To the contrary, local competition in the telephone service has probably facilitated availability of DSL much faster than we would have seen otherwise. I really don't think Pacific Bell would be advertising its availability if it were a tarriffed product whose pricing and availability were mandated by the California Public Utilities Commission.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I Tech Consultant hp Services Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-94760@;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Roger Seielstad Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 4:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server > get into. Regardless you can argue the fact that more competition only > creates better products That's not a hard and fast economics law, Hummert. All one has to do is look at local utility (telephone, gas, electricity) deregulation to see that compettion isn't always what its cracked up to be. Quite often, competition hurts products, not helps. For instance, Exchange's traditional competitors are Notes and Groupwise. Each of the three have a long and relatively distinguished implementation record. Now we have OpenExchange. At this point, its probably 3-5 years away from getting to the current state of any of the "Big 3" in functionality, stability and scalability. That's 3-5 years the big players will continue on their own paths, most likely considering OpenExchange as nothing more than yet another wannabe. You see, competition isn't beneficial if the competitors aren't on a relatively level playing field to start. Roger ------------------------------------------------------ Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA > -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:hummertc@;noghri.net] > Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 5:43 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server > > > You can argue yes and no to that. But that's something I'm > not going to > get into. Regardless you can argue the fact that more competition only > creates better products > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:bounce-exchange-97309@;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff > Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 10:47 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server > > > There's plenty of competition today to Exchange which provides > significantly more groupware functionality than "openexchange". Some > of it even runs on *nix. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:hummertc@;noghri.net] > > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:40 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > But is competition. Hopefully someday it will become good > competition > > and finally Microsoft will have someone to try to one up again with > > each release instead of providing new functions and > features when they > > > get around to it > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:bounce-exchange-97309@;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of > Chris Scharff > > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:04 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server > > > > > > It's not "open" and it's certainly not Exchange. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:tony.mccullough@;hcs.state.or.us] > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:21 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > > > You mentioned that there is nothing in the Linux world like > > > Exchange. > > > > > I haven't looked at this but I received this "Open Exchange" link > > > from > > > > > a friend of mine the other day. I can't vouch for it, > but thought > > > I'd > > > > > throw it out. > > > > > > > http://www.suse.com/us/business/products/suse_business/openexchange/ > > > in > > > dex. > > > ht > > > ml > > > > > > Tony McCullough > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:Ken.Cornetet@;kimball.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 7:09 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server > > > > > > > > > Here's my take: > > > > > > A quick peek a CDW shows SBS at $1277 > > > http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.asp?EDC=274287. > Microsoft > > > is offering a $500 rebate if you can read the SBS sales > literature > > > and answer 20 some-odd questions. That puts the price at $777. > > > > > > I'm not familiar with the MCSP program, so I cannot > comment on that. > > > > You are also forgetting about Exchange CALS at $70 each. > > > > > > You are correct in that growing past SBS is somewhat painful (I > > > might argue with the 10-20 times more expensive. Exmerging 50 > > > mailboxes is not that painful...), but I would maintain that if a > > > company finds themselves outgrowing SBS, then it should not have > > > been put in in the first place. > > > > > > Yes, Linux is a viable option for small companies (big > ones, too). > > > It does have some drawbacks, though. > > > > > > 1. Support. Finding a local consultant to support a Linux > system is > > > going to be harder than finding someone to support Microsoft > > > products. > > > > > > 2. Third-party applications. Going Linux defiantly puts a company > > > outside the mainstream and limits third party server applications > > > like > > > > > mail filtering, antivirus, web surfing control, etc. > > > > > > Running a business on Linux servers is, IMHO, very a very viable > > > option. But, it pretty much requires a resident propeller-head to > > > smooth over the rough spots. Most small companies (where SBS is > > > targeted) just can't afford a full-time system admin. They would > > > much rather farm it out to a consultant. > > > > > > Let's not forget that Exchange is more than email as > well. There's > > > nothing in the open source arena (that I know of) that > can provide > > > the > > > > > same functionality that Exchange provides. > > > > > > I'll conclude stating that IMHO, SBS is an excellent value when > > > applied in the appropriate environment - that is a small company > > > (5-15 > > > > > employees) needing at least file-sharing and Exchange and with no > > > resident system admin. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg@;infonition.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 6:55 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server > > > > > > > > > Thought long and hard about letting this go, but where is > the fun in > > > > that? > > > > > > First, to answer the migration piece of this. The only > option I can > > > think of at this time would be to treat the SBS Exchange > system as a > > > > foreign mail system, meaning export and import mailbox data to > > > migrate. Migration costs will be 10-20 times what it would be to > > > simply put another server in place and move users. But, > if is your > > > only option... > > > > > > Now on to the fun... > > > > > > SBS License: $1,499.00 (5 clients) > > > > > > Real W2K Server license: $1,199.00 (10 clients) > > > E2K Standard Edition: $1,299.00 (can always be upgraded to > > > Enterprise if > > > needed) > > > > > > Now, realistically, if you are a small little shop, this > is all the > > > Microsoft products that you need and so for 1.67 times the amount > > > you eliminate all of the limitations of SBS and have actual, real > > > products > > > > > versus cripple-ware. > > > > > > But what about ISA? Don't need it. Go get a Linksys box > for $100 for > > > > your firewall and it is wide open outbound. > > > > > > But what about SQL Server? IF you need it, then it's $1,499.00. > > > Otherwise, you don't need it. > > > > > > If you are a small business, you can get cripple-ware for > $1.5K or > > > actual software to run your business for $2-4K. Under the first > > > scenario you are setting yourself up for failure and under the > > > second, > > > > > you have invested just a little more money but have primed your > > > business for growth. > > > > > > And if you are such a cash-strapped business that you > cannot afford > > > the extra grand or two, then you should probably be > looking at free > > > software. Put a Linux box up, done. It's cost $0.00. > > > > > > And, just for fun, 2 MCP exams, ~$250 and an MCSP license > ~$2000.00. > > > > So again, for just a few extra (hundreds) of dollars you get lots > > > and lots and lots of actual software versus cripple-ware. > > > > > > So where is the business case for SBS? There isn't one. It is for > > > closed-minded, all I know is Microsoft, lazy people that do not > > > think far enough ahead to keep them from running into > closed doors. > > > Installing SBS is setting yourself up for failure, period. I have > > > seen > > > > > it time and time again. > > > It is Microsoft cripple-ware, plain and simple. You get > what you pay > > for > > > and > > > you get what you deserve when you don't plan ahead. > > > > > > I am more than willing to admit I am wrong, so show me a business > > > case > > > > > where SBS is the RIGHT solution. And by that, I do not mean the > > > lowest > > > > > cost solution, because Linux has that one well in hand. I > mean, when > > > > all the pros and cons are analyzed, that SBS is the winner. I > > > honestly have never encountered it. > > > > > > > > > > You know what they say: opinions are like, well never mind... > > > > > > > > Personally, I think SBS is a fantastic product, > provided you keep > > > > it's limitations in mind up front. Yes, it would be a pain to > > > > upgrade, but my guess is that the vast majority of SBS > > > > installations > > > > > > would never face that task. > > > > > > > > Most small companies (10-15 employees) could never > afford to buy > > > > Win2k, E2K, and ISA server, let alone SQLServer. SBS gives them > > > > all this for the price of Win2K server alone! > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg@;infonition.com] > > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 1:22 PM > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > Subject: Re: Moving E2k storage group to new Server > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, the easiest way to do this is to install another > E2K server > > > > and simply move the mailboxes to the new server. Now, the only > > > > thing > > > > > > that might throw a wrench into this for you is running > sbs2k. And, > > > > > I > > > > > > have repeatedly stated this and let me go on record as stating > > > > that SBS is a terrible product that should never be installed > > > > anywhere in > > > > > > the entire world because of the serious limitations that it > > > > imposes on organizations. This is a perfect example as > to why an > > > > organization should NEVER install SBS. And if there are any > > > > companies out there that have consultants recommending > SBS, fire > > > > them immediately and get somebody competant. > > > > > > > > One of the big problems with SBS is that it uses the Standard > > > > Edition of Microsoft Exchange, which has the nasty > limitation of > > > > not > > > > > > being able to support multiple Exchange servers. > > > > > > > > From Microsoft docs: > > > > "Exchange 2000 on a Small Business Server installation is > > > > restricted > > > > > > from being part of a larger Exchange server > organization. Because > > > > Small Business Server 2000 is installed as the root of > the Active > > > > Directory forest, you cannot install the Exchange 2000 > component > > > > into an existing organization." > > > > > > > > Also from Microsoft docs: > > > > "Full installation of Windows 2000 is required. It is > not possible > > > > > to upgrade Microsoft BackOffice Small Business Server to the > > > > Windows > > > > > > 2000 operating system; however, if your hardware meets > the system > > > > requirements > > > > > > > > (http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/advancedserver/evaluation/sysr > > > eq > > > s/) > > > > for Windows 2000, you can install the full product. > > > > > > > > The current plan for the next release of Small Business > Server is > > > > to > > > > > > base the product on the Windows 2000 operating system. For more > > > > information about Small Business Server, see the Small Business > > > > Server Web site > > > > (http://www.microsoft.com/smallbusinessserver/default.htm)." > > > > > > > > What this means in a nutshell is that I don't have a > solution for > > > > you. I have searched Technet and have not been able to find an > > > > acceptable upgrade path from SBS to anything useable. > Essentially, > > > > > since you are running SBS, you cannot install a new E2K server > > > > into the organization and simply move the user > mailboxes. And, in > > > > all honesty, I have not found an acceptable way to > upgrade SBS to > > > > W2K enterprise. > > > > > > > > If anyone has a solution out there for upgrading SBS to > enterprise > > > > > versions, I'd love to see it. There HAS to be a way, Microsoft > > > > could > > > > > > not have been THAT bone-headed. On the other hand, they > released > > > > SBS > > > > > > so I guess I wouldn't put anything past them. > > > > > > > > One thing you might try is backing up your stores, installing a > > > > new non-SBS server with full W2K and E2K and restoring to that > > > > server. > > > > > > > > Avoid SBS like the plague, it is a terrible, terrible > product and > > > > Microsoft, in good conscience, should NEVER have > released it upon > > > > an > > > > > > unsuspecting public. > > > > > > > > > Exchange is working fine on the server its just that the raid > > > > > set on this dodgy ibm server keeps going critical after a > > > > > reboot(keep getting the runaround from ibm) and we want the > > > > > customer to purchase a better server but there is a > lot of mail > > > > > stored on it and i was just wondering how easy/hard > would it be > > > > > to move the mail to another server. Also is their any > > > > > repercussions moving mail from sbs2k to a win2k o/s. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > Damian. > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > List posting FAQ: > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > > > Archives: > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > > > 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > > 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > > 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > > 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
