As long as you are within your budget, who cares. Just because you spend a lot of money doesn't mean you are stupid. If the money is there take it and use the resources that are available. You don't have to stick with the basics and try to make it work.
-----Original Message----- From: Aristotle Zoulas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: PST Files on a network share As an IT Manager of a decent size organization, I would say the most valuable employees get the job done with the resources at hand. There have been many articles that show too many IT Departments today are "OVER-RAIDED, Over Staffed, and Over-Redundant." The idea of throwing money at something to "make it 'go away"', is for the uneducated. There are "levels" of risk and degrees of safety. The maximum is not for everybody. To go out and spend money to get a job done is simple. To get it done without spending money (or spending less) requires thinking and planning. As an example, removing the ability to send "high risk" files (*.pif, *.bat, etc.) within exchange drastically reduces the likelihood of getting a virus in your company. To not perform the above and to opt to get some EXPENSIVE software is doing your company an injustice. It is our duty to get the job done while keeping expenses low. All while presenting risk levels and exposure to the company owners. If they will pay for it, let them decide. -----Original Message----- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: PST Files on a network share Mr. Tech, I've worked for companies with 3 employees to 130k employees. I've seen managers and CxO's focused different things at every level. I've seen small companies which were visionary in the tech spending and technology implementations and fortune 500 companies who had IT shops so bad I wouldn't piss on them when they burst into flames (and they will). There is no large company utopia of unlimited resources, one could rephrase your question and wonder where small companies come from in thinking that large organizations have unlimited resources to throw at problems and that their issues are unique to them because they are small fish. When I worked for $vbc I put in 4 requests for an enterprise AV solution ($65k) and had it turned down all four times. Only when they finally got hammered by a virus did they come to me and direct me to implement a solution to prevent it from happening again. Sure sometimes people are forced into suboptimal situations. I know of one large credit organization which allows PST files on network shares, but that doesn't make it a good idea. I for one and happy when someone warns me it will hurt to hit myself in the head with an axe before I try it. If you really want to get into an in depth discussion of budget, resource and user management I'll send you my consulting rate. But as I see it your arguments against improvements in IT process management are currently a bit weak. BTW, Exchange standard has a 16GB limit BTW, not an 18GB limit. > -----Original Message----- > From: tech [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 2:08 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: PST Files on a network share personalmail > > Are the disks on your file server cheaper than the disks in your > Exchange server? > ---- > > It is cheaper to own standard edition of Exchange than Enterprise, > standard has an 18gb limit. > > Some companies have a freeze on upgrading, so what do you suggest to > administrators that do not work in the Utopia of a large corporation > with resources. Most users claim not to have the time or feel their > mail is too important to delete. Yes including the Amazon special > offers. > > Most small companies do not care about working the right way in the > long run, they want to know what is the cheapest way in the short > term. They might not be around next year. My feelings are that with > that attitude no wonder, but many of us work for those companies and > have a boss that is only looking at today and keeping his job. > > When you guys reply to these messages I just wonder whether you know > who the audience on this list are? From the dizzy heights of Compaq > it may seem odd that admins keep making the same mistakes but many > admins propose the correct solution only to actually do what is > approved three of four declines later. > > Nathan _________________________________________________________________ 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] _________________________________________________________________ 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]
