RE: Exchange 2000 and permissions
Don't know how to do it for all mailboxes at once, but for singe mailbox you have to check user in AD, Security tab and Exchange Advanced, Mailbox Rights - Full mailbox access. jang -Original Message- From: Benjamin Zachary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 1:13 AM Posted To: NTSysAdmin Conversation: Exchange 2000 and permissions Subject:Exchange 2000 and permissions Single site/single db on win2k/e2k. Where can I add permissions to allow someone to logon to all mailboxes. I have one exchange server that somehow blew up permissions, and not even the ex service acct can get in. When I bounced the box, it came back, but now I can only get it into like 3-4 mailboxes.. Im trying to verify permissions.. Want to unsub? Do that here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/scripts/lyris.pl?enter=ntsysadmin&text_mode=0&lang=english Want to unsub? Do that here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/scripts/lyris.pl?enter=ntsysadmin&text_mode=0&lang=english
RE: Exchange 2000 Question - Thanks
Thanks -Original Message- From: Andrey Ilichov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 September 2001 08:52 To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Question Try remove full mailbox access rights from SELF. AD users and computers -> view -> advanced features. Open properties page of user. Exchange Advanced -> mailbox rights. Andrew. -Original Message- From: Stuart Pittwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:29 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2000 Question In Exchange 2000 what is the quickest way to prevent a user logging onto their mailbox while we check out a complaint against them? In 5.5 I used to just changed the NT Account to my own account so that logon would fail Thanks Stu http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange 2000 Question
Try remove full mailbox access rights from SELF. AD users and computers -> view -> advanced features. Open properties page of user. Exchange Advanced -> mailbox rights. Andrew. -Original Message- From: Stuart Pittwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:29 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2000 Question In Exchange 2000 what is the quickest way to prevent a user logging onto their mailbox while we check out a complaint against them? In 5.5 I used to just changed the NT Account to my own account so that logon would fail Thanks Stu http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange 2000
Check
out Mercury/Pegasus Mail systems for a full-featured mail server (not a
discussion or App server, a la Exchange and Domino, however). If you're looking
for a smaller server that can be administered by the brain-dead, get ArGo Mail
Server (I even use that when I just need an SMTP server). For simplified Web
access, but alas no POP or IMAP support, Deerfield's EMail Guardian (now in
beta) looks promising. Their MDaemon mail server has POP (and IMAP, IIRC)
capabilities and is a little more full-featured (neither are free, but they're
alot cheaper than Exchange-both in initial costs and support). It may also have
a web client, but I can't recall right now.
Exchange (especially 2000) is too resource and
support-intensive to be used as a SMB mail server. The only thing Exchange
offers which is hard to replicate with other, smaller programs, is the
Calendaring. If someone has suggestions to replaceOh, and I think
Exchange has caught up a bit more to Domino lately, and GroupWise holds a steady
3rd place. -Original Message-From: Kelly
Borndale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Sunday, September 09,
2001 11:08 PMTo: NT System Admin IssuesSubject: Re:
Exchange 2000
To go a bit beyond "vanilla", many of them can also be set
up as IMAP servers and have list serv type software as well. All for
free.
K.Borndale
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -home
email
- Original Message -
From:
Lefkovics, William
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 10:47
PM
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000
>>Even I-mail, a plain vanilla (boring) email server
isn't farbehind in price!If a client just wants a basic POP/SMTP
server, the price for the productwould be almost nothing. Postfix
and Sendmail on some free *nix works justfine.Beer for Clayton
and Joe.William-Original Message-From:
Joe L. CasaleTo: NT System Admin IssuesSent: 9/9/01 12:55
AMSubject: RE: Exchange 2000I think 1300.00 bucks Canadian last
I checked for E2k?Expensive?Considering what you can do w/ it, I
think not!Geesh! Even I-mail, a plain vanilla (boring) email server
isn't farbehind in price! As far as the sec holes in OL, well I am not
worried,part of the cost of doing biz I think. The man hours associated
w/exchange are practically nill! Automated backups, I verify 'em for
funonce and a while, and maybe if I am bored, Ill pull it offline for
adefrag. Think I did that 5 times in my life! Maybe while your
investingin all the man hours keeping your working, I peruse my eyes
through M$'ssite and look for new OL
holes!Jlc-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 3:40 PMTo: NT System Admin
IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange 2000I've been on systems with
Exchange, Groupwise and Notes. Currentlyworking with Notes
R5. I dont really like any of them - they are
alltoocumbersome. I havent worked with any of the new
web clients yet - onething I really dislike is the monster client they
all have. I am happythat I dont have to try to keep up with
all the Outlook securityproblemsthough. We have had zero
security problems with Notes R5. I wouldrather have a
simple email system such as Novell IMS which requires noadministration
if you are using NDS. Then use a webserver for intranetand
database front end to take the place of the Notes databases.
Weuseall the features of Notes but it takes a huge amount of
supportmanhours.Last I read, Notes has about 60 million seats
and Exchange has about 35million. Everyone else is an
also-ran. Whatever features one hasoverthe other will
probably be shortlived, as they tend to converge on thefeature set that
the users want. I'm glad I dont have to select
oneover the other right now. They are all bloated, too expensive,
and ablackhole for support
hours.
"Michael
L.
Callahan"
To: "NT System AdminIssues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ista.com>
Subject: RE: Exchange
2000
09/08/2001
02:26
PM
Please
respond
to
"NT
System
Admin Issues"http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htmhttp://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
Re: Exchange 2000
To go a bit beyond "vanilla", many of them can also be set up as IMAP servers and have list serv type software as well. All for free. K.Borndale [EMAIL PROTECTED] -home email - Original Message - From: Lefkovics, William To: NT System Admin Issues Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 10:47 PM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 >>Even I-mail, a plain vanilla (boring) email server isn't farbehind in price!If a client just wants a basic POP/SMTP server, the price for the productwould be almost nothing. Postfix and Sendmail on some free *nix works justfine.Beer for Clayton and Joe.William-Original Message-From: Joe L. CasaleTo: NT System Admin IssuesSent: 9/9/01 12:55 AMSubject: RE: Exchange 2000I think 1300.00 bucks Canadian last I checked for E2k?Expensive?Considering what you can do w/ it, I think not!Geesh! Even I-mail, a plain vanilla (boring) email server isn't farbehind in price! As far as the sec holes in OL, well I am not worried,part of the cost of doing biz I think. The man hours associated w/exchange are practically nill! Automated backups, I verify 'em for funonce and a while, and maybe if I am bored, Ill pull it offline for adefrag. Think I did that 5 times in my life! Maybe while your investingin all the man hours keeping your working, I peruse my eyes through M$'ssite and look for new OL holes!Jlc-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 3:40 PMTo: NT System Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange 2000I've been on systems with Exchange, Groupwise and Notes. Currentlyworking with Notes R5. I dont really like any of them - they are alltoocumbersome. I havent worked with any of the new web clients yet - onething I really dislike is the monster client they all have. I am happythat I dont have to try to keep up with all the Outlook securityproblemsthough. We have had zero security problems with Notes R5. I wouldrather have a simple email system such as Novell IMS which requires noadministration if you are using NDS. Then use a webserver for intranetand database front end to take the place of the Notes databases. Weuseall the features of Notes but it takes a huge amount of supportmanhours.Last I read, Notes has about 60 million seats and Exchange has about 35million. Everyone else is an also-ran. Whatever features one hasoverthe other will probably be shortlived, as they tend to converge on thefeature set that the users want. I'm glad I dont have to select oneover the other right now. They are all bloated, too expensive, and ablackhole for support hours. "Michael L. Callahan" To: "NT System AdminIssues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ista.com> Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 09/08/2001 02:26 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues"http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange 2000
>>Even I-mail, a plain vanilla (boring) email server isn't far behind in price! If a client just wants a basic POP/SMTP server, the price for the product would be almost nothing. Postfix and Sendmail on some free *nix works just fine. Beer for Clayton and Joe. William -Original Message- From: Joe L. Casale To: NT System Admin Issues Sent: 9/9/01 12:55 AM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I think 1300.00 bucks Canadian last I checked for E2k? Expensive? Considering what you can do w/ it, I think not! Geesh! Even I-mail, a plain vanilla (boring) email server isn't far behind in price! As far as the sec holes in OL, well I am not worried, part of the cost of doing biz I think. The man hours associated w/ exchange are practically nill! Automated backups, I verify 'em for fun once and a while, and maybe if I am bored, Ill pull it offline for a defrag. Think I did that 5 times in my life! Maybe while your investing in all the man hours keeping your working, I peruse my eyes through M$'s site and look for new OL holes! Jlc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 3:40 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I've been on systems with Exchange, Groupwise and Notes. Currently working with Notes R5.I dont really like any of them - they are all too cumbersome. I havent worked with any of the new web clients yet - one thing I really dislike is the monster client they all have. I am happy that I dont have to try to keep up with all the Outlook security problems though. We have had zero security problems with Notes R5.I would rather have a simple email system such as Novell IMS which requires no administration if you are using NDS. Then use a webserver for intranet and database front end to take the place of the Notes databases. We use all the features of Notes but it takes a huge amount of support manhours. Last I read, Notes has about 60 million seats and Exchange has about 35 million.Everyone else is an also-ran. Whatever features one has over the other will probably be shortlived, as they tend to converge on the feature set that the users want. I'm glad I dont have to select one over the other right now. They are all bloated, too expensive, and a black hole for support hours. "Michael L. Callahan"To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 09/08/2001 02:26 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange 2000
I think 1300.00 bucks Canadian last I checked for E2k?
Expensive?
Considering what you can do w/ it, I think not!
Geesh! Even I-mail, a plain vanilla (boring) email server isnt far
behind in price! As far as the sec holes in OL, well I am not worried,
part of the cost of doing biz I think. The man hours associated w/
exchange are practically nill! Automated backups, I verify 'em for fun
once and a while, and maybe if I am bored, Ill pull it offline for a
defrag. Think I did that 5 times in my life! Maybe while your investing
in all the man hours keeping your working, I peruse my eyes through M$'s
site and look for new OL holes!
Jlc
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 3:40 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000
I've been on systems with Exchange, Groupwise and Notes. Currently
working with Notes R5.I dont really like any of them - they are all
too
cumbersome. I havent worked with any of the new web clients yet - one
thing I really dislike is the monster client they all have. I am happy
that I dont have to try to keep up with all the Outlook security
problems
though. We have had zero security problems with Notes R5.I would
rather have a simple email system such as Novell IMS which requires no
administration if you are using NDS. Then use a webserver for intranet
and database front end to take the place of the Notes databases. We
use
all the features of Notes but it takes a huge amount of support
manhours.
Last I read, Notes has about 60 million seats and Exchange has about 35
million.Everyone else is an also-ran. Whatever features one has
over
the other will probably be shortlived, as they tend to converge on the
feature set that the users want. I'm glad I dont have to select one
over the other right now. They are all bloated, too expensive, and a
black
hole for support hours.
"Michael L.
Callahan"To: "NT System Admin
Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000
09/08/2001
02:26 PM
Please
respond to
"NT System
Admin Issues"
I guess I'll have to weigh inWilliam Lefkovics has been a
valued poster for years and has proven his worth many times over. You
have not.
Lotus Notes has good collaborative features, but as a mail
server/client, clearly is inferior to Exchange. I speak as one who has
worked with both. Exchange is now catching on in the collaboration
space, and I look for it to supplant Notes there as well - very soon.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:58 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000
I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information.
"William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability
to
look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup
called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating
to
NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM
Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000
NATE:
Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of
outstanding
information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above
looking
at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the
possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally,
what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System
Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000".
If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that
want
to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure
you'll be missed terribly.
-----Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000
Billyboy-
I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments.
They
have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed
circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage
4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from,
because
I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator.
However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very
existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software
they're
pushing. In the high-glamour world of
RE: Exchange 2000
Hey wait neither is he ;) -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:19 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Ok, now you're just toying with me. I'm not the one with over 100 Exchange2000 deployments under my belt! -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:20 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 As you wish, oh great wise Mr. Lefkovics. -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:14 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Water under the bridge. Let's move on. Thanks for the kind words, Kevin. Yes, I've spent about 40 hours on the MS-less office report. I'm not finished though. William -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:15 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Don't really care how your ego was affected by Mr. Lefkovics [1] your comments were totally unwarranted and unwanted. Of the normal posters to this list Williams is one pay check that does not depend as much on Microsoft products. He has researched swapping his entire office to FreeBSD/Linux with star office. We dislike Lnotes over Exchange. Because exchange runs better. We have a theory here. Do it right or don't bother. [1] what you should be calling him to grovel and show respect. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information. "William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability to look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating to NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems. [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 NATE: Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of outstanding information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above looking at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally, what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000". If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that want to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be missed terribly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000
I've been on systems with Exchange, Groupwise and Notes. Currently
working with Notes R5.I dont really like any of them - they are all too
cumbersome. I havent worked with any of the new web clients yet - one
thing I really dislike is the monster client they all have. I am happy
that I dont have to try to keep up with all the Outlook security problems
though. We have had zero security problems with Notes R5.I would
rather have a simple email system such as Novell IMS which requires no
administration if you are using NDS. Then use a webserver for intranet
and database front end to take the place of the Notes databases. We use
all the features of Notes but it takes a huge amount of support manhours.
Last I read, Notes has about 60 million seats and Exchange has about 35
million.Everyone else is an also-ran. Whatever features one has over
the other will probably be shortlived, as they tend to converge on the
feature set that the users want. I'm glad I dont have to select one
over the other right now. They are all bloated, too expensive, and a black
hole for support hours.
"Michael L.
Callahan"To: "NT System Admin Issues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000
09/08/2001
02:26 PM
Please
respond to
"NT System
Admin Issues"
I guess I'll have to weigh inWilliam Lefkovics has been a
valued poster for years and has proven his worth many times over. You
have not.
Lotus Notes has good collaborative features, but as a mail
server/client, clearly is inferior to Exchange. I speak as one who has
worked with both. Exchange is now catching on in the collaboration
space, and I look for it to supplant Notes there as well - very soon.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:58 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000
I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information.
"William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability
to
look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup
called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating
to
NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM
Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000
NATE:
Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of
outstanding
information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above
looking
at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the
possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally,
what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System
Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000".
If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that
want
to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure
you'll be missed terribly.
-Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000
Billyboy-
I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments.
They
have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed
circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage
4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from
RE: Exchange 2000
William attacked your suggestions? My, aren't we a little over sensitive? If you feel that was being attacked, then I feel sorry for you. Active debate is what is going on here, nothing more. As for the Debate of Lotus V Exchange. There are arguments for both, but the trend is to go to MS platforms, as Novell and others are finding out. Exchange is a viable platform, and MS products perform better together than MS products supporting other platforms. That's been the case where ever I have been. Lastly, CAN WE PLEASE DROP THIS CRAP ABOUT LETTERS BEHIND NAMES AND PRODUCT LOYALTEES. It is childish, and serves no purpose other than for people who have ill informed opinions to spout them off when no one else is interested in hearing them. Can I go have my beer now? Clayton Doige IT Manager MCSE, MCP + I Gameday International N.V. Bound in a nutshell, King of infinite space... T: +5 999 736 0309 ext 4537 C: +5 999 563 1845 F: +5 999 733 1259 E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Michael L. Callahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 4:27 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I guess I'll have to weigh inWilliam Lefkovics has been a valued poster for years and has proven his worth many times over. You have not. Lotus Notes has good collaborative features, but as a mail server/client, clearly is inferior to Exchange. I speak as one who has worked with both. Exchange is now catching on in the collaboration space, and I look for it to supplant Notes there as well - very soon. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:58 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information. "William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability to look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating to NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems. [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 NATE: Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of outstanding information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above looking at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally, what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000". If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that want to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be missed terribly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL
RE: Exchange 2000
I guess I'll have to weigh inWilliam Lefkovics has been a valued poster for years and has proven his worth many times over. You have not. Lotus Notes has good collaborative features, but as a mail server/client, clearly is inferior to Exchange. I speak as one who has worked with both. Exchange is now catching on in the collaboration space, and I look for it to supplant Notes there as well - very soon. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:58 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information. "William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability to look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating to NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems. [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 NATE: Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of outstanding information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above looking at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally, what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000". If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that want to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be missed terribly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the
RE: Exchange 2000
Title: RE: Exchange 2000 I think that every thread that goes through (or almost every one) has William at one end or the other... and I would sleep much better at night with him at the wheel of MY network. Kudos as always to William !! -Original Message-From: Zangara, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:38 PMTo: NT System Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange 2000 First positive comments I have ever heard about Lotus. Had a buddy who tried to implement it at his old site and was fired for the ONLY reason that they hated the client interface. Personally I find Williams comments insightful and always helpful and calling him demeaning names (Billy) makes me wonder about you. I am an MCSE but also a CNA but I don't publicize that because Novell is stone knives and bearskins compared to MS in my opinion and no I don't make a cent from MS. Jim Zangara, MCSE+I Special Projects Engineer Premiere Radio Networks A Division of Clear Channel Communications 15260 Ventura Blvd Suite 500 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Direct: (818) 461-8620 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anyth
RE: Exchange 2000
Anyone want a free security audit. Just call Mr. Ellery July a playboy model then annoy don. You can get a free 10,000$ security audit. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 5:03 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I feel your pain... Of course, I got back at that particular individual another way. I'm sure the executives were displeased with the security audit they received from an outside source. ;o) D -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 2:03 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I had the reformat command all loaded on his server waiting for someone to press enter for me. Just could not do it. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 4:18 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 You know... The last time we requested one of these formal apologies, I was privied enough to hack someone's network for failure to comply. ;o) Actually, it wasn't really hacking since the last individuals "secure" servers had port 135 wide open for me. Hmmm. What to do, what to do... -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:08 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 W dude.. Settle down there cowboy. You just bad mouthed one of the best guys we have on this list. As far as myself being an ECNE and a MCSE having used GroupWise, Lnotes, and exchange, the Microsoft product is far superior. Not on only in function but in support. Ever seen a forum like this for a NetWare product? Or the extensive online knowledge base? I fond it very difficult to not lash out at you in anger and destroy your entire network, then show this message to your bosses and have you fired. Your message and opinions should be kept to your self, we here do not want to hear them. Thanks. BTW you owe William an apology, a very well written formal, publicly posted one. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:34 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just complet
RE: Exchange 2000
I feel your pain... Of course, I got back at that particular individual another way. I'm sure the executives were displeased with the security audit they received from an outside source. ;o) D -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 2:03 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I had the reformat command all loaded on his server waiting for someone to press enter for me. Just could not do it. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 4:18 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 You know... The last time we requested one of these formal apologies, I was privied enough to hack someone's network for failure to comply. ;o) Actually, it wasn't really hacking since the last individuals "secure" servers had port 135 wide open for me. Hmmm. What to do, what to do... -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:08 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 W dude.. Settle down there cowboy. You just bad mouthed one of the best guys we have on this list. As far as myself being an ECNE and a MCSE having used GroupWise, Lnotes, and exchange, the Microsoft product is far superior. Not on only in function but in support. Ever seen a forum like this for a NetWare product? Or the extensive online knowledge base? I fond it very difficult to not lash out at you in anger and destroy your entire network, then show this message to your bosses and have you fired. Your message and opinions should be kept to your self, we here do not want to hear them. Thanks. BTW you owe William an apology, a very well written formal, publicly posted one. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:34 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for
RE: Exchange 2000
I had the reformat command all loaded on his server waiting for someone to press enter for me. Just could not do it. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 4:18 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 You know... The last time we requested one of these formal apologies, I was privied enough to hack someone's network for failure to comply. ;o) Actually, it wasn't really hacking since the last individuals "secure" servers had port 135 wide open for me. Hmmm. What to do, what to do... -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:08 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 W dude.. Settle down there cowboy. You just bad mouthed one of the best guys we have on this list. As far as myself being an ECNE and a MCSE having used GroupWise, Lnotes, and exchange, the Microsoft product is far superior. Not on only in function but in support. Ever seen a forum like this for a NetWare product? Or the extensive online knowledge base? I fond it very difficult to not lash out at you in anger and destroy your entire network, then show this message to your bosses and have you fired. Your message and opinions should be kept to your self, we here do not want to hear them. Thanks. BTW you owe William an apology, a very well written formal, publicly posted one. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:34 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [
RE: Exchange 2000
You know... The last time we requested one of these formal apologies, I was privied enough to hack someone's network for failure to comply. ;o) Actually, it wasn't really hacking since the last individuals "secure" servers had port 135 wide open for me. Hmmm. What to do, what to do... -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:08 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 W dude.. Settle down there cowboy. You just bad mouthed one of the best guys we have on this list. As far as myself being an ECNE and a MCSE having used GroupWise, Lnotes, and exchange, the Microsoft product is far superior. Not on only in function but in support. Ever seen a forum like this for a NetWare product? Or the extensive online knowledge base? I fond it very difficult to not lash out at you in anger and destroy your entire network, then show this message to your bosses and have you fired. Your message and opinions should be kept to your self, we here do not want to hear them. Thanks. BTW you owe William an apology, a very well written formal, publicly posted one. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:34 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in that of your company, users, and IT staff) to look into alternative E-mail pla
RE: Exchange 2000
Well said Kevin ! All I can say is *.csc.com = /dev/null Mike -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:08 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 W dude.. Settle down there cowboy. You just bad mouthed one of the best guys we have on this list. As far as myself being an ECNE and a MCSE having used GroupWise, Lnotes, and exchange, the Microsoft product is far superior. Not on only in function but in support. Ever seen a forum like this for a NetWare product? Or the extensive online knowledge base? I fond it very difficult to not lash out at you in anger and destroy your entire network, then show this message to your bosses and have you fired. Your message and opinions should be kept to your self, we here do not want to hear them. Thanks. BTW you owe William an apology, a very well written formal, publicly posted one. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:34 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in that of your company, users, and IT staff) to look into alternative E-mail platforms. My first suggestion would be Lotus Domino. Their server software is more stable, easier to administer, and MORE SECURE than any of the competetion I have seen. Also, the functionality of the client software is far superior to anything e-mail comi
RE: Exchange 2000
Hey now, I don't wanna move on. I want in on this fun. I wasn't paying attention when I should have been. I've got plenty of "kind" words for Nate and his piece of crap software product Scrotum Goats... Let me play, just a little. I promise it will be "real nice" Yeah right... -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:14 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Water under the bridge. Let's move on. Thanks for the kind words, Kevin. Yes, I've spent about 40 hours on the MS-less office report. I'm not finished though. William -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:15 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Don't really care how your ego was affected by Mr. Lefkovics [1] your comments were totally unwarranted and unwanted. Of the normal posters to this list Williams is one pay check that does not depend as much on Microsoft products. He has researched swapping his entire office to FreeBSD/Linux with star office. We dislike Lnotes over Exchange. Because exchange runs better. We have a theory here. Do it right or don't bother. [1] what you should be calling him to grovel and show respect. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information. "William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability to look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating to NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems. [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 NATE: Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of outstanding information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above looking at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally, what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000". If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that want to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be missed terribly. -----Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect&qu
RE: Exchange 2000
Yeah but I dont have my name on the cover an exchange2k book as the author. : > -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:19 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Ok, now you're just toying with me. I'm not the one with over 100 Exchange2000 deployments under my belt! -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:20 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 As you wish, oh great wise Mr. Lefkovics. -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:14 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Water under the bridge. Let's move on. Thanks for the kind words, Kevin. Yes, I've spent about 40 hours on the MS-less office report. I'm not finished though. William -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:15 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Don't really care how your ego was affected by Mr. Lefkovics [1] your comments were totally unwarranted and unwanted. Of the normal posters to this list Williams is one pay check that does not depend as much on Microsoft products. He has researched swapping his entire office to FreeBSD/Linux with star office. We dislike Lnotes over Exchange. Because exchange runs better. We have a theory here. Do it right or don't bother. [1] what you should be calling him to grovel and show respect. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information. "William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability to look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating to NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems. [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 NATE: Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of outstanding information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above looking at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally, what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000". If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that want to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be missed terribly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: &
RE: Exchange 2000
Ok, now you're just toying with me. I'm not the one with over 100 Exchange2000 deployments under my belt! -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:20 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 As you wish, oh great wise Mr. Lefkovics. -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:14 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Water under the bridge. Let's move on. Thanks for the kind words, Kevin. Yes, I've spent about 40 hours on the MS-less office report. I'm not finished though. William -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:15 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Don't really care how your ego was affected by Mr. Lefkovics [1] your comments were totally unwarranted and unwanted. Of the normal posters to this list Williams is one pay check that does not depend as much on Microsoft products. He has researched swapping his entire office to FreeBSD/Linux with star office. We dislike Lnotes over Exchange. Because exchange runs better. We have a theory here. Do it right or don't bother. [1] what you should be calling him to grovel and show respect. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information. "William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability to look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating to NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems. [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 NATE: Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of outstanding information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above looking at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally, what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000". If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that want to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be missed terribly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfec
RE: Exchange 2000
As you wish, oh great wise Mr. Lefkovics. -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:14 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Water under the bridge. Let's move on. Thanks for the kind words, Kevin. Yes, I've spent about 40 hours on the MS-less office report. I'm not finished though. William -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:15 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Don't really care how your ego was affected by Mr. Lefkovics [1] your comments were totally unwarranted and unwanted. Of the normal posters to this list Williams is one pay check that does not depend as much on Microsoft products. He has researched swapping his entire office to FreeBSD/Linux with star office. We dislike Lnotes over Exchange. Because exchange runs better. We have a theory here. Do it right or don't bother. [1] what you should be calling him to grovel and show respect. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information. "William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability to look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating to NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems. [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 NATE: Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of outstanding information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above looking at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally, what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000". If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that want to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be missed terribly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for som
RE: Exchange 2000
Attacked??!!?? So if anyone has an opinion different than yours, and seeks to discuss this with you, does that qualify as an attack??? Williams supposed attack statements (questions?) ... 1. How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. 2. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. 3. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. 4. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! 5. Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. 6. Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? (a NON Microsoft recommendation in a NT System Admin List) Actually, now that I look at it, William should be thrown out of this list. How dare he recommend a non-Microsoft product in this list? Doesn't he know where he gets his $$$? **Mental note to self, do not question Mr. Nate ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) when he has all of 9 total posts in this forum (all of them today I might add). Thank you Mr. Nate for protecting us again the evil of questioning your authoritah.. OK I have had my fill Andre Correa Senior Manager/Information Technology Lexitron, Inc (201) 892-6399 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject:RE: Exchange 2000 I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information. "William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability to look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating to NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems. [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 NATE: Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of outstanding information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above looking at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally, what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000". If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that want to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be missed terribly. -Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the bes
RE: Exchange 2000
Water under the bridge. Let's move on. Thanks for the kind words, Kevin. Yes, I've spent about 40 hours on the MS-less office report. I'm not finished though. William -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:15 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Don't really care how your ego was affected by Mr. Lefkovics [1] your comments were totally unwarranted and unwanted. Of the normal posters to this list Williams is one pay check that does not depend as much on Microsoft products. He has researched swapping his entire office to FreeBSD/Linux with star office. We dislike Lnotes over Exchange. Because exchange runs better. We have a theory here. Do it right or don't bother. [1] what you should be calling him to grovel and show respect. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information. "William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability to look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating to NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems. [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 NATE: Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of outstanding information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above looking at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally, what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000". If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that want to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be missed terribly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Assoc
RE: Exchange 2000
Dont really care how your ego was affected by Mr. Lefkovics [1] your comments were totally unwarranted and unwanted. Of the normal posters to this list Williams is one pay check that does not depend as much on Microsoft products. He has researched swapping his entire office to FreeBSD/Linux with star office. We dislike Lnotes over Exchange. Because exchange runs better. We have a theory here. Do it right or dont bother. [1] what you should be calling him to grovel and show respect. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information. "William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability to look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating to NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems. [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 NATE: Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of outstanding information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above looking at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally, what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000". If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that want to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be missed terribly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients
RE: Exchange 2000
Forgot this. If possible don't put E2k on a DC. If you must it's ok but not a best practice. -Original Message- From: Jim Mediger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:03 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2000 We are looking at implementing Exchange 2000 and I have a few questions, and wanted advice from people who have had real world experience. We are currently running NT 4.0 Svr and Wkstn. I have setup a Windows 2000 Domain (still in testing phase). We have about 100 users. My Questions: 1. I have a PII with 2 300mhz processors and 384mb ram. Will this be ample enough to handle Exchange 2000 and future growth? How much Hard Drive space would you recomend? 2. We plan on Going from NT 4.0 to Windows XP. Can we connect to Exchange 2000 with the NT 4.0 Clients during the interim? Any issues I should be aware of? Any issues with WXP? 3. We have 50-60 users on Outlook 2002 with internet access etc., and 40-50 users on other clients (internal e-mail and intranet only). Does Exchange play well with other e-mail clients? 4. Any other Gottcha's, Do's, Don'ts? All advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jim http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange 2000
W dude.. Settle down there cowboy. You just bad mouthed one of the best guys we have on this list. As far as myself being an ECNE and a MCSE having used GroupWise, Lnotes, and exchange, the Microsoft product is far superior. Not on only in function but in support. Ever seen a forum like this for a NetWare product? Or the extensive online knowledge base? I fond it very difficult to not lash out at you in anger and destroy your entire network, then show this message to your bosses and have you fired. Your message and opinions should be kept to your self, we here do not want to hear them. Thanks. BTW you owe William an apology, a very well written formal, publicly posted one. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:34 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in that of your company, users, and IT staff) to look into alternative E-mail platforms. My first suggestion would be Lotus Domino. Their server software is more stable, easier to administer, and MORE SECURE than any of the competetion I have seen. Also, the functionality of the client software is far superior to anything e-mail coming out of Redmond, WA. If your server that you mentioned is now idle and will be performing ONLY email functionality, that is perfect for 100 users, and I would bet you could squeeze in another 100. My suggestion for hard-disk space
RE: Exchange 2000
I never said he wasn't a constant source of outstanding information. "William" attacked my suggestions. Therefore, I attacked his inability to look anywhere but his own paycheck. What did I expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Issues"? Well, I expected conversation relating to NT Systems. And last time I checked, Lotus Domino runs on NT Systems. [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/07/2001 12:49:29 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 NATE: Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of outstanding information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above looking at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally, what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000". If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that want to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be missed terribly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in th
RE: Exchange 2000
Inline -Original Message- From: Jim Mediger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:03 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2000 We are looking at implementing Exchange 2000 and I have a few questions, and wanted advice from people who have had real world experience. We are currently running NT 4.0 Svr and Wkstn. I have setup a Windows 2000 Domain (still in testing phase). We have about 100 users. My Questions: 1. I have a PII with 2 300mhz processors and 384mb ram. Will this be ample enough to handle Exchange 2000 and future growth? How much Hard Drive space would you recomend? multiply the number of users you want Exchange 2k to support times the max mailbox size per user and multiply that by 2.2 and put the database on a hardware Raid5 array. put the logs on a HW mirror and the OS and Exchange on another HW mirror. 2. We plan on Going from NT 4.0 to Windows XP. Can we connect to Exchange 2000 with the NT 4.0 Clients during the interim? Any issues I should be aware of? Any issues with WXP? Nope. 3. We have 50-60 users on Outlook 2002 with internet access etc., and 40-50 users on other clients (internal e-mail and intranet only). Does Exchange play well with other e-mail clients? Yes, ldap, smtp, pop, imap, mapi, whatever. 4. Any other Gottcha's, Do's, Don'ts? All advice will be greatly appreciated. Get Windows 2k AD and DNS solid before doing Exchange 2k. Thanks, Jim http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange 2000
Let's get ready to rmbllle . It has been my observation that Microsoft guys make more Microsoft suggestions than not, but in my opinion, who better to recommend? I can't imagine giving a UNIX or LINUX guy a copy of 2000 Server and say, "Go implement 2000 user; 3 domain tree forest and good luck". And I think that if there are classes to instruct administrators and engineers on how to best implement the product, then you should go. I apologize for making this generalization, but I just don't understand why anti-Microsoft people always seem to attack the PERSON possessing the opposing view? I have used Linux and UNIX, and they are great OSes, but I would still look at a Microsoft product first in most situations, to see if it solves the problem, because it is what I know and what I feel comfortable with. Want to take a guess at what a UNIX, LINUX, or Lotus person would do? I just don't get it. Why is there a need for "Billy" and "just because you have all kinds of ACRONYMS " which translates into, "just because you decided to educate yourself in your field of choice and have taken certification exams in order to be recognized by the product manufacturer as possessing expert knowledge in this particular subject " Flame Off Andre Correa Senior Manager/Information Technology Lexitron, Inc (201) 892-6399 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:34 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject:RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message
RE: Exchange 2000
Title: RE: Exchange 2000 Nathan, My vote goes with Williams. He is always there with meaningful solutions. So what, if he is bit sarcastic?. Whether he reads white papers or yellow papers, one should agree, he is quite knowledgeable guy on subjects discussed here. Sorry to say this, demeaning other’s name, only reflects your own personality. Mal -Original Message- From: Zangara, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:38 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 First positive comments I have ever heard about Lotus. Had a buddy who tried to implement it at his old site and was fired for the ONLY reason that they hated the client interface. Personally I find Williams comments insightful and always helpful and calling him demeaning names (Billy) makes me wonder about you. I am an MCSE but also a CNA but I don't publicize that because Novell is stone knives and bearskins compared to MS in my opinion and no I don't make a cent from MS. Jim Zangara, MCSE+I Special Projects Engineer Premiere Radio Networks A Division of Clear Channel Communications 15260 Ventura Blvd Suite 500 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Direct: (818) 461-8620 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anything Exchange, I thin
RE: Exchange 2000
Who is Billyboy? You're ability to assume things about people is too overwhelming for me to go on. Responding to that is hardly worth the effort. Was that the bell? I think recess is over. Off you go. William -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in that of your company, users, and IT staff) to look into alternative E-mail platforms. My first suggestion would be Lotus Domino. Their server software is more stable, easier to administer, and MORE SECURE than any of the competetion I have seen. Also, the functionality of the client software is far superior to anything e-mail coming out of Redmond, WA. If your server that you mentioned is now idle and will be performing ONLY email functionality, that is perfect for 100 users, and I would bet you could squeeze in another 100. My suggestion for hard-disk space is a mirrored system volume (2 disks). For the data, I would suggest allocation 100 meg for each user. Disk space is cheap, eat it up. Running 4 10 gig drives RAID5 would be a beautiful thing. Buy 2 extra, just in case. I would also recommend, if you want to upgrade desktops, to go with Windows 2000. Upgrading, loading, installing, whatever you want to call it, WinXP could turn out to be a nightmare. Especially with Microsoft's new Product Activation &q
RE: Exchange 2000
Title: RE: Exchange 2000 NATE: Boy are you EVER OUT OF LINE. William is a constant source of outstanding information, and has been for a long time. Secondly, he's not above looking at non-ms solutions, and has in fact spent a lot of time researching the possibility of implementing a totally non-MS dependent office. Finally, what kind of responses did you expect from a newsgroup called "NT System Admin Isssues", or a subject called "Exchange 2000". If you want to commiserate with all the other Lotus Notes folks that want to whine about their declining marketshare, go somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be missed terribly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in that of your company, users, and IT staff) to look into alternative E-mail platforms. My first suggestion would be Lotus Domino. Their server software is more stable, easier to administer, and MORE SECURE than any of the competetion I have seen. Also, the functionality of the client software is far superior to anything e-mail coming out of Redmond, WA. If your server that you mentioned is now idle and will be performing ONLY email functionality, that is perfect for 100 users, and I would bet you could squeeze in another 100. My suggestion for hard-disk space is a mirrored s
RE: Exchange 2000
Title: RE: Exchange 2000 First positive comments I have ever heard about Lotus. Had a buddy who tried to implement it at his old site and was fired for the ONLY reason that they hated the client interface. Personally I find Williams comments insightful and always helpful and calling him demeaning names (Billy) makes me wonder about you. I am an MCSE but also a CNA but I don't publicize that because Novell is stone knives and bearskins compared to MS in my opinion and no I don't make a cent from MS. Jim Zangara, MCSE+I Special Projects Engineer Premiere Radio Networks A Division of Clear Channel Communications 15260 Ventura Blvd Suite 500 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Direct: (818) 461-8620 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:34 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in that of your company, users, and IT staff) to look into alternative E-mail platforms. My first suggestion would be Lotus Domino. Their server software is more stable, easier to administer, and MORE SECURE than any of the competetion I have seen. Also, the functionality of the client software is far superior to anything e-mail coming out of Redmond, WA. If your server that you mentioned is now idle and will be performing ONLY email functionality, that is perfect for 100 users, and I would bet you c
RE: Exchange 2000
Billyboy- I did a little research on Holaday before I posted my comments. They have 100 employees in the heart of Minnesota, they manufacture printed circuit boards, and their web page was created using Microsoft Frontpage 4.0. I understand where your frustrated comments are coming from, because I understand where YOU are coming from as a systems administrator. However, I find it very difficult to take advice from someone whos very existence is dependant upon the particular company whose software they're pushing. In the high-glamour world of MCSEs, the "needs or potential email usage patterns" speech sounds great. In the real world, assumptions are made, budgets are undercut, and profits increase. This, Billy, is called business. And business is why you wake up in the morning. Now to someone with all those acronyms after their name, this might not make sense. You are also going to have to understand that whoever is in charge of the IT budget at this company is not about to shell out money for a new server to run Exchange when they can use the old one to run Domino. As to the "people" who prefer Outlook over Lotus Notes...where do I begin? I suppose I must start, again, with the acronyms following your name. Billy, if you had a Novell Certification, you'd be ranting and raving about Groupwise. Just because you went to 236 classes, read the whitepages, AND subscribe to TechNet does not mean that Exchange provides the best of anything. It just means that your job DEPENDS on it. "Lefkovics, William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 12:14:46 PM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in that of your company, users, and IT staff) to look into alternative E-mail platforms. My first suggestion would be Lotus Domino. Their server software is more stable, easier to administer, and MORE SECURE than any of the competetion I have seen. Also, the functionality of the client software is far superior to anything e-mail coming out of Redmond, WA. If your server that you mentioned is now idle and will be performing ONLY email functionality, that is perfect for 100 users, and I would bet you could squeeze in another 100. My suggestion for hard-disk space is a mirrored system volume (2 disks). For the data, I would suggest allocation 100 meg for each user. Disk space is cheap, eat it up. Running 4 10 gig drives RAID5 would be a beautiful thing. Buy 2 extra, just in case. I would also recommend, if you want to upgrade desktops, to go with Windows 2000. Upgrading, loading, installing, whatever you want to call it, WinXP could turn out to be a nightmare. Especially with Microsoft's new Product Activation "feature". In a business environment, there is no reason, as far as I have seen, to put WinXP on the desktop. Windows 2000 has proven itself to me to be an adequate choice for end use. I must stress again the importance of exploring your options. Just because your OS says Microsoft on it doesn't mean your Backend product has to. Nathan W. Jim Mediger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&
RE: Exchange 2000
How can you suggest that those hardware specs would be good for 100 users without knowing their company's needs or potential email usage patterns? Your word: "perfect". Potentially adequate might be better. WindowsXP is an excellent desktop for the business environment. The additional features from Windows2000 do not provide a huge step, but things like remote desktop built-in and the added commandline functions work very well for some. That and Windows2000 will not be available OEM anymore, I would suggest you get used to the idea of the activation feature, which is totally painless in the corporate environment. More painless than Oracle, Computer Associates, and the pre-XP Metaframe registration requirements. As for your recommendation of Lotus Domino... if that's what you're used to. I just completed another migration from Lotus to Exchange and yet another customer wonders why the hell they stuck with Lotus so long. Outlook provides the best email client interface available. I've had clients prefer Outlook as their Lotus Domino email client! Lotus used to have the largest market share for collaborative messaging applications. They don't anymore. Can you guess who does? Exploring your options is very good. "Best tool for the job" definitely. So, do they need the collaborative functionality, or would PostFix on OpenBSD or Sendmail on Linux for free be adequate? William Lefkovics -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in that of your company, users, and IT staff) to look into alternative E-mail platforms. My first suggestion would be Lotus Domino. Their server software is more stable, easier to administer, and MORE SECURE than any of the competetion I have seen. Also, the functionality of the client software is far superior to anything e-mail coming out of Redmond, WA. If your server that you mentioned is now idle and will be performing ONLY email functionality, that is perfect for 100 users, and I would bet you could squeeze in another 100. My suggestion for hard-disk space is a mirrored system volume (2 disks). For the data, I would suggest allocation 100 meg for each user. Disk space is cheap, eat it up. Running 4 10 gig drives RAID5 would be a beautiful thing. Buy 2 extra, just in case. I would also recommend, if you want to upgrade desktops, to go with Windows 2000. Upgrading, loading, installing, whatever you want to call it, WinXP could turn out to be a nightmare. Especially with Microsoft's new Product Activation "feature". In a business environment, there is no reason, as far as I have seen, to put WinXP on the desktop. Windows 2000 has proven itself to me to be an adequate choice for end use. I must stress again the importance of exploring your options. Just because your OS says Microsoft on it doesn't mean your Backend product has to. Nathan W. Jim Mediger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 09:03:02 AM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: Exchange 2000 We are looking at implementing Exchange 2000 and I have a few questions, and wanted advice from people who have had real world experience. We are currently running NT 4.0 Svr and Wkstn. I have setup a Windows 2000 Domain (still in testing phase). We have about 100 users. My Questions: 1. I have a PII with 2 300mhz processors and 384mb ram. Will this be ample enough to handle Exchange 2000 and future growth? How much Hard Drive space would you recomend? 2. We plan on Going from NT 4.0 to Windows XP. Can we connect to Exchange 2000 with the NT 4.0 Clients during the interim? Any issues I should be aware of? Any issues with WXP? 3. We have 50-60 users on Outlook 2002 with internet access etc., and 40-50 users on other clients (internal e-mail and intranet only). Does Exchange play well with other e-mail clients? 4. Any other Gottcha's, Do's, Don'ts? All advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jim http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange 2000
1) That hardware is only adequate. Definitely a RAID for the Information Stores would be beneficial. At least separate controllers for the logs and databases. Hard drive space can not be assessed without policy, need, and behavior patterns of users in your company. Some people leverage all the features of their email system, while others just want to use basic email. Allowing 100MB per user for initial disk space requirements would likely be acceptible in your case (only as a basic guideline). 2) Exchange doesn't care what OS the clients run on. It's really the protocols that the email client communicates with. Outlook in Corporate/Workgroup mode is by far the best and provides the most features from a user perspective. WindowsXP, with it's remote desktop feature and added command line functionality (more so than its predecessors), is an excellent OS for the business desktop. 3) If the users are on the local LAN, you should use Outlook using MAPI (C/W mode) regardless of whether they have internal only or both. Exchange plays very well with any IMAP or POP compliant client. From Netscape on Linux to Outlook Express on Windows95. By far, Outlook using MAPI is preferred for all the features. 4) Do NOT underestimate proper Active Directory setup and proper DNS deployment. Ensure you have an AD disaster recovery strategy before going forward with Exchange2000. Read the many whitepapers at: www.microsoft.com/exchange Exchange2000 FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/e2kfaq.htm William Lefkovics, MCSE, A+ co-author Configuring Exchange2000, Syngress Media -Original Message- From: Jim Mediger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:03 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2000 We are looking at implementing Exchange 2000 and I have a few questions, and wanted advice from people who have had real world experience. We are currently running NT 4.0 Svr and Wkstn. I have setup a Windows 2000 Domain (still in testing phase). We have about 100 users. My Questions: 1. I have a PII with 2 300mhz processors and 384mb ram. Will this be ample enough to handle Exchange 2000 and future growth? How much Hard Drive space would you recomend? 2. We plan on Going from NT 4.0 to Windows XP. Can we connect to Exchange 2000 with the NT 4.0 Clients during the interim? Any issues I should be aware of? Any issues with WXP? 3. We have 50-60 users on Outlook 2002 with internet access etc., and 40-50 users on other clients (internal e-mail and intranet only). Does Exchange play well with other e-mail clients? 4. Any other Gottcha's, Do's, Don'ts? All advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jim http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
Re: Exchange 2000
Title: FW: Exchange 2000 I agree w/ exploring alternate solution esp. Notes. Initially we thought it to be a bad decision to launch Notes but it turns out a choice of many in org. It provides inbuilt archiving, offline/online email support, since it works seamlessly with any kind of IP network you can make it independently with any kind of dial-up service provider - Delegations etc is cakewalk.. so more and so forth. It won;t hurt if you do a beta test with evaluation copy of Notes in your environment. Subject: FW: Exchange 2000 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 8:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in that of your company, users, and IT staff) to look into alternative E-mail platforms. My first suggestion would be Lotus Domino. Their server software is more stable, easier to administer, and MORE SECURE than any of the competetion I have seen. Also, the functionality of the client software is far superior to anything e-mail coming out of Redmond, WA. If your server that you mentioned is now idle and will be performing ONLY email functionality, that is perfect for 100 users, and I would bet you could squeeze in another 100. My suggestion for hard-disk space is a mirrored system volume (2 disks). For the data, I would suggest allocation 100 meg for each user. Disk space is cheap, eat it up. Running 4 10 gig drives RAID5 would be a beautiful thing. Buy 2 extra, just in case. I would also recommend, if you want to upgrade desktops, to go with Windows 2000. Upgrading, loading, installing, whatever you want to call it, WinXP could turn out to be a nightmare. Especially with Microsoft's new Product Activation "feature". In a business environment, there is no reason, as far as I have seen, to put WinXP on the desktop. Windows 2000 has proven itself to me to be an adequate choice for end use. I must stress again the importance of exploring your options. Just because your OS says Microsoft on it doesn't mean your Backend product has to. Nathan W. Jim Mediger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 09:03:02 AM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: Exchange 2000 We are looking at implementing Exchange 2000 and I have a few questions, and wanted advice from people who have had real world experience. We are currently running NT 4.0 Svr and Wkstn. I have setup a Windows 2000 Domain (still in testing phase). We have about 100 users. My Questions: 1. I have a PII with 2 300mhz processors and 384mb ram. Will this be ample enough to handle Exchange 2000 and future growth? How much Hard Drive space would you recomend? 2. We plan on Going from NT 4.0 to Windows XP. Can we connect to Exchange 2000 with the NT 4.0 Clients during the interim? Any issues I should be aware of? Any issues with WXP? 3. We have 50-60 users on Outlook 2002 with internet access etc., and 40-50 users on other clients (internal e-mail and intranet only). Does Exchange play well with other e-mail clients? 4. Any other Gottcha's, Do's, Don'ts? All advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jim http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htmhttp://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange 2000
My opinions to your questions. 1. For now that should get you by. The best thing to do is set it all up and do some performance monitoring on it for a week or two. Get your average load and go from there. 2. Don't really understand what your saying here. However you don't have to use Outlook to connect to exchange. Any email client capable of using LDAP can connect an exchange server. 3. Same as #2 Hardware setup is crucial and must be well thought out before you put the system into production. I would listen to the advice another poster gave about using 2 raid arrays. I have the exact same setup ( system - Raid 1, data - Raid 5). Do you self a favor and buy an extra drive for the data array and set it up as a hot spare, drives are cheap. Also, how did you decide to upgrade to XP? Unless your a beta tester how did you evaluate the OS. Make sure you really understand XP and what advantages/disadvantages (regworm) come with it before making a finial decision. Matt Wehnes System Administrator Morton Machining & MFG (309) 266-6551 x12 -Original Message- From: Jim Mediger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 8:03 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2000 We are looking at implementing Exchange 2000 and I have a few questions, and wanted advice from people who have had real world experience. We are currently running NT 4.0 Svr and Wkstn. I have setup a Windows 2000 Domain (still in testing phase). We have about 100 users. My Questions: 1. I have a PII with 2 300mhz processors and 384mb ram. Will this be ample enough to handle Exchange 2000 and future growth? How much Hard Drive space would you recomend? 2. We plan on Going from NT 4.0 to Windows XP. Can we connect to Exchange 2000 with the NT 4.0 Clients during the interim? Any issues I should be aware of? Any issues with WXP? 3. We have 50-60 users on Outlook 2002 with internet access etc., and 40-50 users on other clients (internal e-mail and intranet only). Does Exchange play well with other e-mail clients? 4. Any other Gottcha's, Do's, Don'ts? All advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jim http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange 2000
Title: FW: Exchange 2000 Yo Pete - how come all your replies are blank? -Original Message-From: Pete Karhatsu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:17 AMTo: NT System Admin IssuesSubject: FW: Exchange 2000 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 8:19 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in that of your company, users, and IT staff) to look into alternative E-mail platforms. My first suggestion would be Lotus Domino. Their server software is more stable, easier to administer, and MORE SECURE than any of the competetion I have seen. Also, the functionality of the client software is far superior to anything e-mail coming out of Redmond, WA. If your server that you mentioned is now idle and will be performing ONLY email functionality, that is perfect for 100 users, and I would bet you could squeeze in another 100. My suggestion for hard-disk space is a mirrored system volume (2 disks). For the data, I would suggest allocation 100 meg for each user. Disk space is cheap, eat it up. Running 4 10 gig drives RAID5 would be a beautiful thing. Buy 2 extra, just in case. I would also recommend, if you want to upgrade desktops, to go with Windows 2000. Upgrading, loading, installing, whatever you want to call it, WinXP could turn out to be a nightmare. Especially with Microsoft's new Product Activation "feature". In a business environment, there is no reason, as far as I have seen, to put WinXP on the desktop. Windows 2000 has proven itself to me to be an adequate choice for end use. I must stress again the importance of exploring your options. Just because your OS says Microsoft on it doesn't mean your Backend product has to. Nathan W. Jim Mediger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 09:03:02 AM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: Exchange 2000 We are looking at implementing Exchange 2000 and I have a few questions, and wanted advice from people who have had real world experience. We are currently running NT 4.0 Svr and Wkstn. I have setup a Windows 2000 Domain (still in testing phase). We have about 100 users. My Questions: 1. I have a PII with 2 300mhz processors and 384mb ram. Will this be ample enough to handle Exchange 2000 and future growth? How much Hard Drive space would you recomend? 2. We plan on Going from NT 4.0 to Windows XP. Can we connect to Exchange 2000 with the NT 4.0 Clients during the interim? Any issues I should be aware of? Any issues with WXP? 3. We have 50-60 users on Outlook 2002 with internet access etc., and 40-50 users on other clients (internal e-mail and intranet only). Does Exchange play well with other e-mail clients? 4. Any other Gottcha's, Do's, Don'ts? All advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jim http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
Re: Exchange 2000
Before you implement anything Exchange, I think it is in your best interest, (as in that of your company, users, and IT staff) to look into alternative E-mail platforms. My first suggestion would be Lotus Domino. Their server software is more stable, easier to administer, and MORE SECURE than any of the competetion I have seen. Also, the functionality of the client software is far superior to anything e-mail coming out of Redmond, WA. If your server that you mentioned is now idle and will be performing ONLY email functionality, that is perfect for 100 users, and I would bet you could squeeze in another 100. My suggestion for hard-disk space is a mirrored system volume (2 disks). For the data, I would suggest allocation 100 meg for each user. Disk space is cheap, eat it up. Running 4 10 gig drives RAID5 would be a beautiful thing. Buy 2 extra, just in case. I would also recommend, if you want to upgrade desktops, to go with Windows 2000. Upgrading, loading, installing, whatever you want to call it, WinXP could turn out to be a nightmare. Especially with Microsoft's new Product Activation "feature". In a business environment, there is no reason, as far as I have seen, to put WinXP on the desktop. Windows 2000 has proven itself to me to be an adequate choice for end use. I must stress again the importance of exploring your options. Just because your OS says Microsoft on it doesn't mean your Backend product has to. Nathan W. Jim Mediger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2001 09:03:02 AM Please respond to "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: Exchange 2000 We are looking at implementing Exchange 2000 and I have a few questions, and wanted advice from people who have had real world experience. We are currently running NT 4.0 Svr and Wkstn. I have setup a Windows 2000 Domain (still in testing phase). We have about 100 users. My Questions: 1. I have a PII with 2 300mhz processors and 384mb ram. Will this be ample enough to handle Exchange 2000 and future growth? How much Hard Drive space would you recomend? 2. We plan on Going from NT 4.0 to Windows XP. Can we connect to Exchange 2000 with the NT 4.0 Clients during the interim? Any issues I should be aware of? Any issues with WXP? 3. We have 50-60 users on Outlook 2002 with internet access etc., and 40-50 users on other clients (internal e-mail and intranet only). Does Exchange play well with other e-mail clients? 4. Any other Gottcha's, Do's, Don'ts? All advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jim http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
