RE: [ActiveDir] OT: PST files

[Christopher Hummert]

From an exchange list that some of us here are on:   Why PSTs are bad, by Ed Crowley.  Reprinted by permission of the author (Ed Crowley). Items 11, 12 and 13 courtesy of Stephen Gutknecht. Based on input from the many PST=BAD proselytizers in the Exchange Discussion List and personal experience. PST=BAD #1. They're fragile, especially as they get big. They get corrupted too easily. Users aren't the best at ensuring that their systems are properly shut down. PST=BAD #2. You have to run the Inbox Repair Tool on them way too often. PST=BAD #3. Your users don't back them up. Presumably you do back up the server. PST=BAD #4. Your users don't compact them. They just get bigger and bigger. PST=BAD #5. Your users forget their PST passwords. Even though there are unsupported tools to crack them, it can take a significant amount of time to do so. PST=BAD #6. You lose single instance store (SIS). PST=BAD #7. Messages take up more space in a PST than in an Exchange store. PST=BAD #8. It's simply nuts to store PSTs on a network drive. They just end up taking up more space. Is disk space on your file server cheaper than disk space on your Exchange server? PST=BAD #9. One might think that it will be easier to restore a single mailbox by using server-based PSTs. However, with proper implementation of the Ed Crowley Never Lose a Mailbox Procedure, it should never ever be necessary to restore a mailbox. PST=BAD #10. For road warriors, OSTs are a much superior storage technique, especially with the improvements made with Outlook 98. They allow untethered computing at a higher level than with PSTs, plus with the added security of a backed-up information store on the server. PST=BAD #11: A PST can be opened by only one machine at a time. This precludes a manager and assistant from working from the same PST simultaneously, and precludes team access. PST=BAD #12: You cannot use Outlook Web Access to read your downloaded messages. PST=BAD #13: Future applications, such as unified messaging, will be poorly implemented when using PSTs. Groupware applications that work with the mailbox probably won't work at all. PST=BAD #14: PST files are not secure. Anyone with access to the PST file can open it using the right tools. PST=BAD #15: You cannot clean up PST files after virus infestations. Why PSTs are good. PST=GOOD #1. They're just about all you have when using a POP3 mail source. (We maintain that use of POP3 in an enterprise, unless that's the only client available, is a reflection of administrative sloth.) PST=GOOD #2. They're useful as an archive for those who simply can't ever delete a message, as long as the user understands that they could lose all their data, and as long as they keep it on their local hard drive.     The entire thing is located here: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq_appxf.htm From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pelle, Joe Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 12:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: PST files I’m sorry for the off topic post, however I’d like some input from the field on a subject we’ve been throwing around for a while now.   That is: what do we do with PST files in Outlook?  We’re replacing EVERY desktop or laptop in the company and have the opportunity to GET RID OF PST files.  Our users abuse the HE11 out of them.  The PST files get so big that they end up corrupt – or- take a half an hour to open b/c the file size is 800 – 1 GB…  It’s tough to manage!!!   What are your thoughts on this?  How do others manage this?   Your comments, thoughts, etc are greatly appreciated!   Joe Pelle Infrastructure Architect Information Technology Valassis / IT 19975 Victor Parkway Livonia, MI 48152 Tel 734.591.7324  Fax 734.632.6151 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.valassis.com/   This message may have included proprietary or protected information.  This message and the information contained herein are not to be further communicated without my express written consent.