Slashdot Mirror


First Look at Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 Beta

snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Martin Heller takes a first look at Microsoft's Exchange Server 2010 Beta, noting several usability, reliability, and compliance improvements over Exchange 2007. Top among Exchange 2010's new features are OWA support for Firefox 3 and Safari 3; improved storage reliability; conversation views; mail federation between trusted companies; and MailTips, a sort of Google Mail Goggles for the corporate environment. 'Database availability groups give you redundant mail stores with continuous replication; database-level failover gives you automatic recovery. I/O optimizations make Exchange less "bursty" and better suited to desktop-class SATA drives; JBOD support lets you concatenate disks rather than stripe them into a redundant array.' Exchange 2010 will, however, require shops to upgrade to Windows Server 2008, as support for Windows Server 2003 has been dropped. Microsoft will release technical previews of other products in the suite, including Office 2010, SharePoint Server 2010, Visio 2010, and Project 2010, in the third calendar quarter."

22 of 274 comments (clear)

  1. Now Let's Talk Pricing by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Funny
    I found this part of the review especially helpful:

    The invoice for this baby is pretty small compared to your normal MS Exchange Server, it's only 1. But that's not in dollars, that's in first born children. So I'm going to throw out a few strategies for coping with this.

    • Just squeeze one out with your wife/prostitute to get it out of the way. ProTip: don't waste money on shots or clothing, a transport blanket will do. Usually you you can convince your wife that the first one is like a test run anyway.
    • Order one of those adopted kids from some other country. Throw some cheap makeup on them to match your ethnicity, pick up some false documents and practice watering up your eyes for when you have to push the kid across a long empty room to Steve Ballmer waiting with a pair of handcuffs. They'll be slightly better off indentured to Microsoft than whatever country they came from anyway.
    • Shaft them and never have kids. This is probably the option that will come naturally to most software folks. Get a vasectomy, abstain, do whatever it takes. There's no clause against this in the licensing agreement I read--yet.

    So, like pretending you're a college student, starving African or university staff to get cheap editions of Exchange 2007, there are ways to acquired 2010 at a relatively low cost and I hope this helps you cope with the extreme cost of owning Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 for your enterprise business.

    Sure the costs don't stop there, you need to upgrade to Windows Server 2008 to use it and there are a few more things you'll need to upgrade if you want to keep the same functionality you have now ... but that's just the unspoken rule.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Now Let's Talk Pricing by just_another_sean · · Score: 4, Funny

      Great. Thanks. Now I have to RTFA to find out if your serious or not.

      Why do you hate /.?

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    2. Re:Now Let's Talk Pricing by jonbryce · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exchange is pretty cheap compared to the competition. That's probably one of the reasons why it is so popular.

  2. Re:Blah by alen · · Score: 5, Informative

    there are these entities called corporations/companies. they are required to follow a lot of laws and in some cases retain all communications for many years. Exchange makes this easy because it centralizes everything for easier management.

    2010 looks more like 2007 R2. Same engine but more features and support for it's new ActiveSync partners, Google and Apple.

    the archiving and legal features look nice. right now you have to buy add on products from EMC and other companies. Integrating the SOX features into Exchange will save customers a lot of money.

  3. Re:Blah by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, but you're not a large corporation. Exchange does all kinds of crazy shit that's nice to have in a very large environment. Calendaring, extreme scalability, integration with other systems, mobile messaging integration, spam filtering, encryption support, voicemail integration, auditing compliance. etc... and etc... and etc...

    Exchange does a _whole_ lot of shit and integrates with other products that do a whole lot of other shit.

    So if you have 50 employees and 40 computers, Exchange might be overkill. If you have 40,000 employees, it might be exactly what you need.

  4. Re:And all the admins ask... by Amouth · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa142634(EXCHG.65).aspx

    it isn't exactly normal SQL but it is alot closer than most things - and it does work.

    --
    '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
  5. Re:And all the admins ask... by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because most companies dont want to hire competent EMail admins. Any of the MCSE monkeys can administer the Exchange server. No they cant administer it correctly but they can administer it. You really do need a competent email admin staoff to use exchange, but it's not as daunting as the FOSS or other options out there to windows It staff.

    I also dont understand the love affair with outlook, It's simply that some PHB's hate change and they used Exchange as the killing point to stop OSS infiltration.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  6. Re:Blah by adarn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People underestimate how important Exchange is.

    The argument is always how Office is the real lynchpin and that if only a compatible document suite like Google docs or OpenOffice got a foothold Microsoft would be crushed but Outlook/Exchange is the REAL barrier to entry.

    I work at a call center. EVERY corporate employee who calls me is using Outlook except the 1% of poor souls stuck with Lotus Notes and Domino.

    Business relies on Outlook/Exchange.

  7. Re:And all the admins ask... by alen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    if you have an iphone or winmo you can point your phone to a corporate email server and it will download all your email into the phone as long as you have a signal. and the IT department can manage all the phones remotely.

    say your hippy marketing exec loses his or her iphone and it has all kinds of data on it. the IT people can just wipe it remotely not caring where it is.

    say you have to keep all email for at least 7 years but you don't want it in anyone's mailbox. right now you have to buy a third party product. Exchange 2010 integrates it.

    say you want failover to another city with all your company's email there. Exchange 2007 and later.

    Even the FOSS Exhcange clones don't come close. For a medium to large business it's cheaper to buy Exchange with all the features than pay for add on software and more people to admin it

  8. Re:And all the admins ask... by somersault · · Score: 4, Funny

    "here you are sir, 23 people in the office are boinking your Executive assistant."

    "Don't worry - I've already told the cleaners to give special attention to your desk, chair, phone, scanner, shredder, and your little wooden dinosaur sculptures with the very long necks."

    --
    which is totally what she said
  9. Re:And all the admins ask... by somersault · · Score: 4, Insightful

    support for mobile .. access

    Bingo. This is the reason that we haven't moved away from Exchange. Windows Mobile connected to Exchange with DirectPUSH is a great combination for mobile users.. you can synchronise all your contacts, calendar, tasks and email with Exchange remotely. Email actually arrives on the mobiles a second or two before showing up in Outlook. Our Exchange server would be replaceable if it weren't for this. I almost replaced it with OpenExchange until I found out about this feature, which has now become essential to a lot of our sales team. If the blackberry network (and devices) weren't so shit then maybe I'd reconsider (the number of times I used to have our blackberry users blaming me for email not working when in fact it was the blackberry network, something which I have no control over.. eurghh..). There is a lot of room for a nice FOSS email client/server product on an open mobile platform..

    --
    which is totally what she said
  10. Re:Worthless review... by rob1980 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    His first point is you can use it with FF and Safari. Nice, but not a really big deal to most admins.

    For sysadmins who want their users to stick with Firefox or something else not named Internet Explorer, an improvement to OWA may not be a huge deal but it's still nice. OWA on alternative browsers blows pretty hard. It works, but it blows.

  11. Re:And all the admins ask... by Sandbags · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yea, it would be REALLY NICE if MSFT would put Exchange inside of something other than a Jet engine database... Then maybe I could have a high performance database that wasn't capped at 200GB for performance reasons, and I could have one big database per server cluster instead of 12-16... and I could front end that with a half a dozen exchange servers and have all 20,000 users inside of a single database and eliminate all the wasted space from single indexing!

    For Chrsits sake, can't the Exchange people and the SQL people work together, and combine the log shipping asynchronous non-cluster replciation features of exchange with a REAL F*ING DATABASE ENGINE!?!?!?!

    --
    There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
  12. Re:Blah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This kind of misses the point. In many cases of Microsoft products, you could weave and configure together a bunch of FOSS applications to do the same thing. But then you'd have a custom solution that only your now-very-valuable admin understands. On the other hand, Exchange is a one stop shop for all this stuff, and the admins are pretty much interchangeable, since the product is the same.

    Mail servers for large corporations are not just, well, mail servers. For a 200 person shop, full Exchange is definitely overkill (which is why there's multiple versions you can buy). For a 300K person company, it worth the cost.

  13. Re:And all the admins ask... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I agree with your point, but must say that your abrasive tone makes this AC understand why IT folks get such a bad rap. It's similar to why people dislike police so much. I consider myself a "competent" e-mail admin, but the several Exchange servers I administer only constitute about 3% of the servers I am responsible for, so I don't really have time to focus on them as much as I would like.

  14. Re:And all the admins ask... by Kamokazi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was able to set up a working Exchange 2007 server in 2 days. I had never configured an e-mail server before. I'm not even an MCSA (well MCTS woudl be the new name for it)....really only about halfway to it.

    So it's even easier than you say it is :-) But you are absolutely correct...you need a competent admin to do it right (I know I sure as hell didn't do it right...it was just a test box)...they don't necessarily have to be an "E-mail Admin" to do it right, they just need to be competent enough to follow best practice guidelines (and obviously have a basic understanding of how e-mail works...any of your 'MCSE monkeys' should have that).

    And that is a big part of why Exchange predominates...it's easily administered, and it has features that nothing else offers on an equivalent level.

    Also keep in mind that it's not just the PHB's being resistant to change that stops OSS...it's the fact that Microsoft does a good job of making sure that their stuff integrates with eachother very well (and they don't exactly go out of their way to make sure other stuff can integrate with their products). The reason Exchange was so easy to get up and running for me is due in large part to Active Directory integration, and ISA Server 2006 is basically preconfigured to allow an Exchange server the proper access just by telling it the IP address.

    --
    As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to disable Slashdot 2.0.
  15. Re:Decent OWA?! by benjymouse · · Score: 4, Informative

    ..., and is one of the early web applications to actually use something like AJAX to give you the feeling of using a desktop application.

    More aptly, is was THE first AJAX application. It doesn't get earlier than that.

    This was years before it got its spiffy name. XmlHttpRequest (the linchpin in AJAX) was invented by Microsofts email client team to support Outlook Web Access. Being invented for IE it was (and still is AFAIK) a COM object which could be created from JavaScript in the browser. Mozilla later copied the idea and made XmlHttpRequest a first class citizen, but kept the name. The rest is history.

    --
    Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
  16. Re:And all the admins ask... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Informative

    Exchange database engine is also called "Jet", but it's a different kind of Jet: Access is Jet Red, Exchange is Jet Blue. The difference is explained here.

  17. Re:And all the admins ask... by nine-times · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sorry, but really, you're wrong. I'd love to believe you, because then we could all just drop Exchange and everything would be good. What you're saying may contribute to Exchange's place in the corporate world, but it's not the complete answer.

    But show me another email package that provides all the same things. Integrated email, contacts, calendar, the ability to send/receive meeting invites, role delegation, public folders, support for mobile devices (w/push and remote wipe), single sign-on, advanced AJAX web client as well as desktop client... I'm missing some things. Those are just the major features off the top of my head.

    Oh, right, you're going to tell me about Zimbra and Scalix, except those don't seem to work as well as FOSS people claim, and besides not all of the components are FOSS. Or you're going to post something about some package that no one has ever heard of, but you'll swear it's great. When I investigate, it'll turn out to be some not-really FOSS package that doesn't work at all and has only been in development for 2 months. Or you'll tell me, "I don't care about your features," in which case, great, that's why you can use a FOSS alternative and the rest of us can't.

    Sorry, I need a trustworthy and functioning alternative from a major vendor (who I can safely assume will exist in 2 years). Maybe Apple will be a contender once Snow Leopard comes out, but your IMAP/POP3 server isn't really in the same class of product.

  18. Re:And all the admins ask... by Acer500 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Business people have funny ideas. In my experience they want everything integrated and everyone using the same software. They think it's cool that someone that mailed once 6 months ago is in their address book.

    I might be too far along the "Dark Side" (TM)... but why exactly is that a bad idea? I think it's a nifty feature, myself.

    I'm under instruction to produce some stationary for outlook because the CFO wants a logo in his emails. I've explained to him that it's stupid. I've shown him base64 encoded binary attachments on the mail spool. I explained the increase in message size and storage requirements for sent email. Futile. Like the bit in American Psyhco where they're all flashing business cards, his peer group are impressed by recieving email with a company logo.

    Are you stupid yourself??? Why would your CFO care about how many bytes an encoded binary attachment takes, or how it looks in base64 of all things !!! Just tell him "Yes sir, it will cost U$ XXXX in added storage costs, do you still want to go ahead sir?", that's all he wants to understand or care about.

    Much like some of us don't care how exactly your car works as long as it takes you there (even though it's not a bad idea to know a bit), your CFO doesn't want to or cares to know how his logo goes.

    Even further, if he thinks a company logo on his emails will result in more business opportunities, I think he's right to implement that. YOU are not the target of those logoed emails, it's other people like him !!!

    /anti-rant + rant (sorry for the flamebaitish name-calling)

    --
    There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
  19. Re:striped? by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 4, Funny

    A philosophical question, then: what's coming first - Exchange running in Emacs, or Emacs running in Exchange?

    My money would be on Emacs running a virtual machine on which you could install Exchange.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  20. Now let's talk licensing by SL+Baur · · Score: 4, Funny

    Not only the pricing, but this part is intriguing too:

    Outlook protection rules

    Automatically triggers Outlook to apply an RMS template to a message before it is sent

    I suppose that means that a GPL V3 notice is attached whenever it notices that a user is attempting to email source code.

    Take that! you GNU/Linux weenies!