http://www.sqlmag.com/authors/author/author/3526073/rsscomment/3526073en-USFri, 25 May 2012 10:17:46 GMTFri, 25 May 2012 10:17:46 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/lync2010/lync-2010-load-balancing-bandwidth-142272#commentsAnchorSat, 31 Mar 2012 17:07:24 GMT
I laugh my socks off when I look through the Kemp guide and realise it needs 6 yes six! load balancers and it quite clearly shows two pairs with cables breaking the DMZ structure i.e. looping around the firewalls as otherwise they cant send the UDP traffic via the NAT.... sigh... Still it is not their fault Microsoft really makes hardware load balancer vendors work for their money with their totally daft requirements for their communication products... even F5 struggle to come up with a sensible work around for Lync's crazy security segregation of services structure... If you use DR (Direct routing mode) it works fine with just 2 load balnacers... but strictly not supported by Microsoft... BTW. I work for Loadbalancer.org and our Lync guide makes me laugh as well... but then we want to get certified don't we :-). ]]>loadbalancerSat, 31 Mar 2012 17:07:24 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/lync2010/lync-2010-load-balancing-bandwidth-142272#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/android/carrier-bloatware-android-plague-142702#commentsAnchorFri, 30 Mar 2012 10:57:58 GMT
Thanks for the app suggestions. Ive heard of these before but havent tried them. I probably should. Honestly, as I wrote this article, I had to rein in my desire to rail against the carriers and their evil practices. I firmly believe something needs to be done about this problem, but the carriers have all the power as things stand. Perhaps a groundswell of consumer anger will grow eventually. Well see.]]>bkwinFri, 30 Mar 2012 10:57:58 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/android/carrier-bloatware-android-plague-142702#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/android/carrier-bloatware-android-plague-142702#commentsAnchorFri, 30 Mar 2012 09:09:20 GMT
I think the combined issues on locked phones of unremovable bloatware and lack of updates from carriers is a big problem. I had my Galaxy S for over a year before I got fed up with the performance. Not only did I root it, but loaded a custom rom as the carrier wasn't releasing any updates beyond Froyo 2.2, but I got Gingerbread 2.3. Best decision ever! The phone runs much faster and has improved battery life now. The problem is subsidized phones. People should look for carriers that offered unsubsidized plans (like T-Mobile) and buy unlocked phones that you own and control. If this happened more often, more places would start selling unlocked phones (like regular chains) and via competition, phones prices would come down. Even now, people don't understand that it almost always cheaper in the long run to pay 'full' price for a non-subsidized phone with a non-subsidized plan than to get the typical American subsidized phone.]]>RichFri, 30 Mar 2012 09:09:20 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/android/carrier-bloatware-android-plague-142702#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/android/carrier-bloatware-android-plague-142702#commentsAnchorThu, 29 Mar 2012 17:59:06 GMT
Oh, and three programs. Startup Manager (to limit what runs), Advanced Task Manager (to kill tasks that shouldn't be running), and SystemPanel (the best utility app ever!). 373MB of user run time memory. Just wonderful on the Droid Charge.]]>dbapsThu, 29 Mar 2012 17:59:06 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/android/carrier-bloatware-android-plague-142702#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/android/carrier-bloatware-android-plague-142702#commentsAnchorThu, 29 Mar 2012 17:53:07 GMT
I learned a hard lesson after I bought my Droid Charge. ALWAYS check how much run-time memory a phone has before buying it. My phone, because of the Samsung and Verizon bloatware is only good for people that don't buy apps or those that root the phone and remove the bloatware. I chose the latter.]]>dbapsThu, 29 Mar 2012 17:53:07 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/android/carrier-bloatware-android-plague-142702#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/teched-2011-exchange-2010-sp2-features-demoed-136613#commentsAnchorTue, 24 Jan 2012 02:45:45 GMT
Adress book policies is the most awaited feature of Exchange and since the release of SP2, IT guys would be at great comfort to experience recommended GAL seggregation in proper way. Mini OWA is another good feature apart from HCW that is good too but I am not in favor of Office 365 because it does not provide that much freedom to users as you can experience in on-premise hosted environment via a 3rd party control panel for automation like MachPanel that also supports Exchange 2010 SP2. You can find more info at http://www.machsol.com]]>JamesTue, 24 Jan 2012 02:45:45 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/teched-2011-exchange-2010-sp2-features-demoed-136613#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/exchange-server-2010/exchange-2010-service-pack-2-140992#commentsAnchorWed, 28 Dec 2011 07:47:54 GMT
MachSol Inc., a Microsoft Gold Partner is first ever to announce support for Microsoft Exchange 2010 SP2 in coming release of MachPanel. So, If you have not deployed Exchange 2010 yet, than we suggest you to make a wise decision by avoiding /hosting mode and configuring Exchange 2010 SP2 on-premises deployment. MachPanel is the industry leading control panel for Shared and Enterprise Hosting that fully supports Microsoft Exchange, SharePoint, CRM 2011 and OCS/Lync etc. http://blog.machsol.com/microsoft-exchange/microsoft-exchange-2010-sp2-support-with-machpanel]]>cloudtechWed, 28 Dec 2011 07:47:54 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/exchange-server-2010/exchange-2010-service-pack-2-140992#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/lync2010/lync-mobile-clients-microsoft-debut-141642#commentsAnchorMon, 19 Dec 2011 10:26:19 GMT
@Ed Thats a great story that Microsoft did on your school, and a wonderful demonstration of the Lync technology. I hope others will visit the link you posted and see the full story. @zerenia I feel your pain! That's long been a frustration of mine, that these technologies are superceded so quickly by the next greatest thing, and the previous versions get abandoned. And that cycle is becoming ever shorter. Android, of course, is the worst of smartphones OSs in this regard -- but it's the price you pay for the fact that they're also usually the quickest to market with newer, more powerful phones, and offer the greatest choice. For now at least, I'm sticking with Android, but then, it's time for me to upgrade to that latest, most powerful device...]]>bkwinMon, 19 Dec 2011 10:26:19 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/lync2010/lync-mobile-clients-microsoft-debut-141642#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/lync2010/lync-mobile-clients-microsoft-debut-141642#commentsAnchorFri, 16 Dec 2011 06:24:59 GMT
Lync for Android - disappointed - must be running Android 2.3, so for those of us left in the dust by our carrier (in my case, AT&T and a Samsung Captivate I), we're out of luck and will have to invest in the 3rd party OCS/Lync clients if we want to use OCS/Lync on the go. Score another great support coup for AT&T!]]>zereniaFri, 16 Dec 2011 06:24:59 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/lync2010/lync-mobile-clients-microsoft-debut-141642#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/lync2010/lync-mobile-clients-microsoft-debut-141642#commentsAnchorThu, 15 Dec 2011 19:26:40 GMT
We have been using Lync 2010 for about a year now and have loved it for our school. We have a remote teacher teaching a math class to our campus. Not to unusual, except that our students are Low Vision and Blind. The Lync client was the only product that was accessible for our students. A write up was done by Microsoft featuring lync and Blind students http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2011/dec11/12-08Lync.mspx]]>Ed LukowskiThu, 15 Dec 2011 19:26:40 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/lync2010/lync-mobile-clients-microsoft-debut-141642#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/mobile-computing-devices/mobile-device-management-140841#commentsAnchorFri, 07 Oct 2011 13:31:55 GMT
I agree with this article and I think more admins should be aware of the risks associated with not implementing an MDM solution soon. My company wanted to align ourselves with a solution which provided us all the security and management capabilities for all our devices, as well as being able to push and remove applications from the devices. We successfully rolled out thousands of devices and have visibility into all of them. We secured all of them with password protection and encryption for certain high risk devices. We are pushing a line of business app over the air and we are seeing our mobile field service workers production increase by more than double. The product is called Tangoe in case you don't know about it. Our main contact Julie is quoted in the article. Great person and great company.]]>Mike RiderFri, 07 Oct 2011 13:31:55 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/mobile-computing-devices/mobile-device-management-140841#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/software-as-a-service-saas/data-residency-legal-questions-cloud-139762#commentsAnchorMon, 18 Jul 2011 15:14:53 GMT
Yes, it does appear I was repeating information about Canadian regulations that I'd read and been told numerous times, but in fact does not appear to be the whole truth--that is, there is no Canadian regulation forbidding Canadian businesses from storing data in US data centers. Canada does have stiff privacy laws related to electronic data, which has led to uncertainty about whether companies can or should be concerned about using data centers that could be subject to provisions of the USA Patriot Act; however, provided companies are aware of the requirements of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) and follow them, they shouldn't have problems using data centers outside Canadian borders. Keep in mind that certain business segments and government entities could have stricter requirements when it comes to hosted data. As for the question about Canadian-based hosters, I'm not familiar with any that I could recommend. However, if the only reason for looking for such a hoster is the legal question of data residency, it could be that's not an issue after all. I'm not a legal expert, of course, but you should certainly consult the appropriate legal guides for your area. B. K. Winstead Windows IT Pro]]>bkwinMon, 18 Jul 2011 15:14:53 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/software-as-a-service-saas/data-residency-legal-questions-cloud-139762#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/outlook/selfinflicted-wounds-microsoft-outlook-139820#commentsAnchorMon, 18 Jul 2011 12:42:25 GMT
Thanks for your replies! @Terence & @Andrew Yes, I've also done the forwarding mistake. That's similar to the Reply All error, maybe even a sub-error. I think the real good of raising this whole topic is getting around to the important lessons we can learn from our mistakes. Personally, I know I don't like making a mistake more than once. @dottiemay71 Yes, calendars are troublesome. And then when you add the smartphone to the picture--look out! I think there's a whole category of self-inflicted wounds introduced by smartphones, actually. I thought of a couple as I was writing my initial post, but then left them out. For instance, on my Droid, it's almost too easy to delete an email--you can actually do it by accident. If I recognize I've done it, it's easy to pull that message back in if I need to. Yeah, but what happens when I don't even realize what I've done? So the lesson I've learned there is don't read work email when I'm sitting at home watching TV. Again, I appreciate the comments, and I hope others will keep theirs coming!]]>bkwinMon, 18 Jul 2011 12:42:25 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/outlook/selfinflicted-wounds-microsoft-outlook-139820#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/outlook/selfinflicted-wounds-microsoft-outlook-139820#commentsAnchorFri, 15 Jul 2011 12:34:51 GMT
Reliving some of my not-so-finer moments reading this post... Oh the horror. One of my most embarrassing episodes, like Terence, was including a full email trail that definitely did not need to be included. Luckily, even though I was thoroughly kicking myself afterwards, the client (willingly or unwillingly, I'll never know) seemed to gloss over its rougher bits. Crisis averted, but it definitely taught me a good lesson. Always, always, always double check the contents before adding a new recipient.]]>Andrew WaberFri, 15 Jul 2011 12:34:51 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/outlook/selfinflicted-wounds-microsoft-outlook-139820#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/outlook/selfinflicted-wounds-microsoft-outlook-139820#commentsAnchorThu, 14 Jul 2011 16:41:44 GMT
I support Outlook 2007 at my employer..or try lol. It seems that the most self inflicted wounds in Outlook seem to happen with calendar. It's truly been a thorn at times to try to figure out why meetings are dropping off and someone isn't showing up when they're supposed to be there. In some cases, there's been a smart phone of some sort involved and they have tried removing an occurence of a meeting and instead removed the whole series from their calendar. but to try to explain that it might be user error is no easy task. :D I think the one thing I myself run into is forgetting where something was filed. Or swearing that I kept that email and I have it...but can't find it anywhere..even with search. Perhaps I just read about it online and didn't actually have it in my own email. Ha!]]>dottiemay71Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:41:44 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/outlook/selfinflicted-wounds-microsoft-outlook-139820#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/outlook/selfinflicted-wounds-microsoft-outlook-139820#commentsAnchorThu, 14 Jul 2011 01:28:01 GMT
I've done most of Brian's, with two more to add to the list. One is not checking the name of the recipient when using Outlook's autocomplete feature. Just type the first few characters of the recipient name, press tab, and the full name is magically filled in! Great time saver, not so great when it's not the right name and you didn't check it. The other one is forwarding a message that's part of a long email trail, without checking that the *entire* trail is suitable reading for the new recipient. I once forwarded a message to a client not knowing that another colleague had included some unflattering remarks about them way down in the trail.]]>Terence RabeThu, 14 Jul 2011 01:28:01 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/outlook/selfinflicted-wounds-microsoft-outlook-139820#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/software-as-a-service-saas/data-residency-legal-questions-cloud-139762#commentsAnchorFri, 08 Jul 2011 13:35:16 GMT
I tried very hard 2 years ago to find a hosting company in Canada that also had its servers physically in Canada. I was able to find only one and now, they've decided to close down their Canadian data centres and migrate all their customers to a data centre in Boston. I did not try to find a Canadian host again because of the difficulty I had before. Do you have any suggestions of companys that have their servers here in Canada and that can provide web hosting at a reasonable price?]]>Fri, 08 Jul 2011 13:35:16 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/software-as-a-service-saas/data-residency-legal-questions-cloud-139762#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/software-as-a-service-saas/data-residency-legal-questions-cloud-139762#commentsAnchorFri, 08 Jul 2011 10:40:53 GMT
The part about Canada is wrong. There is no law saying we can't have data outside the country. There is a lot of confusion around it though.]]>Fri, 08 Jul 2011 10:40:53 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/software-as-a-service-saas/data-residency-legal-questions-cloud-139762#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/software-as-a-service-saas/data-residency-legal-questions-cloud-139762#commentsAnchorFri, 08 Jul 2011 10:35:31 GMT
In the UK its an offence to withold encryption keys from the authourities so perhaps that could be creating another problem rather than remove one.]]>Fri, 08 Jul 2011 10:35:31 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/software-as-a-service-saas/data-residency-legal-questions-cloud-139762#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/office-365/bpos-outage-office-365-launch-days-139594#commentsAnchorFri, 24 Jun 2011 09:29:20 GMT
I did not experience an outage yesterday or there was one I did not notice Best Regards, Scott Salisbury www.ITTakesaTeam.net (MS Office 365 Partner) ]]>Scott SalisburyFri, 24 Jun 2011 09:29:20 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/office-365/bpos-outage-office-365-launch-days-139594#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sharepoint/sharepoint-integration-with-windows-phone-7#commentsAnchorFri, 13 May 2011 17:57:31 GMT
Hi ofergal, I was able to get an answer to your question from SharePoint MVP Matthew McDermott. This is what he had to say about if you need UAG to connect to SharePoint with WP7: "It depends. It depends how they are connecting (what app) and what authentication they are using on SharePoint. "The Windows Phone cannot use NTLM authentication. Most SharePoint sites are set up that way by default. So the app does not matter. It wont work. If they are using FBA, then they should be able to browse to the site and login. If they are using claims they may even be able to use Office Hub. For the best integration with Windows Phone (and other devices) plus manageability and security, UAG is the best bet." I hope this helps! B. K. Winstead ]]>bkwinFri, 13 May 2011 17:57:31 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sharepoint/sharepoint-integration-with-windows-phone-7#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/eas-logo-program-good-start-but-not-far-enough-136604#commentsAnchorThu, 28 Apr 2011 13:00:57 GMT
@poomba1 Yes, the multiple labels for Vista was a bit of a problem, no question. And no, I’m not saying that having multiple labels is the ultimate answer. It’s true WP7 has been disappointing in many ways, but I don’t think Microsoft could introduce something like this EAS logo program and exclude WP7. Using multiple labels, perhaps initially, would allow WP7 to be included at the lower level--not outcast completely--and then as the phone platform improves to the higher level (assuming it will), they could revert to a single logo. Ultimately, Microsoft has introduced this program to be a tool in the hands of IT departments. It won’t make any difference to consumers, who don’t know about or care about EAS--or Exchange, for that matter; they’re going to buy what they like. But the program can be used as an IT tool for setting the level of what devices they allow to connect to the corporate environment if it’s strong enough to be useful.]]>bkwinThu, 28 Apr 2011 13:00:57 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/eas-logo-program-good-start-but-not-far-enough-136604#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/eas-logo-program-good-start-but-not-far-enough-136604#commentsAnchorThu, 14 Apr 2011 22:21:34 GMT
Do you remember the fiasco with Vista ready, Vista capable...? No one logo certification is enough. Let’s not put lipstick on a pig here. Windows mobile 7 comes up short. I wa sso hoping, truly hoping "lucky number 7" would pay off as it did for the PC’s but it had been a complete joke and has embarrassed those of us who recomend this company. Mobile 7 and it’s failure to get one update out the door, Balmer should be fired. Now you suggest multiple logo prorgams becasue Mobile 7 can’t effectively communicate with it’s own parent prouct as well as 3rd party applications.....?
]]>poomba1Thu, 14 Apr 2011 22:21:34 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/eas-logo-program-good-start-but-not-far-enough-136604#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sharepoint/sharepoint-integration-with-windows-phone-7#commentsAnchorWed, 13 Apr 2011 18:29:37 GMT
Our SharePoint is HTTPS and the phone never connects to it. Do we need Microsoft Forefront Unified Access Gateway (UAG) server? ]]>ofergalWed, 13 Apr 2011 18:29:37 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sharepoint/sharepoint-integration-with-windows-phone-7#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/lessons-learned-about-exchange-2010-migrations-dag-lag-copies-lync-and-more-136603#commentsAnchorMon, 11 Apr 2011 14:13:54 GMT
"Redmond discussed the possibility of moving your Exchange organization to the cloud." Redmond should discuss the possibility of migrating to Gmail instead. Gmail allows us to host our mail system, protecting our own domain name and up to 50 users. And it is for free! A real option for the admins who think to switch to Exchange 2010, which was really a mess.]]>murat yildirimogluMon, 11 Apr 2011 14:13:54 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/lessons-learned-about-exchange-2010-migrations-dag-lag-copies-lync-and-more-136603#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sharepoint/5-funny-sharepoint-videos#commentsAnchorWed, 23 Mar 2011 18:18:45 GMT
What, no props for "How to become a SharePoint Admin" ?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1B2o2ENyi4 ]]>Christian BuckleyWed, 23 Mar 2011 18:18:45 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/sharepoint/5-funny-sharepoint-videos#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/exchange-server-2010/exchange-2010-architecture-microsoft-s-rajesh-jha-talks-about-the-future-of-exchange#commentsAnchorSat, 19 Mar 2011 22:32:07 GMT
really good read - I was very interested to hear his take on exchange’s future in the face of the rise of Microsoft Lync server and Office 365.]]>scottsoltenSat, 19 Mar 2011 22:32:07 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/exchange-server-2010/exchange-2010-architecture-microsoft-s-rajesh-jha-talks-about-the-future-of-exchange#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/exchange-server-2010/exchange-2010-architecture-microsoft-s-rajesh-jha-talks-about-the-future-of-exchange#commentsAnchorThu, 17 Mar 2011 20:27:14 GMT
Refreshing perspective from Mr Rajesh Sha! I completely agree with his comments on Microsoft’s progress with the hybrid cloud and coexistence models for organizations who want to take partial advantage of O365/multi-tenant cloud - but also want some of their users on private/dedicated infrastructure. Its great to hear Microsoft leadership discussing the flexibility and choice that they are providing in tandem with their partners.
We can’t wait for the full release of O365, ADFS, and its impact to our enterprise customers who want the flexibility of the hybrid cloud!

Andy Blevins
www.azaleos.com]]>Andy BlevinsThu, 17 Mar 2011 20:27:14 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/exchange-server-2010/exchange-2010-architecture-microsoft-s-rajesh-jha-talks-about-the-future-of-exchange#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/is-the-iphone-really-all-that-136592#commentsAnchorFri, 14 Jan 2011 12:51:19 GMT
Reading recent news about how less than half the Android phones have been updated to Froyo (33% on Verizon is the BEST - pathetic) is one of the reasons I stick with iPhone. You want the latest, greatest OS on your phone? Don’t buy an Android. It’ll probably NOT have the most recent OS when you buy it. You might get upgraded someday, and forget it after 6 months to a year. Hacking the OS to install an update unofficially is not mainstream and not the answer for the general public, so that doesn’t count. The world is not full of geeks. I prefer to spend my money with a company that actually supports the products they sell during the time I’m most likely to continue using it (my contract term duration).

"Fit and finish" also matter to me. iOS has it. Android doesn’t. I don’t care what the hardware specs are if the usability is terrible. iOS isn’t perfect, either, since there are certainly improvements that can be made, but it definitely the better experience overall. Even Windows Phone 7 came out version 1 with a better overall experience than Android has now.

Since someone else mentioned the apps, the Apple App Store is also more polished than the Android Marketplace. The number of apps doesn’t matter, really. Android seems to have a glut of ad-serving background screen "apps"; far more than fart apps on the iPhone, so the typical iPhone’s "fart app" count inflating doesn’t fly anymore. What matters is quality apps. I read lots of comments that iPhone apps are better quality than Android. This does not surprise me since Apple has the gate to the store that means an app has to at least pass some minimum level of functionality to be available. With Android any piece of crap can be thrown into the pile, and apparently there’s more crap in Android than fart for iPhone. Even the same app ported between platforms seems better on iPhone than Android. (Note that I’m taking this from others who have compared, since I have not actually had the opportunity to do so myself). I LIKE my gated community with the iPhone. It keeps out the riff-raff.

Speaking of riff-raff, you can keep your network and custom launcher crapware off my phone, thanks. If the pure OS is designed right, then it doesn’t need those extras to slow it down and make it work "better". If you need a launcher to make it usable, then that says the base OS interface sucks and should be fixed.

So, what it really seems to come down to is that Android is disposable. What you buy is what you get and don’t expect it to do any more beyond that. You might get lucky, you might not. However, the iPhone will be updated for at least 2 years after you get it for new things you don’t have now. And the experience will be what Apple designed it. If you don’t like that, then I perfectly understand it. At least you KNOW what you’re getting with it.]]>KelekoFri, 14 Jan 2011 12:51:19 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/is-the-iphone-really-all-that-136592#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/is-the-iphone-really-all-that-136592#commentsAnchorFri, 14 Jan 2011 08:39:34 GMT
Apple is a culture club. That’s not a smart a** comment. It’s simply true. People like being part of trendy, hip, and cool groups. Plus, Apple makes pretty decent products that incorporate good hardware and software design.

I am very dissappointed that Apple is lagging technically with the Verizon iPhone and the iPad. No 4G capability in either. No simultaneous data and phone on Verizon (due to CDMA and not the iPhone... but still), and the iPad is hobbled with lack of appropriate I/O hardware and cameras.

What I want is a pad with an integrated phone, plenty of memory, and all the I/O hardware needed to bridge the functionality we have in laptops, cell phones, and the current "pads".

As far as Apps, having over 300,000 apps in your store is somewhat comical and frankly ridiculous. Certainly not a criterion that makes the decision for me on which product to buy. Can one imagine wading thru 300,000 apps? Do we even need 300,000 apps? Give me an App store that has 100, or even 500 high quality Apps that I can actually use, and I’ll be just fine.]]>dreavisFri, 14 Jan 2011 08:39:34 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/is-the-iphone-really-all-that-136592#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/is-the-iphone-really-all-that-136592#commentsAnchorThu, 13 Jan 2011 18:44:56 GMT
What’s so great about the iPhone. When I got mine, the WinMo interface was stagnant and was a hassle to upgrade. Sure, nor Android has caught on and it’s better than the old WinMo, but I have an iPhone already. Would I get an Android based phone now. Probably not. I picked one up and tried to use it and it was confusing. I’m no computer ID10T, but the interface was bad. Sure it can be customized, but then I still have to deal with the viruses and data leaks. And let’s not forget, the whole purpose of Android is a Google marketing tool. SO that’s not saying what’s so great about the iPhone. Well, I have the iPad too. I can use the same apps. There’s BARELY an Android tablet out yet. Again Apple beat everyone to market with a good device. So now I can do the same things on my phone and switch to my iPad and everything is basically in sync. There are more quality apps right now that work better on the iPhone. Maybe Android will catch up. Maybe it will get better than the iPhone but for now, I like the iPhone. Apple may even allow Apps to run on Mac OSX and then all the same interface can run on laptop/desktop, pad and phone. Pick the right device for the moment. I don’t think any other platform has that seamless of an environment yet.]]>boechererThu, 13 Jan 2011 18:44:56 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/is-the-iphone-really-all-that-136592#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/office/microsoft-office-365-offers-promise-of-productivity#commentsAnchorFri, 19 Nov 2010 10:26:16 GMT
@Val Alstine: I completely agree. I don’t understand the technology side of why Microsoft can’t make that happen, particularly when they made such a big deal of all the testing Exchange 2010 received from hosted services before is was released--but I’m sure they have their reasons. However, there is a little more to the story with regards to Office 365, as I learned after posting this article. Perhaps with future releases, Microsoft will be able to offer their own versions before anyone else. Check out my blog for more details: "The Scoop on Exchange Online, Exchange 2010, and Office 365," http://www.windowsitpro.com/blogs/exchangeandoutlook/tabid/780/entryid/72314/The-Scoop-on-Exchange-Online-Exchange-2010-and-Office-365.aspx.]]>WinsteadFri, 19 Nov 2010 10:26:16 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/office/microsoft-office-365-offers-promise-of-productivity#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/the-scoop-on-exchange-online-exchange-2010-and-office-365-136581#commentsAnchorTue, 09 Nov 2010 01:20:14 GMT
King Regards
thank you for link]]>Preisser GünterTue, 09 Nov 2010 01:20:14 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/the-scoop-on-exchange-online-exchange-2010-and-office-365-136581#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/the-scoop-on-exchange-online-exchange-2010-and-office-365-136581#commentsAnchorMon, 08 Nov 2010 16:11:26 GMT
Microsoft has a download on hosting with Exchange 2010 SP1, which you can find here: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?displaylang=en&FamilyID=bba88fb5-9d84-475c-85d7-3ffeb308636e

Obviously there have been many changes since Exchange 2007, so the 2007 white paper probably won’t be too helpful. I hope this link has what you need.

Brian Winstead
Associate Editor]]>bkwinMon, 08 Nov 2010 16:11:26 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/the-scoop-on-exchange-online-exchange-2010-and-office-365-136581#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/the-scoop-on-exchange-online-exchange-2010-and-office-365-136581#commentsAnchorMon, 01 Nov 2010 04:52:27 GMT
Thanks for Info

i have a a question about Hosting Exchange 2010
is there know a Whitepaper or How to built an Hosting Enviorment with Ex2010
available ?? or best practise
The Whitepaper from Ex2007 should not be used I heard

Many thanks and
King Regards
]]>Preisser GünterMon, 01 Nov 2010 04:52:27 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/the-scoop-on-exchange-online-exchange-2010-and-office-365-136581#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/office/microsoft-office-365-offers-promise-of-productivity#commentsAnchorFri, 22 Oct 2010 13:38:14 GMT
It bothers me that Microsoft hosted doesn’t include the latest versions of Exchange and Sharepoint. You’re paying a monthly fee, which is supposed to include software updates. Since they make the software, you’d think they could be the first to offer it; wouldn’t that be great marketing?]]>Van AlstineFri, 22 Oct 2010 13:38:14 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/office/microsoft-office-365-offers-promise-of-productivity#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/choosing-a-smartphone-my-choice-136555#commentsAnchorWed, 20 Oct 2010 15:59:15 GMT
Goforapple.com is for sale]]>Goforapple.comWed, 20 Oct 2010 15:59:15 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/choosing-a-smartphone-my-choice-136555#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/it-pros-resist-moving-messaging-to-the-cloud-136574#commentsAnchorFri, 01 Oct 2010 10:52:18 GMT
Hi Jim, Thanks for the feedback. I totally understand what you’re saying--it goes back to that issue of control. If there’s going to be a problem, you want to know it’s within your power to correct it, and not be waiting for someone else to do it--someone who might not have the same priorities you do.

It’s also interesting considering that for years cloud vendors have really targeted small & mid-sized business because those were the companies where it seemed to make the most economic sense. A lot of small businesses can’t afford to implement a robust messaging environment. But now it almost seems like it’s reversed and it’s the enterprise businesses that seem to be investigating cloud options specifically for cost savings.

I’d be curious to know what version(s) of Exchange you’re running, and what high-availability measures you’ve implemented.

B. K. Winstead
Associate Editor]]>bkwinFri, 01 Oct 2010 10:52:18 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/it-pros-resist-moving-messaging-to-the-cloud-136574#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/it-pros-resist-moving-messaging-to-the-cloud-136574#commentsAnchorThu, 30 Sep 2010 15:35:44 GMT
Pretty cut and dried here. Can’t even take a chance that email would be unavailable for any length of time. Firm lives and dies by it and any outage, even 30 minutes, would kill us. So using an external service puts us at the mercy of the host provider. I can control internal problems but I have no control over external providers and how fast they address issues.

I have no real statistics to back up this claim but from the various pieces that have been authored about organizations that have moved to the cloud. Service/urgency always seems to be one of the biggest problems for the end users.

We’re a small place under 250 users so there isn’t a great deal of cost savings benefit to us in moving email to the cloud.

Just my 2 cents
Jim]]>jboettgerThu, 30 Sep 2010 15:35:44 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/it-pros-resist-moving-messaging-to-the-cloud-136574#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/mobile-computing-devices/smartphones-in-the-enterprise-opening-pandoras-box#commentsAnchorTue, 28 Sep 2010 11:53:53 GMT
Excellent summary of the state of mobile devices!!!]]>SamuelsTue, 28 Sep 2010 11:53:53 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/mobile-computing-devices/smartphones-in-the-enterprise-opening-pandoras-box#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/unified-communications-in-2010-where-are-we-with-uc-136568#commentsAnchorFri, 09 Jul 2010 14:22:36 GMT
I agree, there is far greater potential for UC than UM through Microsoft Exchange. As you mention, many organizations who have implemented UC have focused mostly on the communications channel. But it is the organizations who are taking it a step further, and focusing on unified communication and collaboration (UCC) who are achieving the highest ROI. Platforms that integrate VoiP, text, and IM, along with the ability to create and share documents, audio, and video, and, of course, SharePoint integration, give users the ability to more fully replicate a business process, rather than a single function of a business process. Add to that a 3-D environment and social profiles of the users, and you’ve almost recreated real-life business situations ideal for both effective communication and collaboration. This is where the bandwagon you speak of is heading.

As an answer to your question, I find that most organizations are hesitant because of the large overhaul in IT infrastructure that many UC platforms require, and their headaches come from lack of employee adoption and overpromised and under-delivered results.

Ron Burns
CEO ProtonMedia
http://blog.protonmedia.com
]]>Ron BurnsFri, 09 Jul 2010 14:22:36 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/unified-communications-in-2010-where-are-we-with-uc-136568#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/do-you-know-whos-connecting-to-your-exchange-servers-136563#commentsAnchorThu, 10 Jun 2010 10:36:43 GMT
Thanks, everyone, for the great feedback and solutions. It looks like there are many of you who are taking steps to lock down mobile device connections. As for mtp’s comment about Exchange Server being secured by default—well, I’d hate to think my company had disabled such a security feature, although it’s certainly possible. I think the bigger question is if the security measures available with Exchange are sufficient considering the rise in mobile devices and the increasing demand from users to connect their—possibly personal—mobile devices to corporate mail servers.]]>bkwinThu, 10 Jun 2010 10:36:43 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/do-you-know-whos-connecting-to-your-exchange-servers-136563#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/do-you-know-whos-connecting-to-your-exchange-servers-136563#commentsAnchorMon, 07 Jun 2010 16:04:33 GMT
uh...forgive me but a properly configured exchange server requires a security certificate from the server to authenticate (SSL)...unless of course the admin is dumb enough to disable that requirement.....by default you cannot just type an email address and password using EAS and get in...]]>mtp@proxistech.comMon, 07 Jun 2010 16:04:33 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/do-you-know-whos-connecting-to-your-exchange-servers-136563#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/do-you-know-whos-connecting-to-your-exchange-servers-136563#commentsAnchorFri, 04 Jun 2010 14:35:27 GMT
We use Exchange 2003 and by default the Mobile Services are turned on. We disable them until the use is approved to connect via a mobile device. This should solve your problem of not knowing who is connecting. Mobile Services is under the Exchange Features tab of the user account properties when viewed from the Exchange Server ADUC snap-in.]]>pmabkeFri, 04 Jun 2010 14:35:27 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/do-you-know-whos-connecting-to-your-exchange-servers-136563#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/do-you-know-whos-connecting-to-your-exchange-servers-136563#commentsAnchorFri, 04 Jun 2010 08:08:31 GMT
I covered this in 2007 on my blog. Here, I show you a script that allows you create a report of Exchange ActiveSync users for Exchange 2003, as well. This is important since there are obviously no Powershell cmdlets available for this version of Exchange.

See http://www.expta.com/2007/12/how-to-tell-which-users-have-activesync.html
]]>jguilletFri, 04 Jun 2010 08:08:31 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/do-you-know-whos-connecting-to-your-exchange-servers-136563#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/do-you-know-whos-connecting-to-your-exchange-servers-136563#commentsAnchorThu, 03 Jun 2010 19:56:59 GMT
To have control over and know what mobile devices are connecting to our Exchange environment, we ran this Powershell script twice a day:

get-casmailbox -resultsize unlimited | where {$_.hasactivesyncdevicepartnership -eq $false} | set-casmailbox -ActiveSyncEnabled $false.

This script finds all mailboxes that do NOT have mobile devices activated on Exchange and disables Activesync for these mailboxes. We only allow company issued mobile devices to connect to our Exchange environment, and users have to call the Helpdesk to have Activesync enabled for them in order to connect.]]>gfwkesThu, 03 Jun 2010 19:56:59 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/do-you-know-whos-connecting-to-your-exchange-servers-136563#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/do-you-know-whos-connecting-to-your-exchange-servers-136563#commentsAnchorThu, 03 Jun 2010 13:02:18 GMT
In Exchange 2010 a new feature called the Block/Allow/Quarantine list designed to allow IT admins to select which devices can, and can not, attach to their Exchange Server using Exchange ActiveSync. IT admins can also put devices that do not have a rule associated with them into a quarantine state and have a status mail sent to both them and the affected user. Admins then can decide which devices to allow, block, or create exceptions for (say, to allow one user like a special executive or IT test user, to connect a particular device without letting those devices be broadly available to connect by any user).]]>MobileGlickThu, 03 Jun 2010 13:02:18 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/do-you-know-whos-connecting-to-your-exchange-servers-136563#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-os#commentsAnchorWed, 26 May 2010 12:47:14 GMT
Thanks for your comments, Shawn. Sounds like you’ve got a good situation there. If you haven’t read the later articles I posted in this series, I ended up choosing the Motorola Droid--and I love it! I use Gmail for my personal email and have my corporate email through Exchange, and they both work without a hitch, calendars, too.]]>WinsteadWed, 26 May 2010 12:47:14 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-os#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-os#commentsAnchorFri, 14 May 2010 10:09:42 GMT
Recently replaced several BlackBerry user phones with DROID Incredible. Exchange Active Sync works great - users very happy. I also got my *first* smartphone - DROID Incredible... and I am pleased. I have been gmail-centric for many years because Exchange never appealed to me... so Android seems like a natural fit. I think we will consolidate to just Android and BlackBerry phones.]]>Shawn - San DiegoFri, 14 May 2010 10:09:42 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-os#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/sharepoint-like-document-management-with-exchange-server-alternative-136556#commentsAnchorFri, 09 Apr 2010 07:23:04 GMT
Well... Not quite. This is not part of the "standard" Gordano package. Gordano licenses every piece of their product one module at a time. You buy the Gordano Mail server which gets you SMTP/POP3/IMAP. Then you have to buy anti-spam if you don’t want spammed. Then you have to buy GMS Collaboration if you want to share company calendars, contacts, and documents. To share documents you also have to have GMS Webmail. Here’s how it might break down, retail prices mind you, for 50 users:

Basic POP3/IMAP/SMTPServer $688
Webmail $688
Antispam $420
Collaboration $1350
Calendaring $350
Support (8x5 M-F) is 25% of the value of the products you own

So you might have $3500 in the suite and just under $900 in support. Support gets you all updates and upgrades for the year so each year to stay current you would pay about $900.

Also, there’s no spell check for Webmail so it’s another $630 and then only for IE (they don’t list a spell checker option for Firefox, Chrome, etc...). So for a business where misspelled words would be unprofessional, you’re really up to $5000 for 50 users, or about $100/user, about $1000 to start more expensive than a 50 user seat of Exchange Standard.

I can tell you as a long time (15 years) administrator of this product that it’s very administrator friendly, much simpler to handle than Exchange with far fewer problems. It will run on much less hardware than Exchange, but their claims that there is no demand for native x64 support are incorrect too. No hardware made in the past few years is only 32-bit but Gordano is very slow to change. That can be very good for stability but doesn’t bode well for innovation.

One thing that shouldn’t be left out here, Gordano is the master at running dozens or hundreds of totally different domains, even on a single IP address! Try that with Exchange.

I’m not putting down GMS, just making sure people know all they need to before they make a decision. In the end, GMS is solid, reliable, very fast on much less hardware, but depending on your size, cost is similar, and Gordano tends to be slow to innovate, rather taking the safe road to maintain stability and reliability.
]]>MailgeekFri, 09 Apr 2010 07:23:04 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/sharepoint-like-document-management-with-exchange-server-alternative-136556#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/sharepoint-like-document-management-with-exchange-server-alternative-136556#commentsAnchorFri, 09 Apr 2010 07:22:53 GMT
Well... Not quite. This is not part of the "standard" Gordano package. Gordano licenses every piece of their product one module at a time. You buy the Gordano Mail server which gets you SMTP/POP3/IMAP. Then you have to buy anti-spam if you don’t want spammed. Then you have to buy GMS Collaboration if you want to share company calendars, contacts, and documents. To share documents you also have to have GMS Webmail. Here’s how it might break down, retail prices mind you, for 50 users:

Basic POP3/IMAP/SMTPServer $688
Webmail $688
Antispam $420
Collaboration $1350
Calendaring $350
Support (8x5 M-F) is 25% of the value of the products you own

So you might have $3500 in the suite and just under $900 in support. Support gets you all updates and upgrades for the year so each year to stay current you would pay about $900.

Also, there’s no spell check for Webmail so it’s another $630 and then only for IE (they don’t list a spell checker option for Firefox, Chrome, etc...). So for a business where misspelled words would be unprofessional, you’re really up to $5000 for 50 users, or about $100/user, about $1000 to start more expensive than a 50 user seat of Exchange Standard.

I can tell you as a long time (15 years) administrator of this product that it’s very administrator friendly, much simpler to handle than Exchange with far fewer problems. It will run on much less hardware than Exchange, but their claims that there is no demand for native x64 support are incorrect too. No hardware made in the past few years is only 32-bit but Gordano is very slow to change. That can be very good for stability but doesn’t bode well for innovation.

One thing that shouldn’t be left out here, Gordano is the master at running dozens or hundreds of totally different domains, even on a single IP address! Try that with Exchange.

I’m not putting down GMS, just making sure people know all they need to before they make a decision. In the end, GMS is solid, reliable, very fast on much less hardware, but depending on your size, cost is similar, and Gordano tends to be slow to innovate, rather taking the safe road to maintain stability and reliability.
]]>MailgeekFri, 09 Apr 2010 07:22:53 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/sharepoint-like-document-management-with-exchange-server-alternative-136556#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/exchange-2010-competing-in-the-cloud-and-moving-up-from-2003-136558#commentsAnchorThu, 01 Apr 2010 17:37:30 GMT
The reason we are still on Exchange 2003 is we haven’t yet needed unified messaging. That made Exchange 2007 an unnecessary upgrade. Exchange 2010 has many compelling features, especially DAGs and the reduced I/O needs, but the fact that Microsoft has made the server quantities increase so much is still a hinderance. We have a single mailbox server and a single OWA server. After running the deployment wizard, it looks like we will need four servers; two mailbox and two CAS/Hub transport, plus a hardware load-balancer in front of the CAS servers, and an SSL VPN front-end as Microsoft says to leave your CAS servers out of the DMZ. This will be an more expensive and costly upgrade, particularly to smaller businesses that just don’t have the infrastructure. ]]>durkinrThu, 01 Apr 2010 17:37:30 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/exchange-2010-competing-in-the-cloud-and-moving-up-from-2003-136558#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/choosing-a-smartphone-my-choice-136555#commentsAnchorThu, 11 Mar 2010 13:07:16 GMT
Indeed we see 5 major trends coming together for 2015. There will be no single dominant platform; devices will be chosen based on user preference and enterprise certification.

You can find a rundown of our predictions on slideshare at http://www.slideshare.net/boxtone/mobile-market-predictions-for-2015]]>ReedOnTheRunThu, 11 Mar 2010 13:07:16 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/choosing-a-smartphone-my-choice-136555#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/those-dreaded-psts-your-all-in-one-resource-136554#commentsAnchorSat, 06 Mar 2010 10:40:34 GMT
I am looking for some help -- I archived a bunch of old emails to a .pst folder. I have tried retreiving them by going to the open outlook datafiles in outlook and I see the files displayed along with the file sizes, but when I click on the individual files, a dialogue box comes up showing the file as empty. How can I get the original email files back?]]>kjmSat, 06 Mar 2010 10:40:34 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/blog/exchange-and-outlook-blog-8/messaging/those-dreaded-psts-your-all-in-one-resource-136554#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-features#commentsAnchorWed, 24 Feb 2010 23:32:02 GMT
I’m a manager of a highly skilled group of systems programmers. I’m in my 60s and have worked with computers since the days of behemoths. I’m sure Jim Wirthlin accurately describes many people in our age group, but myself, my staff and many others I know in my age bracket definitely want as much function on our phones as can be delivered in a useful manner.]]>Joseph C.Wed, 24 Feb 2010 23:32:02 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-features#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-features#commentsAnchorMon, 22 Feb 2010 07:59:52 GMT
Here’s a response about choosing a smartphone that a reader emailed me: I believe that using a smartphone, no matter what OS or user interface, is a generational and therefore a personal choice. If you consider the recent market theory that a business person will likely only put up with carrying around 2 devices, and we are largely all "information workers" despite our titles, there is a high probably we will carry a laptop (or netbook). That leaves us with adding something that we can actually put in our pockets and have universal connectivity with. We could put up with the limitations of a netbook (or tablet) as our only device (with 3G connectivity), but we still need to carry a mobile phone. If you are my generation, or close to it, who has tracked with technology from the mainframe days, you really don’t want to try and use a plethora of apps on a smartphone, you just want it to work well as a phone, as fun as the apps may all be. When you need to do work, you want the easiest experience you can have for productivity sake. Yes, I use an HTC Windows Mobile smartphone, but can I live without it? Yes! Texting would go a long way toward a step up in my effectiveness of communication and I don’t need a smartphone for that. If you are of a younger generation that tracked with technology only the last 20 years or less, you probably want to use a smartphone. It is just part of the fun of your job and it keeps things interesting. The more apps and coolness factor, the better the experience, and the more fun working. Our company will support both user groups, and for Exchange, it is easy to provide this capability. Will we require our employees to use them? No, and we won’t provide them either, but probably we will subsidize their mobile devices to a certain level and let them use what they are happy with. Any productivity benefits will be due to their enjoyment of getting their work done. Jim Wirthlin Technology Manager]]>BrianMon, 22 Feb 2010 07:59:52 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-features#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-features#commentsAnchorThu, 18 Feb 2010 00:00:49 GMT
On an Android phone, don’t think of a camera as a picture-taking device; think of it as a data-entry device. Bar code scanning and OCR are just the start. After many years of WM phones I recently ( a month ago) abandoned WM6.5 for Android and I’m blown away every day with the innovative tools that are out there.]]>Joseph C.Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:00:49 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-features#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-features#commentsAnchorWed, 17 Feb 2010 23:53:14 GMT
Android with DataViz Documents To Go beats Microsoft Office Mobile hands-down and HTC provides a great Exchange Email app. Don’t eliminate Android phones from consideration.]]>Joseph C.Wed, 17 Feb 2010 23:53:14 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-features#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/mobile-and-wireless2/choosing-a-smartphone-the-hardware#commentsAnchorThu, 11 Feb 2010 10:11:16 GMT
Sorry, guys. I certainly had no intent to mislead anyone. But if you take a look at the results of the polls in this post and the previous one I wrote on this topic (linked near the top of this one), you can begin to see industry trends and what people in the field think of the various devices and OSs. And check back because I’ll be writing more on my choice and how that goes as well as more about what we see going on in the mobile market. B. K. Winstead Associate Editor]]>BrianThu, 11 Feb 2010 10:11:16 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/mobile-and-wireless2/choosing-a-smartphone-the-hardware#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/mobile-and-wireless2/choosing-a-smartphone-the-hardware#commentsAnchorWed, 10 Feb 2010 11:12:59 GMT
Very seldom do I leave reader comments, but I too read this article thinking it would help me "choose a smart phone". I guess the title is somewhat misleading "Choosing a Smartphone"?]]>DeWayneWed, 10 Feb 2010 11:12:59 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/mobile-and-wireless2/choosing-a-smartphone-the-hardware#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/mobile-and-wireless2/choosing-a-smartphone-the-hardware#commentsAnchorTue, 09 Feb 2010 20:03:07 GMT
I read this article because I thought you were going to help me choose a smartphone. No luck here]]>BrianTue, 09 Feb 2010 20:03:07 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/mobile-and-wireless2/choosing-a-smartphone-the-hardware#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-os#commentsAnchorWed, 27 Jan 2010 13:54:26 GMT
If it were me, I think I’d hold out for the Droid. You could even make your first task to be to write a review. Welcome to the dark side. :)]]>BrianWed, 27 Jan 2010 13:54:26 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-mobile/choosing-a-smartphone-the-os#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/permissions/microsoft-s-astrid-mcclean-discusses-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorMon, 11 Jan 2010 17:37:47 GMT
In response to this article and the resulting discussion about in-place upgrades (or the lack thereof), a reader emailed me the following message: Actually I would not do an In-place upgrade for anything if it could be avoided. Much safer, easier, and more controlled to build the new environment, then move a small number of “volunteers” to the new environment for testing. Once it all looks good, then move the remaining accounts in an orderly, controlled fashion. But we have a large environment with about 18 mailbox servers on two continents, and we use leased equipment, so adding a few more servers isn’t as big an issue as it would be for a single-server environment. These days, if I managed a single-server Exchange environment, I’d seriously consider using cloud-based services instead of upgrading (unless that left me without a job!). Greg Riebe Senior Systems Engineer]]>BrianMon, 11 Jan 2010 17:37:47 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/permissions/microsoft-s-astrid-mcclean-discusses-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/permissions/microsoft-s-astrid-mcclean-discusses-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorFri, 18 Dec 2009 09:17:02 GMT
Unfortunately HW has been so cheap that it less cheaper to do move mailbox instead of the running inplace upgrade. And I believe, just too many of us is using HW as use once and through away. But sure, if you though the risks: You start inplace upgrade, that fails. What is your status then? You have W2008 where you have had E2007 and E2010 which has been done the rollback. But you have also database... Personally I don’t want that. More likely I was hoping that B.K.W. has been drilled more about the "archiving" solution. E.g. Why they are calling it as an "archive" because: - you are not able to decrease the backup data, still in same storage - It is not available for Outlook (OL2010 is not released) - you are not able to decrease the primary storage costs - what is differences between increasing the quotas in E2003/E2007 and with this?]]>PenkaFri, 18 Dec 2009 09:17:02 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/permissions/microsoft-s-astrid-mcclean-discusses-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/permissions/microsoft-s-astrid-mcclean-discusses-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorFri, 18 Dec 2009 07:05:01 GMT
Erikssong, if we follow your advice, what will happen is: 1) We buy a new 64-bit machine to upgrade from Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2007. 2) We buy another 64-bit machine to upgrade from Exchange 2007 to Exchange 2010. do you think it is wise?]]>MuratFri, 18 Dec 2009 07:05:01 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/permissions/microsoft-s-astrid-mcclean-discusses-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/permissions/microsoft-s-astrid-mcclean-discusses-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorFri, 18 Dec 2009 06:37:30 GMT
If I had a number of users depending on a working mailsystem, I’d rather consider the move user approach, moving to a system that I have installed in a controlled and tested way, it is safer, opposed to depend on a oneshot upgrade, where addons AV and a number of items will stall the oneshot upgrade. Better safe than sorry.]]>ErikssongFri, 18 Dec 2009 06:37:30 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/permissions/microsoft-s-astrid-mcclean-discusses-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/permissions/microsoft-s-astrid-mcclean-discusses-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorThu, 17 Dec 2009 01:20:52 GMT
Microsoft didn’t allow an in-place upgrade from Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2007 because, it said " hey man, can’t you see 2003 is a 32-bit product and 2007 is a 64-bit product. how can you expect me to upgrade it?" OK, we accepted this. Now it says it does not allow an in-place upgrade from 2007 to 2010 because it says "hey man, can’t you see there are schema differences. how can you expect me to upgrade it?" well, upgrade means to overcome these things like Microsoft did it before when it allowed Windows 3.0, a 16-bit product, to upgrade to Windows 95, a 32-bit product. And it did also when Exchange 2000 in-place upgraded Exchange 5.5 though there were schema differences. Hey, Microsoft, we are not kids, so stop kidding us!]]>MuratThu, 17 Dec 2009 01:20:52 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/permissions/microsoft-s-astrid-mcclean-discusses-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/tony-redmond-s-top-10-things-about-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorWed, 18 Nov 2009 09:09:08 GMT
In defense of Tony’s list, remember that it’s "Top 10 Things You Need to Know About Exchange 2010," which isn’t the same as if he’d been intending to present a "Top 10 Features" list. I think his list gives useful points to think about if you’re just considering exploring Exchange 2010 for a possible migration. B. K. Winstead Associate Editor]]>BrianWed, 18 Nov 2009 09:09:08 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/tony-redmond-s-top-10-things-about-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/tony-redmond-s-top-10-things-about-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorTue, 17 Nov 2009 22:53:54 GMT
I would agree with muraty, that this "top 10" is a bit of a joke. How is a fresh install and no upgrade path a top 10 feature. The list of top 10 should be more along the lines of this: 1) Database Availability Groups (DAGs) 2) OWA Premium Mode for non-IE browsers 3) Reduced # of servers for HA due to support for combined roles (4->2) 4) Store Improvements 5) Shadow Redundancy (transport feature) 6) Ability to move mailboxes online (end user can use during moving) 7) Exchange Admin Audit Logging 8) Compliance Searching 9) Role Based Access Controls 10) New UM features (e.g. rules, notifications via text msgs, etc)]]>BENTue, 17 Nov 2009 22:53:54 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/tony-redmond-s-top-10-things-about-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/tony-redmond-s-top-10-things-about-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorThu, 12 Nov 2009 16:53:29 GMT
Tony Redmond became a yes-man. He nodded everytime Microsoft changed his mind. Microsoft decided not to upgrade Ex2007, Redmond said OK, Microsoft decided not upgrade Ex2010, Redmond said marvellous decision. Microsoft said no more useful GUI, Redmond loudly applouded. Microsoft said Powershell is good for you, Redmond said yes it is the most important novelty since sliced bread. Thanks Microsoft, you have been creating yes- mans all over the world.]]>MuratThu, 12 Nov 2009 16:53:29 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/tony-redmond-s-top-10-things-about-exchange-2010#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/services/hosted-exchange-server-makes-more-sense-than-ever#commentsAnchorWed, 26 Aug 2009 10:03:13 GMT
Nice high-level introduction, but some cost analysis would be helpful. I found one vendor’s hosted Exchange Server service sells for $7 per user per month. For the typical 50-person small company a hosted Exchange service would cost $4200 annually and forever. Cost-wise, how does this compare to an in-house server? At what head count and price point does hosted Exchange make economic sense?]]>NoWed, 26 Aug 2009 10:03:13 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/services/hosted-exchange-server-makes-more-sense-than-ever#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/services/hosted-exchange-server-makes-more-sense-than-ever#commentsAnchorWed, 26 Aug 2009 06:42:20 GMT
This article discusses the same stuff every article on SAS does, cost savings and security. But what about in-house 3rd party apps that access Exchange? Sure, users can securely access Exchange over the internet with either OWA or RPC over HTTP, but most 3rd party apps use a MAPI connection, which I’m not going to run over the internet.]]>RichadWed, 26 Aug 2009 06:42:20 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/services/hosted-exchange-server-makes-more-sense-than-ever#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/exchange-server-2007/exchange-2007-sp1-update-available-sp2-coming-soon#commentsAnchorWed, 22 Jul 2009 08:35:59 GMT
Very helpful article ]]>LyndaWed, 22 Jul 2009 08:35:59 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/exchange-server-2007/exchange-2007-sp1-update-available-sp2-coming-soon#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/email/does-outlook-2010-need-fixing-#commentsAnchorFri, 17 Jul 2009 08:10:29 GMT
Microsoft’s IE team have made major strides both in communication with designers/developers and progressing towards full standards adoptions. If that’s right for the IE team, why is it wrong for the Office team? The reason this matters to business is cost. If your business sends out marketing emails (and how many don’t?) then the cost per email design is likely to be higher this way than otherwise, as emails are less resuable and share less in common with web assets. The reason it matters to business end users is look and feel. We all prefer a well designed look to something, even if it is marketing-focused. Isn’t it nice if you open uip a message and maximise it if the message uses the available space nicely? Very hard if not impossible to do well in table-based email layouts.]]>MORAYFri, 17 Jul 2009 08:10:29 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/email/does-outlook-2010-need-fixing-#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/email/outlook-2007-s-fancy-formatting-a-quick-how-to#commentsAnchorFri, 17 Jul 2009 00:14:06 GMT
.....]]>testFri, 17 Jul 2009 00:14:06 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/email/outlook-2007-s-fancy-formatting-a-quick-how-to#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/email/outlook-2007-s-fancy-formatting-a-quick-how-to#commentsAnchorThu, 16 Jul 2009 23:37:56 GMT
Good one]]>testThu, 16 Jul 2009 23:37:56 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/email/outlook-2007-s-fancy-formatting-a-quick-how-to#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/email/does-outlook-2010-need-fixing-#commentsAnchorThu, 02 Jul 2009 11:41:30 GMT
The perception is that Microsoft invariably chooses a proprietary solution.]]>tThu, 02 Jul 2009 11:41:30 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/email/does-outlook-2010-need-fixing-#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/email/does-outlook-2010-need-fixing-#commentsAnchorThu, 02 Jul 2009 10:40:45 GMT
"don’t necessarily want to go to a website to see it that way" That’s a joke, right? Considering how the readers of your advertising newsletter need to go to the web to read the full articles. (don’t even bother trying to read either on a blackberry.)]]>cathy1972 Thu, 02 Jul 2009 10:40:45 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/email/does-outlook-2010-need-fixing-#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/testing5/exchange-2010-problems-problems-problems#commentsAnchorSun, 03 May 2009 04:40:37 GMT
I m unable to setup forestprep exchange 2003. Prompt:- Setup encounter an error while trying to contact the windows active directory and fail to connect to schema master for this active directory forest... Please help me]]>NangbaSun, 03 May 2009 04:40:37 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/testing5/exchange-2010-problems-problems-problems#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/testing5/exchange-2010-problems-problems-problems#commentsAnchorFri, 01 May 2009 22:52:34 GMT
Sounds like a very expensive upgrade. Contrast that with Unison (www.unson.com) that is similar to Exchange + OCS, and available free of charge. (Including in-place upgrades)]]>RurikFri, 01 May 2009 22:52:34 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/testing5/exchange-2010-problems-problems-problems#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/virtualization/exchange-server-virtualization-is-it-time-#commentsAnchorThu, 16 Apr 2009 14:44:13 GMT
WARNING!!! Our company is a Microsoft Gold Partner and VMware Partner. This past weekend, we had to contact Microsoft Gold Premier Support for an Exchange 2007 installation issue in a VMware environment. We tried three times to get support, one of which was after I hid the VMware icon from the toolbar. Each time, Microsoft ended the call with the stance that they no longer support VMware installations for Microsoft applications. This seems to be a reversal on their previous policies, as I have received support on an identical environment back in January of this year. By the way, as always, we proved and resolved (on our own, if I may add) the problem - IN A VMWARE ENVIRONMENT. The issue was being caused by the Exchange 2007 services, and we proved it to Microsoft. I’ve been fighing their stance on VMware for over 8 years now. And I will continue to fight.]]>AndrewThu, 16 Apr 2009 14:44:13 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/virtualization/exchange-server-virtualization-is-it-time-#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/buyers-guide/hosted-antispam-solutions#commentsAnchorMon, 13 Apr 2009 10:28:10 GMT
Hi Curtis, Thanks for your comments. Of course it is our goal to be as useful as possible to IT pros and, with buyer’s guides, to include as many vendors as are appropriate to the category. And you’ll find that Postini is covered in this guide. Postini was purchased by Google in 2007 (see “Google Adds Security to Its Hosted Application Offerings,” InstantDoc ID 96517). If you go to Google’s website, you’ll see they still refer to it as “Postini services,” but the information they supplied to us for the buyer’s guide table called it Google Message Security. I hope that clears up any confusion. Brian Winstead Associate Editor Windows IT Pro]]>BrianMon, 13 Apr 2009 10:28:10 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/buyers-guide/hosted-antispam-solutions#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/buyers-guide/hosted-antispam-solutions#commentsAnchorThu, 09 Apr 2009 20:21:53 GMT
No Postini? Network World also did a review not too long ago and inserted a disclaimer to the effect "We didn’t mention Postini because we use them ourselves, and thought it would present a conflict of interest. Is that the situation here? No disclaimer, so I’m guessing. Please keep in mind, IT pros need all available options, and to hide a vendor who’s proven to be "Best of breed" only because the magazine doing the rating rating wants to avoid a conflict of interest is doing IT pro’s a disservice. If they’re the best, but you can’t publish that fact, what good is the rating at all? Happy Postinin Camper]]>CurtisThu, 09 Apr 2009 20:21:53 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/buyers-guide/hosted-antispam-solutions#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/buyers-guide/exchange-server-monitoring-tools#commentsAnchorTue, 24 Feb 2009 21:11:05 GMT
Thank you for mentioning Permessa’s product. The product table information is now a few years out of date and has some typos. The desktop product is called ’Express’ and supports Ex2000-Ex2007, starting at $499 for 500 user environment. Permessa was formerly called ’DYS Analytics’. Regards, Ken Gartner (Director of Software Development)]]>kgartner Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:11:05 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/buyers-guide/exchange-server-monitoring-tools#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/microsoft-exchange-server-and-powershell-the-debate-continues#commentsAnchorFri, 30 Jan 2009 16:54:20 GMT
Thanks for the responses! I’m seeing a common thread; let me boil it down: PowerShell = Good BUT Put necessary functions in the GUI too! These responses are apparently all from people who were at least willing to give PowerShell a try. When Exchange 2007 first came out, we heard from readers who refused to upgrade because of the scripting element. I wonder what those people are doing now? Are they looking at alternatives to Exchange Server? Have they—even if grudgingly—made the adjustment to the new Exchange management system? I’d love to hear from some of these admins. Brian Winstead Associate Editor Windows IT Pro]]>BrianFri, 30 Jan 2009 16:54:20 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/microsoft-exchange-server-and-powershell-the-debate-continues#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/microsoft-exchange-server-and-powershell-the-debate-continues#commentsAnchorFri, 30 Jan 2009 16:16:13 GMT
I find powershell to be extremely useful to me for supporting any client with more than a handful of users. A big time saver for anything that I have to do repeatedly, per user, or recursively. It is also the best/most efficient way I’ve found to get various pieces of information about my environment. I leave a powershell window open at all times on my management workstations and on servers that I frequently manage.]]>MichaelFri, 30 Jan 2009 16:16:13 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/microsoft-exchange-server-and-powershell-the-debate-continues#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/microsoft-exchange-server-and-powershell-the-debate-continues#commentsAnchorThu, 29 Jan 2009 18:31:58 GMT
What drives me nuts is that simple tasks in Exchange 2003 send you off in a hunt through the 2008 GUI. But they are not there. Microsoft needs a command matrix between versions. (They need it for XP Pro and Vista as well). I spend more time hunting for the scripts and the command syntax than I ever did redoing tasks in Exchange 2003. Give us both, full GUI for the one time hits and Powershell for bulk operations.]]>JohnThu, 29 Jan 2009 18:31:58 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/microsoft-exchange-server-and-powershell-the-debate-continues#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/microsoft-exchange-server-and-powershell-the-debate-continues#commentsAnchorThu, 29 Jan 2009 17:18:42 GMT
I agree with Jorn. The PowerShell interface filled a critical need for large organizations; how else do you set up 300 identical Exchange servers without writing a common configuration script? But for the Small Business Server market and slightly larger companies, who only run one Exchange server and have a sysadmin who is a jack of all trades, learning PowerShell and the Exchange extensions is way too much to ask. Maybe not for obscure disaster recovery scenarios when Microsoft Support is telling us what to type anyway, but for day-to-day operation it’s too high a learning curve. I think PowerShell is great and I have no problem with it being the core interface to Exchange, but Microsoft set the bar for which tasks are considered "esoteric" and only do-able via scripting way too low. The GUI needs to include many more functions. Other product groups that use PowerShell have shown much better judgment in this area. I see Paul Robichaux is about to write an article about how to capture common Exchange management tasks as scripts. Why doesn’t Microsoft capture common Exchange management tasks and program the scripts into the Exchange GUI once and for all instead of requiring each site to duplicate this work independently?]]>MIKEThu, 29 Jan 2009 17:18:42 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/microsoft-exchange-server-and-powershell-the-debate-continues#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/outlook-web-access-owa/is-owa-light-too-light-#commentsAnchorThu, 29 Jan 2009 10:33:53 GMT
Firefox will run the full OWA client if you install the IE Tab add-on in Firefox. This allows you to click a status bar icon and change the rendering engine to IE. The add-on will remember your preferred rendering engine for each page so OWA always renders properly in Firefox. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1419 Chrome still uses the thin client tho...]]>ChuckThu, 29 Jan 2009 10:33:53 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/outlook-web-access-owa/is-owa-light-too-light-#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/microsoft-exchange-server-and-powershell-the-debate-continues#commentsAnchorSat, 24 Jan 2009 12:34:26 GMT
I’m a Exchange admin. PowerShell works ok for me. But for my administrators who are used to do "simple" tasks to help me in my work - that is more difficult now. My understanding of PowerShell is quite good, but for a company with limited resources we can’t train everyone in PowerShell. Hence, I’ll have to do more of the trivial work with our Exchange servers. Witch in turn takes my focus away from more demanding tasks. I say YES to PowerShell, but please make more tasks available in the GUI.]]>JornSat, 24 Jan 2009 12:34:26 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/windows-powershell/microsoft-exchange-server-and-powershell-the-debate-continues#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/telephony/hyper-v-support-and-windows-integration-in-an-ip-pbx#commentsAnchorFri, 26 Dec 2008 03:25:32 GMT
I think you will be interested in this tool called myDocs. It is an add-in for Outlook, that lets us view SharePoint Document Libraries by clicking standard Outlook folders, and drag emails into these folders to upload into SharePoint. There is more information on this at http://www.nsynergy.com/Products/myDocs/Pages/About_myDocs.aspx or please email to info@nsynergy.com if you want more information.]]>shirleyFri, 26 Dec 2008 03:25:32 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/telephony/hyper-v-support-and-windows-integration-in-an-ip-pbx#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/services/hosted-and-bundled-a-complete-messaging-and-collaboration-solution#commentsAnchorThu, 25 Dec 2008 02:35:02 GMT
nSynergy SharePoint Document management and collaboration software architectures allow organisations to centralise and better manage all electronic information with its seamless integration of Microsoft SharePoint into the Microsoft Office suite of products in intranet, extranet and internet. The ability to simply create and deploy extranets and portal sites allows these firms to build stronger relationships with clients and increase the productivity. There is more information at http://www.nsynergy.com or mail to info@nsynergy.com.]]>shirleyThu, 25 Dec 2008 02:35:02 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/services/hosted-and-bundled-a-complete-messaging-and-collaboration-solution#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/services/hosted-and-bundled-a-complete-messaging-and-collaboration-solution#commentsAnchorTue, 23 Dec 2008 05:21:10 GMT
the business productivity has certain shortcomings - it is not ready to use and needs to be configured. - it needs a specialist to run it - the solutions are not integrated, or integrated only at the superficial level. these shortcomings make it un-viable for small companies. alternate solutions like HyperOffice do a better job of providing ready to use, seamlessly integrated messaging, collaboration and communications.]]>PankajTue, 23 Dec 2008 05:21:10 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/services/hosted-and-bundled-a-complete-messaging-and-collaboration-solution#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/outlook-web-access-owa/is-owa-light-too-light-#commentsAnchorThu, 11 Dec 2008 10:46:13 GMT
OWA Lite is way to lite! We currently use Exchange in our environment but most of my users are Macintosh so they don’t have a choice but to use the ’Lite’ version. For those Outlook users, management, they love it with all of the options. The premium version provides an almost identical experience. For the Macintosh’s we use Entourage but it’s flawed in many ways! It’s local storage database is the biggest issue. I work about 20% of my time cleaning up those local corrupted databases which causes e-mails to duplicate. On a weekly basis I have to recover 30Gb from a 100Gb store due to this. We are looking for an alternative. I’d like to go 100% web based but Exchange will not be the answer. I’d like to see a GMail or even a YMail appliance come out that has the feature rich items but all from a web interface. The ability to have Outlook plugins would be icing on the cake. I understand Microsoft’s reasoning behind only making rich for Windows but it might be time to let down the guard and open it up to all browsers. We all know Exchange is the killer app. Keep Outlook with the extra’s but please remove the handcuffs on OWA and make it universally rich for everyone and all browsers!! Heck you have MSN Mail which isn’t hampered why not do the same for OWA?]]>ChrisThu, 11 Dec 2008 10:46:13 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/outlook-web-access-owa/is-owa-light-too-light-#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/commentary/sassy-saas-lingo-when-is-the-right-word-right-#commentsAnchorWed, 10 Dec 2008 12:46:57 GMT
Add to the list of "cloud" terms: XaaS (everything as a service--and no, I don’t want to pronounce it!), Communication as a Service (CaaS), Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), and Platform as a Service (PaaS). See http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7197.]]>AnneWed, 10 Dec 2008 12:46:57 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/commentary/sassy-saas-lingo-when-is-the-right-word-right-#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/mobile-and-wireless2/obama-campaign-exploits-text-messaging#commentsAnchorWed, 05 Nov 2008 15:41:27 GMT
As a fellow editor, I’m right there with ya about the text shorthand, but the reality is that it’s the way teens and 20-somethings communicate. And eventually, they’ll outnumber us. ;-)]]>AnneWed, 05 Nov 2008 15:41:27 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/mobile-and-wireless2/obama-campaign-exploits-text-messaging#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/exchange-server-2007/what-mail-server-are-you-using-#commentsAnchorFri, 03 Oct 2008 11:33:16 GMT
A reader, John M. Kuttler, emailed me the following comments about this article: "We are primarily Exchange 2007, but kept one 2003 server exclusively to hold Public Folders. We ran into difficulties migrating public folders to 2007 and those were painful enough (and Microsoft will ultimately end support for Public Folders) that we decided to simply keep the public folders in 2003. Outlook 2007 and OWA 2007 users are able to access the Public Folders easily enough. We are very happy to be on Exchange 2007. Much improved OWA; better search; CCR and SCR; and opportunistic TLS are some of the immediate benefits we see. I’m hopeful for better stability too, but it’s too soon to measure that."]]>BrianFri, 03 Oct 2008 11:33:16 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/exchange-server-2007/what-mail-server-are-you-using-#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/buyers-guide/exchange-server-monitoring-tools#commentsAnchorMon, 05 May 2008 06:23:22 GMT
it is a good article.]]>harry1477 Mon, 05 May 2008 06:23:22 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/buyers-guide/exchange-server-monitoring-tools#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/archiving/exchange-server-archiving-software-#commentsAnchorTue, 12 Feb 2008 09:57:08 GMT
Thanks, bwadmin, for pointing out Zantaz. As you might not know, we invite appropriate vendors to participate in our buyer’s guides and use the information they submit for the product table. I contacted Zantaz when writing this buyer’s guide, but unfortunately was unable to get a response. As you point out, interested readers can visit the company’s Web site for information on that product. Brian Winstead Assistant Editor bwinstead@windowsitpro.com]]>BrianTue, 12 Feb 2008 09:57:08 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/archiving/exchange-server-archiving-software-#commentsAnchorhttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/archiving/exchange-server-archiving-software-#commentsAnchorFri, 08 Feb 2008 12:21:43 GMT
Zantaz / Autonomy EAS (Enterprise Archive Solution) is missing from the table. http://www.zantaz.com/products/eas.php]]>robFri, 08 Feb 2008 12:21:43 GMThttp://www.sqlmag.com/article/archiving/exchange-server-archiving-software-#commentsAnchor