My suggestion in this scenario would be VPN + Outlook in cached mode with
the download only headers option set (I actually believe that it will
"sense" the slow connection and auto-set it to download only headers,
that's how it works with I connect with my EVDO card). POP3 works, but my
experience is that Outlook in cached mode and only downloading headers
would work better when working with connections that are less then optimal
(when compared to your other choices).
Whether you use Outlook+cached\Outlook+RPC-over-HTTPS\pop3\OWA you still
have to work out how they are going to connect to that particular
interface. Outlook+cached (my preferred solution in this scenario) will
require a VPN connection if they are dialing up to an external ISP.
Outlook+RPC-over-https\POP3\OWA can all be done with externally facing
front-end servers or an externally facing ISA 2004 server and utilizing
SSL.
So it may come down to what is easier to setup for you and what will give
the best overall customer experience. My customers (finicky as they are)
love Outlook+cache mode when working over slow connections.
Best regards,
Steven
> So again, for my staff that travels to africa latin america and =
> caribiean
> ( 14.4 or 28.8 dial-ups) this WOULD NOT be a good option to setup on =
> the
> laptops.
>
> What would be , pop?=20
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of =
> Michael B.
> Smith
> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 5:45 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: OWA-vs-OUTlook via http
>
> I've got folks using it, in cached mode at 56K. Anything less than that =
> is
> tough.
>
> On vaca, I used it for 2 weeks at 33.6 quite successfully. But in =
> non-cached
> mode it would've really sucked.
> --------------------------
> Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Exchange Discussions <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Fri Oct 08 17:34:38 2004
> Subject: RE: OWA-vs-OUTlook via http
>
> My comment is in the context of slow links. RPC-over-HTTP is not =
> targeted
> for slow connections, right?
>
> Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
> Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
> Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of =
> Michael
> B. Smith
> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 2:31 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: OWA-vs-OUTlook via http
>
> I've got a LOT of customers who are using it VERY happily.=20
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Jean-Paul Natola
> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 5:13 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: OWA-vs-OUTlook via http
>
> But so far, with regards to rpc/http
>
> I have heard;
>
> "Forget RPC over HTTP. Think Outlook 2003 cached mode."
> and
> "I have found that when at home on dial-up, RPC over HTTP has a hard =
> time
> Connecting."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jean-Paul Natola
> Systems Administrator
> Information Technology
> Family Care International
> 588 Broadway Suite 503
> New York, NY 10012
> Phone:212-941-5300 xt 36
> Fax: 212-941-5563
> Mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael B. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 1:26 PM
> Subject: RE: OWA-vs-OUTlook via http
>
>
> Or use RPC/HTTPS.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of =
> Steve
> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 12:56 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: OWA-vs-OUTlook via http
>
> It uses MAPI, in order to get your mail from Exchange when on the road =
> you
> would need a VPN connection.
>
> > Ok, maybe i'm just blind , or too burnt out (sitting here with 101=20
> > fever isnt helping me any), but I just dont see it, HOW what protocol=20
> > does Cached mode use when a traveller is on the road to send/recieve=20
> > /sync
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jean-Paul Natola
> > Systems Administrator
> > Information Technology
> > Family Care International
> > 588 Broadway Suite 503
> > New York, NY 10012
> > Phone:212-941-5300 xt 36
> > Fax: 212-941-5563
> > Mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 11:58 AM
> > Subject: RE: OWA-vs-OUTlook via http
> >
> >
> > > Absolutely. However I agree with Ed, Outlook over cached mode is an
>
> > > excellent mail client for slow connections. Unfortunately not=20
> > > everyone is "willing" to use Outlook (got lots of those here..can't
> imagine why :-)).
> > > For those who want to use a POP3\IMAP4 client, such as Eudora, we=20
> > > configured our Exchange frontends to only accept POP3 and IMAP4 over
>
> > > SSL and it works rather well, although again...Outlook (cached) is=20
> > > IMHO one of the best clients out there currently when you consider=20
> > > its functionality over the slowest links.
> > >
> > > Eudora has an option to "Use Alternate Port" which will use the SSL=20
> > > ports (995\993).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Can Eudora dor SSL over POP3/IMAP4??
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 4:05 PM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: OWA-vs-OUTlook via http
> > > >
> > > > Exchange can easily be configured to use SSL over a POP3 or IMAP4=20
> > > > connection.
> > > >
> > > > > Perhaps sending unencrypted pop3 passwords over the internet?
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 3:42 PM
> > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > Subject: Re: OWA-vs-OUTlook via http
> > > > >
> > > > > What is it that is motivating you to try to get your Eudora=20
> > > > > customers to move from Eudora to Outlook?
> > > > >
> > > > > -Steven
> > > > >
> > > > > > hi everyone,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm really trying to sell Outlook to a few of my
> "anti-outlook"
> > > > > > staff (Eudora -users) ,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So one of my selling points was OWA for them when they are on=20
> > > > > > the road, till they told me that when they are in Africa OWA=20
> > > > > > is not feasible for 2 reasons;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > a) Very poor connections 14-4 or 28-8 if lucky,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > b) something along the lines of 14 dollars (US) per hour.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So I was contemplating Outllook over HTTP.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > is this a viable option given the above circumstances? is=20
> > > > > > anyone using it yet, any feedback?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jean-Paul Natola
> > > > > > Systems Administrator
> > > > > > Information Technology
> > > > > > Family Care International
> > > > > > 588 Broadway Suite 503
> > > > > > New York, NY 10012
> > > > > > Phone:212-941-5300 xt 36
> > > > > > Fax: 212-941-5563
> > > > > > Mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >
> > > > >
_________________________________________________________________
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at:
Jupitermedia Corp.
Attn: Discussion List Management
475 Park Avenue South
New York, NY 10016
Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
