Microsoft: Exchange 2007 SP2 required for interop with Exchange 2010

Microsoft: Exchange 2007 SP2 required for interop with Exchange 2010

Summary: Exchange customers who are planning to continue to run Exchange Server 2007 while moving to Exchange Server 2010, take note: You're going to need Exchange 2007 Service Pack (SP) 2, in order to do so.

SHARE:

Exchange customers who are planning to continue to run Exchange Server 2007 while moving to Exchange Server 2010, take note: You're going to need Exchange 2007 Service Pack (SP) 2, in order to do so.

Microsoft is planning to deliver the final SP2 for Exchange Server 2007 in the third calendar quarter of this year, according to a recent post on the Microsoft Exchange Team Blog. SP2 will include the usual fixes and updates, but also functionality that will allow Exchange Server 2007 and Exchange Server 2010 to coexist. The final release of Exchange Server 2010 is expected toward the end of 2009.

A couple of pertinent Qs and As, from the blog post:

"Q: Will the Service Pack 2 be required for Exchange 2007 to interoperate with Exchange Server 2010? "A: Yes, Exchange Server 2007 SP2 is required to interoperate with Exchange Server 2010 and to enable the transition of services to the latest version of the product.

"Q: Can customers decide to skip Service Pack 2 if they are not planning to deploy Exchange 2010 and wait for the next version of the product?

"A: Given the benefits SP2 provides, Microsoft recommends customers deploy SP2, so they can immediately benefit from the operational efficiency improvements and Update Rollups that generally address hotfixes, security and critical updates for the product. Ultimately it is customer's decision on the timing to apply the service pack and Microsoft will support those customers in alignment with the Service Pack Support Policy."

Exchange Server 2007 SP2 is slated to provide new auditing capabilities, volume-snapshot-backup  functionality, dynamic Active Directory schema update and validation, and public folder quota management, among other features.

Microsoft released a public beta of Exchange Server 2010 in mid-April. The new release is set to include new capabilities for handling and organizing e-mail, voice mail and other forms of communication and collaboration.

There will be no 32-bit version of Exchange Server 2010 (not even a lab version, as was the case with Exchange Server 2007). It's going to be a 64-bit-only release. Accordingly, Exchange Server 2010 will require a 64-bit version of Windows Server to run.

Users commenting on an Exchange Server Team blog posting that highlighted the 64-bit-only information were of two minds about Microsoft's decision. Some said they were happy Microsoft was pushing them into the 64-bit world and others said the 64-bit-only requirement might be a deal breaker for them, in terms of moving to the new Exchange release.

Topics: Microsoft, Collaboration, Enterprise Software, Software

About

Mary Jo has covered the tech industry for 30 years for a variety of publications and Web sites, and is a frequent guest on radio, TV and podcasts, speaking about all things Microsoft-related. She is the author of Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft plans to stay relevant in the post-Gates era (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

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

Talkback

3 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Regarding 64-bit

    As an Exchange 2007 administrator, I can firmly say that if you're running 2007 in a 32-bit production environment now, you are doing so unsupported by Microsoft. So it's nothing new.

    With that in mind, I don't think Microsoft is going to give a rats rump-roast about the customers claiming it's a "deal-breaker" for them that it isn't available in a 32-bit format.

    If you're still running 2003 and looking to move to 2010, you're waaay behind to start with. It's not even akin to moving from Windows XP to Windows 7, it's more like Windows 2000 to Windows 7 in terms of the environment.

    Further more, if you're not running hardware in your environment that supports 64-bit Windows, you're even further behind, and it's time to pony up some IT budget for your business.
    GoodThings2Life
    • I don't know...

      Exchange 2003 worked. But when 2007 came out, half the company would have been forced to use Internet Explorer just to take advantage of the new features and if you were able to justify the price tag for little or no gain in functionality. You got further than me.
      Then even when all the complaints died down and they finally patched it to the extent you could start finding people with something good to say about it, it still had a huge price tag and public folders wouldn't migrate well.
      To compare the difference between 2003 and 2010 to be similar to the difference between 2000 and Windows 7 is a little harsh. Let's face it 32bit vs. 64bit does not make a big difference in performance when you add in all the bloat that came with it. XP to windows 7 is probably a good analogy, not that I wouldn't role back to 2000 in a heartbeat if I had the need for a smaller deployment.
      You can say M$ doesn't care if we're running 2003, but you can't really condemn us for it.
      Socratesfoot
  • RE: Microsoft: Exchange 2007 SP2 required for interop with Exchange 2010

    Lovely attractive submission. [url=http://www.mulberry-outlets.co.uk/]mulberry outlets[/url] Put into get you handy remarks for your web page followers [url=http://www.mulberry-outlets.co.uk/]mulberry outlet[/url] similar [url=http://www.mulberry-outlets.co.uk/]mulberry outlet store[/url] to me.
    dfwekrdfe5101-24353686861768215410686735419378