RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
GD wrote: I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped Erm, could it be down to the fact that the budget was allocated before the consultant even knew which GroupWise client was most suitable for the task? The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
GD wrote: I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped Erm, could it be down to the fact that the budget was allocated before the consultant even knew which GroupWise client was most suitable for the task? The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
with a chiropractic solution. When you go to a heart surgeon, everything is a coronary problem with a coronary solution. Different you say? Not really. If they act responsibly, they'll refer you somewhere else if what they have to offer isn't what you need. In the IT space, if what you need is not what I have to offer, I'll refer you somewhere else. Saying that I'm more likely to lie to you and try to mislead you than any random doctor with a specialty is absurd. On the other hand, if you want a specialist, getting one that has /deep/ technical knowledge is not a bad idea and if they've been recognized by other experts and their peers for that, all the better. Now you know my opinion on this subject. It's that you are every bit as wrong on this topic as you think I am. Let's move on. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 9:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Well, if you're big enough to look past my views on MVP, I think I can let it slide. Many thanks for your response. And, BTW, $1200 is 25% of the budget for this project, that's a big chunk of change. P.S. And because I have been heckled to death on this issue, I feel the need to clarify because I believe you have mis-characterized my position on this. Regardless of whether or not MVP is the greatest thing since sliced bread and never, ever, in a million years caused anyone to every act unethically or fail to think for themselves, it is still compensation from a vendor and hence something that IT professionals should not engage in. It is a slippery slope and if IT is to ever achieve the status of a profession, something that will eventually have to be addressed. Andy =20 Ps - please add appropriate grains of salt to the validity and intellectual honesty of this answer. I have been accused of being an MVP, which may have compromised my ethics and ability to think for myself. =20 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=3Dexchangetext_mode=3D= lang=3Denglish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[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=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come to your defense here. The ones I know agree with me. =20 I don't think I've mischaracterized your position at all. You say that we are all unethical solely because of the vendor relationship and without respect to any other facts. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software. That's a recognition from the vendor with monetary value. I really don't see the difference. I've given a lot of thought to your arguments over the years and I respectfully disagree. IT is not the same as building roads. Within the areas you call professions there are specializations. Within IT there are specializations too. It just so happens that those areas of /deep/ technical knowledge are sometimes on a particular product in addition to the specializations on generic process. There really is no precedent stating that there is ipso facto unprofessionalism or an issue with ethics. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come to your defense here. The ones I know agree with me. =20 I don't think I've mischaracterized your position at all. You say that we are all unethical solely because of the vendor relationship and without respect to any other facts. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software. That's a recognition from the vendor with monetary value. I really don't see the difference. I've given a lot of thought to your arguments over the years and I respectfully disagree. IT is not the same as building roads. Within the areas you
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come to your defense here. The ones I know agree with me. =20 I don't think I've mischaracterized your position at all. You say that we are all unethical solely because of the vendor relationship and without respect to any other facts. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software. That's a recognition from
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Obviously, you're either sticking your finger all the way past the second knuckle again or you've had too many facelifts -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Me fail english? Thats unpossible! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Fretz Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
You've got the women just lining up for you don't ya... -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come to your defense here. The ones I know agree with me. =20
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
You can fix fat, but you can't fix ugly... -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
I like crickets and figs John Parker, MCSE IS Admin. Senior Technical Specialist Alpha Display Systems. Alpha Video 7711 Computer Ave. Edina, MN. 55435 952-896-9898 Local 800-388-0008 Watts 952-896-9899 Fax 612-804-8769 Cell 952-841-3327 Direct [EMAIL PROTECTED] Be excellent to each other ---End of Line--- -Original Message- From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You can fix fat, but you can't fix ugly... -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
You do too? I thought I was the only one. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Fretz Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Oh. My. I think that was TMI, Eric. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
You forget that you're comparing me to the guy that tickles his brain when he picks his nose. Frankly, I seem a bit tame. =) Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Oh. My. I think that was TMI, Eric. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
When I grow up I want to be a principalor a caterpillar. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Fretz Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You forget that you're comparing me to the guy that tickles his brain when he picks his nose. Frankly, I seem a bit tame. =) Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Oh. My. I think that was TMI, Eric. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Well, some day I'd like to be a dentist. - Hermey - Matt -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 When I grow up I want to be a principalor a caterpillar. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Fretz Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You forget that you're comparing me to the guy that tickles his brain when he picks his nose. Frankly, I seem a bit tame. =) Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Oh. My. I think that was TMI, Eric. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
I want to be a fig farmer John Parker, MCSE IS Admin. Senior Technical Specialist Alpha Display Systems. Alpha Video 7711 Computer Ave. Edina, MN. 55435 952-896-9898 Local 800-388-0008 Watts 952-896-9899 Fax 612-804-8769 Cell 952-841-3327 Direct [EMAIL PROTECTED] Be excellent to each other ---End of Line--- -Original Message- From: Bailey, Matthew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 2:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Well, some day I'd like to be a dentist. - Hermey - Matt -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 When I grow up I want to be a principalor a caterpillar. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Fretz Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You forget that you're comparing me to the guy that tickles his brain when he picks his nose. Frankly, I seem a bit tame. =) Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Oh. My. I think that was TMI, Eric. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Looking down, I see that you just pleaded, Will everyone just drop this discussion? Didn't you really mean everyone else? 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 Christopher Hummert Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Actually I just gave up, and gave in -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Crowley [MVP] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 3:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Looking down, I see that you just pleaded, Will everyone just drop this discussion? Didn't you really mean everyone else? 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 Christopher Hummert Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Pretty quickly--six minutes. There's a name for that but this is a family forum. 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 Christopher Hummert Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 3:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Actually I just gave up, and gave in -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Crowley [MVP] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 3:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Looking down, I see that you just pleaded, Will everyone just drop this discussion? Didn't you really mean everyone else? 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 Christopher Hummert Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
On the subject of migration tool investment by the vendors, migration tools are considered a marketing expense. You build free tools when you're trying to quickly gain market share from your competitors. Once you have the market share, there's less need since the prospective customers will want to move to your product for many other reasons. You also face an increasing competition for the development dollars. On day one, /all/ the customers want migration tools. On day 1000, 2% want migration tools and 98% want some other feature. I'm not apologizing for Microsoft's lack of updated tools - in fact their consistency on this has been quite good for my company. They never did do an HP OpenMail to Exchange or Steltor/Netscape Calendar to Exchange tool, so the ones we did are still viable products. In terms of cost, $1200 for 700 users seems pretty cheap compared to the number of hours spent looking for a solution. Migration tools are rarely cheap from third parties because they're generally expensive to maintain and support and because the third parties don't have the Exchange/Outlook/Windows revenue to shore up the bottom line. Compared to the total cost of the project, $1200 is probably a drop in the bucket. Compared to having to abandon the data, I suspect $1200 is infinitesimal. Creating Outlook personal DLs is a pain in the neck. I know because we had to implement it in our products. You can script it using the Outlook Object Model, but you still have to be careful of the size limitations of an Outlook DL (125-135 entries depending on entry type and address size) and handle adding additional nesting if there are too many for one DL. There are some examples of using the DistListItem object at www.outlookcode.com. Andy Ps - please add appropriate grains of salt to the validity and intellectual honesty of this answer. I have been accused of being an MVP, which may have compromised my ethics and ability to think for myself. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 11:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 OK, some more specifics from the front. ENVIRONMENT - NetWare 6 Server, SP3 - GroupWise 6.5 PO, SP1 - Exchange 2000 Server, (Version 6.0 Build 6249.4, SP3) Migration Workstation - Exchange 2000 Administrative Tools, no SP's - NetWare 32-bit client - GroupWise 6.5 client, not SP1 - Outlook 2000, no patches - Terminal Services in Application Mode What is migrated: - Cabinet - Cabinet - Calendar - Calendar, after logon and import - Contacts - NO, but can use OrgToOut (DL's, see below) - Trash - NO - Mailbox - Inbox - Sent Items - Sent Items - Drafts - Drafts - Junk E-mail - Junk E-mail - Documents - NO, not surprising as this is a different paradigm - Checklist - NO - Work In Progress - Work In Progress Day 2 was largely beating my head against the wall. Could not get GBMT to work with either the 5.2.6 GW client or the 6.5 GW client. I can export users to a file, but cannot reset passwords or set proxy rights. This is not overly distressing since migrating users using their own accounts is working consistly. No real explanation that I can come up with other than I guess something is different in 6.5 that allows this to work. Also, since this is only about 700 users, manually doing this after resetting passwords from the GW Admin interface is a possibility. Sucks if you're the guy that has to do it, but doable. I emailed the creator of GBMT to see if there is an update that might do the trick, but have not heard back and am not really counting on it. Spent the morning trying to get this to work without success. Spent the afternoon beating my head against the wall with converting personal DL's. This one is important to the client because they got burned on this going from Exchange 5.5 to GW6.5 so it bites that I have not been able to get what I consider to be a good solution for this. Contacts work just fine using OrgToOut, but not PDL's. OrgToOut is my own tool that takes CSV files from things like Lotus Organizer and GW and converts them to a format that can be imported into Outlook. If anyone wants a copy, let me know and I'll fire it your way. Exporting the GW address book (Frequent Contacts in GW6.5) to a .NAB file exports the groups, but there does not appear to be a CSV import for PDL's in Outlook. If anyone knows the format or if it is possible to import PDL's into Outlook from a CSV, I would be most appreciative of any insight. Next, I tried VCF format. Again, GW VCF exporting exports the groups and, in fact, exports all of the Frequent Contacts to a single VCF file. However, Outlook VCF import appears to only recognize the very first entry in the VCF file, which it imports successfully and then ignores everything else. So much for VCF being a standard I guess. sigh So next I ran Outlook against the GW server, the thought being that I
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Well, if you're big enough to look past my views on MVP, I think I can let it slide. Many thanks for your response. And, BTW, $1200 is 25% of the budget for this project, that's a big chunk of change. P.S. And because I have been heckled to death on this issue, I feel the need to clarify because I believe you have mis-characterized my position on this. Regardless of whether or not MVP is the greatest thing since sliced bread and never, ever, in a million years caused anyone to every act unethically or fail to think for themselves, it is still compensation from a vendor and hence something that IT professionals should not engage in. It is a slippery slope and if IT is to ever achieve the status of a profession, something that will eventually have to be addressed. Andy Ps - please add appropriate grains of salt to the validity and intellectual honesty of this answer. I have been accused of being an MVP, which may have compromised my ethics and ability to think for myself. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come to your defense here. The ones I know agree with me. I don't think I've mischaracterized your position at all. You say that we are all unethical solely because of the vendor relationship and without respect to any other facts. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software. That's a recognition from the vendor with monetary value. I really don't see the difference. I've given a lot of thought to your arguments over the years and I respectfully disagree. IT is not the same as building roads. Within the areas you call professions there are specializations. Within IT there are specializations too. It just so happens that those areas of /deep/ technical knowledge are sometimes on a particular product in addition to the specializations on generic process. There really is no precedent stating that there is ipso facto unprofessionalism or an issue with ethics. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software. That's a recognition from the vendor with monetary value. I really don't see the difference. I wish you could stop being so closed minded about this one particular issue. The venom and bile with which you say the word vendor is also really puzzling. When you go to a chiropractor, everything is a chiropractic problem with a chiropractic solution. When you go to a heart surgeon, everything is a coronary problem with a coronary solution. Different you say? Not really. If they act responsibly, they'll refer you somewhere else if what they have to offer isn't what you need. In the IT space, if what you need is not what I have to offer, I'll refer you somewhere else. Saying that I'm more likely to lie to you and try to mislead you than any random doctor with a specialty is absurd. On the other hand, if you want a specialist, getting one that has /deep/ technical knowledge is not a bad idea and if they've been recognized by other experts and their peers for that, all the better. Now you know my opinion on this subject. It's that you are every bit as wrong on this topic as you think I am. Let's move on. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 9:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Well, if you're big enough to look past my views on MVP, I think I can let it slide. Many thanks for your response. And, BTW, $1200 is 25% of the budget for this project, that's a big chunk of change. P.S. And because I have been heckled to death on this issue, I feel the need to clarify because I believe you have mis-characterized my position on this. Regardless of whether or not MVP is the greatest thing since sliced bread and never, ever, in a million years caused anyone to every act unethically or fail to think for themselves, it is still compensation from a vendor and hence something that IT professionals should not engage in. It is a slippery slope and if IT is to ever achieve the status of a profession, something that will eventually have to be addressed. Andy Ps - please add appropriate grains of salt to the validity and intellectual honesty of this answer. I have been accused of being an MVP, which may have compromised my ethics and ability to think for myself. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[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=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Webb, Andy If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. No kidding. The design and implementation plan alone for a project of that size is worth WAY more than $4800. Jason _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Perhaps you should bill fewer hours to compensate. On the whole, it'd probably be a huge win for everyone. Except for you, of course. 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 Greg Deckler Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 7:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Well, if you're big enough to look past my views on MVP, I think I can let it slide. Many thanks for your response. And, BTW, $1200 is 25% of the budget for this project, that's a big chunk of change. P.S. And because I have been heckled to death on this issue, I feel the need to clarify because I believe you have mis-characterized my position on this. Regardless of whether or not MVP is the greatest thing since sliced bread and never, ever, in a million years caused anyone to every act unethically or fail to think for themselves, it is still compensation from a vendor and hence something that IT professionals should not engage in. It is a slippery slope and if IT is to ever achieve the status of a profession, something that will eventually have to be addressed. Andy Ps - please add appropriate grains of salt to the validity and intellectual honesty of this answer. I have been accused of being an MVP, which may have compromised my ethics and ability to think for myself. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[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=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
