Yeah, but the previous poster implied that all of Exchange's groupware functions are based upon shared folders - and they're not. You don't schedule appointments or assign tasks or provide CTI/FAX integratoin with shared folders in Exchange.
Maybe I misunderstood what he meant by shared folders... previously MS Mail ran by sharing out the entire mail system as a share on the server. You wanted to publish your calendar, you had to run Schedule+ and put your schedule into a shared folder on the MS Mail server. A real mess.
I agree though, Exchange's shared folders ARE quite handy, I use them all the time. Our IS staff has a series of folders we use as our own personal Knowledge Base for dealing with client calls. Work's great. But Exchange is a hell of a lot more than just the "Public Folders" tree...
We use Exchange here without issues. We're a 6 person IT shop (2 staff members dedicated soly to our AS/400) supporting roughly 400 users. I pretty much single-handedly look after Exchange.
Until we got the new server last year, 5.5 ran on a PPro 200 with 128 megs of RAM. Hardly highend hardware. Not wham-bam-here's-your-mail-mam fast, but it worked without issues.
As I've mentioned in previous posts, our current Exchange server has been up for 8 months without being taken down for a reboot. Usually stopping a service and re-starting it works quite well (as would killing/restarting sendmail) if we need to make any massive changes to the system.
I'm no big Pro-MS guy - in fact I'm all Linux and OpenBSD at home. But the fact of the matter is that Exchange works extremely well, and although Outlook may have its share of issues (especially when you consider all the security/virus related bugs that have been found over the last while), the backend is rock solid.
I'd be curious to try Openmail to see how it stacks up (both price and performance wise).
A nightmare to add anti-virus capability?
I double-clicked setup for NAV for MSE, and had it up and running with the latest virus defs from Symantec in less than 5 minutes. Didn't even have to reboot.
Our Exchange server runs flawlessly. It hasn't been rebooted in close to 8 months - and the only reason it was rebooted was because we had to convert the case from a tower to a rackmount (and therefore unplug the machine from the wall).
I just installed a test environment for Exchange 2000 in an afternoon, that's complete with copying our existing mailboxes over and the whole bit. It's been running steady without problems for about a week now (and no, I didn't have to reboot to install that, either).
Hate to bring this up, but telling them to suck it won't help you at all when they come and unplug your cable for going against the TOS.
When you got the cablemodem, you signed an agreement. That terms of that agreement state that you cannot run any type of server - although when I had mine, I believe it said "without written permission", meaning you could theoretically get permission to run services off of your cablemodem. Mouthing them off when they tell you take your servers down, when you've entered a legally binding agreement that says you won't do it in the first place, will do you no good.
I know they go around and unplug people all the time for violations of the TOS and whatnot. A friend of mine works for Shaw, and he's had to do quite a few of them around here.
Yes, upstream is limited. If I recall correctly (a rare occurance, but its kinda neat when it happens), with the Motorola head-end and nodes that Shaw@Home is using (used?) in Alberta, each node can deliver a maximum 30MBit downstream, and 1MBit upstream.
Consider the fact that you're sharing both of those with everyone in your neighbourhood, all it takes is one person running a 1337 w4r3z server to chew up everyone's upstream. And up here, things are REALLY bad, as they've got more subscribers than they know what to do with. When I had cable, I was being portscanned and probed (ooo, touch me *there*!) on a daily basis from their network management workstations.
The upstream number may be a little higher in newer hardware, but I know it used to be that low. IIRC thats part of the reason Excite@Home was talking about capping upstream on each modem.
Actually, IBM hasn't "unveiled" anything in terms of 400 hardware running Linux. IBM has mentioned that the AS/400 has a POSIX subsystem, and is capable of compiling UNIX-like code, but to my knowledge they have never "officially" mentioned running Linux on an AS/400.
OS/400, in terms of maturity and stability, is several large jumps ahead of Linux and pretty much any other Intel-based operating system (hell, even non-Intel based operating systems). As much as I like Linux (and admit that it'd be quite nifty to see), I think it'd be a huge step backward for IBM to invest any time or effort into making it happen.
Then again, they are doing the 390... so who knows. I have to agree with one of the other posters though, in that most (as in 99%) of the shops where an AS/400 is installed (including mine), you'd be hard pressed to find anyone willing to subject a production machine to Linux. The RS/6000 is much better suited for it.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, CNN reported the first one, and gamecenter.com the 2nd.
/. a source for news =)
And for future reference, I hardly consider
Hey! We're just gonna sell chips now!
No wait, sorry, we're still gonna sell cards!
Ah screw it, we suck, let NVIDIA have it all.
And I thought the wife's moodswings were bad. Sheesh.
Seems like I've read this somewhere before...
And as he said, do some research before you jump to conclusions.
/., its the truth, right? Uh huh.
Just because its posted on
Linux boots fine on plenty of thinkpads, including the 600e i'm writing this on. Thank you, please drive through.
Yeah, but the previous poster implied that all of Exchange's groupware functions are based upon shared folders - and they're not. You don't schedule appointments or assign tasks or provide CTI/FAX integratoin with shared folders in Exchange.
Maybe I misunderstood what he meant by shared folders... previously MS Mail ran by sharing out the entire mail system as a share on the server. You wanted to publish your calendar, you had to run Schedule+ and put your schedule into a shared folder on the MS Mail server. A real mess.
I agree though, Exchange's shared folders ARE quite handy, I use them all the time. Our IS staff has a series of folders we use as our own personal Knowledge Base for dealing with client calls. Work's great. But Exchange is a hell of a lot more than just the "Public Folders" tree...
I fail to see how Outlook has anything to do with the "load". It's a client. What couldn't it handle?
Well, I know what my managers would say if I said I researched a solution on /. =)
We use Exchange here without issues. We're a 6 person IT shop (2 staff members dedicated soly to our AS/400) supporting roughly 400 users. I pretty much single-handedly look after Exchange.
Until we got the new server last year, 5.5 ran on a PPro 200 with 128 megs of RAM. Hardly highend hardware. Not wham-bam-here's-your-mail-mam fast, but it worked without issues.
As I've mentioned in previous posts, our current Exchange server has been up for 8 months without being taken down for a reboot. Usually stopping a service and re-starting it works quite well (as would killing/restarting sendmail) if we need to make any massive changes to the system.
I'm no big Pro-MS guy - in fact I'm all Linux and OpenBSD at home. But the fact of the matter is that Exchange works extremely well, and although Outlook may have its share of issues (especially when you consider all the security/virus related bugs that have been found over the last while), the backend is rock solid.
I'd be curious to try Openmail to see how it stacks up (both price and performance wise).
Shared folders on a server? This is a discussion about Microsoft EXCHANGE, not MS MAIL.
A nightmare to add anti-virus capability? I double-clicked setup for NAV for MSE, and had it up and running with the latest virus defs from Symantec in less than 5 minutes. Didn't even have to reboot. Our Exchange server runs flawlessly. It hasn't been rebooted in close to 8 months - and the only reason it was rebooted was because we had to convert the case from a tower to a rackmount (and therefore unplug the machine from the wall). I just installed a test environment for Exchange 2000 in an afternoon, that's complete with copying our existing mailboxes over and the whole bit. It's been running steady without problems for about a week now (and no, I didn't have to reboot to install that, either).
Hate to bring this up, but telling them to suck it won't help you at all when they come and unplug your cable for going against the TOS.
When you got the cablemodem, you signed an agreement. That terms of that agreement state that you cannot run any type of server - although when I had mine, I believe it said "without written permission", meaning you could theoretically get permission to run services off of your cablemodem. Mouthing them off when they tell you take your servers down, when you've entered a legally binding agreement that says you won't do it in the first place, will do you no good.
I know they go around and unplug people all the time for violations of the TOS and whatnot. A friend of mine works for Shaw, and he's had to do quite a few of them around here.
Yes, upstream is limited. If I recall correctly (a rare occurance, but its kinda neat when it happens), with the Motorola head-end and nodes that Shaw@Home is using (used?) in Alberta, each node can deliver a maximum 30MBit downstream, and 1MBit upstream.
Consider the fact that you're sharing both of those with everyone in your neighbourhood, all it takes is one person running a 1337 w4r3z server to chew up everyone's upstream. And up here, things are REALLY bad, as they've got more subscribers than they know what to do with. When I had cable, I was being portscanned and probed (ooo, touch me *there*!) on a daily basis from their network management workstations.
The upstream number may be a little higher in newer hardware, but I know it used to be that low. IIRC thats part of the reason Excite@Home was talking about capping upstream on each modem.
It's not that hard to find search engines/etc. that find copyrighted mp3 files. Even mp3.lycos.com finds them...
Try doing a search for "mp3 search" on Altavista sometime.
Nevermind. I'm dumb.
What does Transmeta have to do with a Thinkpad bundled with Linux...?
I must've missed something somewhere.
Actually, IBM hasn't "unveiled" anything in terms of 400 hardware running Linux. IBM has mentioned that the AS/400 has a POSIX subsystem, and is capable of compiling UNIX-like code, but to my knowledge they have never "officially" mentioned running Linux on an AS/400.
OS/400, in terms of maturity and stability, is several large jumps ahead of Linux and pretty much any other Intel-based operating system (hell, even non-Intel based operating systems). As much as I like Linux (and admit that it'd be quite nifty to see), I think it'd be a huge step backward for IBM to invest any time or effort into making it happen.
Then again, they are doing the 390... so who knows. I have to agree with one of the other posters though, in that most (as in 99%) of the shops where an AS/400 is installed (including mine), you'd be hard pressed to find anyone willing to subject a production machine to Linux. The RS/6000 is much better suited for it.