RE: Exchange 2000

[Mal Sasalu]

Title: RE: Exchange 2000

Nathan,   My vote goes with Williams. He is always there with meaningful solutions. So what, if he is bit sarcastic?. Whether he reads white papers or yellow papers, one should agree, he is quite knowledgeable guy on subjects discussed here. Sorry to say this, demeaning other’s name, only reflects your own personality.   Mal     -----Original Message----- From: Zangara, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:38 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000   First positive comments I have ever heard about Lotus. Had a buddy who tried to implement it at his old site and was fired for the ONLY reason that they hated the client interface. Personally I find Williams comments insightful and always helpful and calling him demeaning names (Billy) makes me wonder about you. I am an MCSE but also a CNA but I don't publicize that because Novell is stone knives and bearskins compared to MS in my opinion and no I don't make a cent from MS. Jim Zangara, MCSE+I Special Projects Engineer Premiere Radio Networks A Division of Clear Channel Communications 15260 Ventura Blvd Suite 500 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Direct: (818) 461-8620 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000   Billyboy-      I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments.  They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0.  I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing.  In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great.  In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase.  This, Billy, is called business.  And business is why you wake up in the morning.  Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense.  You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino.      As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin?  I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name.  Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise.  Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything.  It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues"       <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:   "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject:  RE: Exchange 2000   How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect".  Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment.   The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some.  That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment.  More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long.  Outlook provides the best email client interface available.  I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications.  They don't anymore.  Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good.  "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics   -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000   Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in that of your company, users, and IT staff) to look into alternative E-mail platforms.  My first suggestion would be Lotus Domino. Their server software is more stable, easier to administer, and MORE SECURE than any of the competetion I have seen.  Also, the functionality of the client software is far superior to anything e-mail coming out of Redmond, WA.  If your server that you mentioned is now idle and will be performing ONLY email functionality, that is perfect for 100 users, and I would bet you could squeeze in another 100.  My suggestion for hard-disk space is a mirrored system volume (2 disks).  For the data, I would suggest allocation 100 meg for each user.  Disk space is cheap, eat it up.  Running 4 10 gig drives RAID5 would be a beautiful thing.  Buy 2 extra, just in case.  I would also recommend, if you want to upgrade desktops, to go with Windows 2000.  Upgrading, loading, installing, whatever you want to call it, WinXP could turn out to be a nightmare.   Especially with Microsoft's new Product Activation "feature".  In a business environment, there is no reason, as far as I have seen, to put WinXP on the desktop.  Windows 2000 has proven itself to me to be an adequate choice for end use. I must stress again the importance of exploring your options.  Just because your OS says Microsoft on it doesn't mean your Backend product has to. Nathan W. Jim Mediger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 09:03:02 AM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues"       <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:   "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject:  Exchange 2000   We are looking at implementing Exchange 2000 and I have a few questions, and wanted advice from people who have  had real world experience. We are currently running NT 4.0 Svr and Wkstn. I have setup a Windows 2000 Domain (still in testing phase). We have about 100 users. My Questions: 1. I have a PII with 2 300mhz processors and 384mb ram. Will this be ample enough to handle Exchange 2000 and future growth? How much Hard Drive space would you recomend? 2. We plan on Going from NT 4.0 to Windows XP. Can we connect to Exchange 2000 with the NT 4.0 Clients during the interim? Any issues I should be aware of? Any issues with WXP? 3. We have 50-60 users on Outlook 2002 with internet access etc., and 40-50 users on other clients (internal e-mail and intranet only). Does Exchange play well with other e-mail clients? 4. Any other Gottcha's, Do's, Don'ts? All advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jim http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm