It's the recovery storage group I like. And Volume Shadow Copy Service. Granted I don't need an 8-node cluster.... OWA is just fluff.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Sadler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 8:25 AM Subject: RE: Why would I want to go to Exchange 2003/Outlook 2003 Yes, that may be true. But my E2K server is very stable itself, and the "benefits" of upgrading don't seem much to someone who doesn't need the ability to download your mailbox to your desktop. Bob Sadler City of Leawood, KS, USA WAN/Internet Specialist 913-339-6700 x194 -----Original Message----- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 10:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Why would I want to go to Exchange 2003/Outlook 2003 "Exchange2003 RC1 has proven to be more stable at Microsoft that Exchange2000 sp3" >From a session at TechEd. All but 1 server at Microsoft have been migrated to Exchange2003. That's almost 80,000 mailboxes. William -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Sadler Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 8:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions _________________________________________________________________ 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: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
