As I understand it, but you can confirm this with Microsoft, is that a license for Outlook is included with an Exchange 2000 CAL. An Exchange 2000 CAL is the same price regardless of which client you use, OWA included.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mark Rotman Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 1:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook Web Access More comments inline ...<snip>... >>How about the tangible fixed costs like: >> OWA CAL versus Outlook CAL -- Same cost. Right, its just the cost of Outlook, which includes a CAL so something like $60 Outlook versus $20 OWA, dependent on order quantities and licensing programs? >> Bandwidth of Outlook versus OWA -- How much does bandwidth cost? Depends, I guess we need to know the avg utilization of Outlook in kpbs versus OWA in kpbs. I suppose this will also be dependent on Outlook 97 versus 2000 versus XP. >> Hardware requirements of Outlook versus OWA (scalability) -- You might argue that heavy use of OWA would cost more because of front-end servers. True, but I've heard that people are running 50% more users on the back-end so the lighter FEPs are less expensive than enhancing the BEPs Other factors? Surely someone has done a hard comparison - maybe I need to look at iNotes versus OWA and Outlook to get some numbers? _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
