.
0 Votes
+ -
Not so...
lawryll@... 9th Nov 2009
Exchange is incredibly reliable...provided you set it up correctly. I had a customer call me the first of this year saying their Exchange 2000 cluster had been up and operational continuously for a year. They achieved a 100% service uptime on their yearly report.

That INCLUDED a failvover-failback test last July in which not a single e-mail transaction was lost for 3200 users...all on a single server mind you...utilizing the built-in Microsoft-written CCR.

So, the only garbage I can see with Exchange is when you fail to deploy it correctly and/or rely on faulty AD/networking components. Deployed correctly...by a competent Exchange SME, it works pretty much flawlessly.
0 Votes
+ -
Non User Criticism?
brianpeterson@... 9th Nov 2009
And some people don't like caviar either.

So what's your point? Reliability is not an issue or American business would all migrate to Domino or something else.
0 Votes
+ -
Obvious you haven't used it
FrankHa 11th Nov 2009
We run a 5000 user cluster with almost no problems, it's by far the most reliable of the mail systems I've run and I've run most of them.
0 Votes
+ -
Especially small companies. Maintaining your own server costs more, and you get very little in return other than the satisfaction that no one else touches your data. And unless you need government level security, there's no reason why an outsourced server can't meet your security needs.

Plus our office gets frequent internet interruptions. If we had all our e-mail sent here, we'd need a backup plan for when our internet is down and our clients/vendors are trying to send messages to us. With the server being off-site, we let the other company worry about maintaining 100% uptime reliability and we get by on our locally cached e-mail until we are up again. And those of us with 3G smart phones can still contact the server.
0 Votes
+ -
Local server with unreliable ISP not a killer
AlexChiefTech 10th Nov 2009
We've been using mxsave.com with our clients' in-
house servers. You setup a lower-priority MX
record that points to their servers, and they will
store any email that comes their way while trying
to deliver it to your server periodically. If the
client's internet goes down, the emails are not
lost. Works great for us, and d*mn cheap.
0 Votes
+ -
I know for many small businesses (thinking of 3 I worked for in the past and presently, as examples), there's a very real concern about spending too much capital on "services" instead of "physical assets".

Outsourced Exchange might seem like a great "value", but it takes away from the capabilities you actually own yourself, as a company. I know where I work now, I could probably make a good argument for outsourcing just about every facet of our I.T. infrastructure, one application at a time. But eventually, we'd be stuck with investments in a climate controlled server room that sits basically empty, and we'd be paying all these 3rd. parties to maintain everything we use EXCEPT for all the workstations the employees access it all with. Because someone still needs to take care of the workstations (or portables), you haven't eliminated a full-time I.T. person from your payroll ... but you might have started under-utilizing him/her. He/she could have been tending to the servers for part of the work-day, if you had any left!

Not only that, but if/when you decide to make changes to your environment, it's nice to have full control of the "back end". Outsourced hosting sounds great, until you need them to make some sweeping changes for you, and you're at their mercy to do them for you when THEY get time to take care of it. They don't just work for you. They work for thousands of clients. So it always comes down to "take a number and get in line" when you need things reconfigured.
Adobe, for its web-based photoshop, gets to take ownership...

Microsoft would undoubtedly try the same for its online Office...

Most e-stores and forums do so for customers' reviews...

What happens if the e-mail provider goes under? Last I checked, large businesses are buying the smaller ones or the smaller ones lose customers due to their own economic-related issues... no symbiosis is one-sided...
0 Votes
+ -
I have to wonder...
zkiwi 9th Nov 2009
One of the major early selling points for Exchange was that you could (easily) run your own email server.

If that's changed to the point where you don't want to have a bar of it (in house), then what is there in your humble opinion for that (I'd say, still rather large) market?
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
The world changes
Ed Bott 9th Nov 2009
Once upon a time, outside providers were less reliable and an internal server was more reliable.

Today it's the other way around.

It used to make sense to have your own PBX too, right? I think things are a little different today in that regard as well.

For some companies, it makes perfect sense. But outsourcing has now reached the point where it's more cost-effective and creates fewer headaches than internal management. IMHO.
0 Votes
+ -
on these outsourced sites?
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
No
Ed Bott 10th Nov 2009
You have full control over account management. An administrator would have to know your password, which is stored only in encrypted form, to access your account.
0 Votes
+ -
re: No
use_linux 10th Nov 2009
Yes, like identity theft it happens and when it does
what do you say 'oops'...

No way would I outsource email when the in house
options are cheaper and they can be manage by
in house expertise.

Outsourcing is just another buzz word to say we are
doing it cheaper, when in reality we all know how
the other outsourcing adventures went down the
tubes.

Small companies rely on inside expertise not some
big 'Wal_Mart' style of outsourcing where you are
at someones whim with a problem.

No thanks to Exchange and MS LOCKED-IN insecure
solutions. This sounds like a Paid ad to buy
Exchange, any other email solution is deemed to
be inferior!

I think this entire forum is pro-MS when you call
it for what it is, you are deemed a troll.

I will stay with Linux distro's and know what
the servers are doing with the ability to view
logs and know what I build is what I wanted
not what some big Mega Corp bloated up the
OS with!

  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Where you don't have to deal with customers and the realities of the business world
Good day to confirm this comment I would appreciate T h e b e s t o f Z D N e t d e l i v e r e d your website very nice to everyone Yes, Oracle is the only one with shared-disk architecture, but that is there advantage. It means you can add or remove nodes and the database lives on. In a shared nothing architecture, if you lose a node, you lose the system. I'm sure Oracle appreciates EMC highlighting their advantage.I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate Awesome post! Thank you very much || thanks for nice content this is really benefit to me.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix