Oh, I wish I was in the mood to argue, but I am not.
I'll only point out, that a local install of SQL is no longer need for BCM, except if you want an offline copy. You can put the BCM database, shared or unshared, on a centralized SQL server.
And, wanting Microsoft to make Project Server play well with others, is like asking Chevron to start investing in Wind Farms.
If you can admin SharePoint server farms, write web parts in C#, and know Forms Server inside out, I would be THRILLED to pay you in Top Ramen. In fact, I will through in tons of extra seasoning packets, since I have to keep my salt down, ya know? Say the word, baby!
Well done. I was getting tired. I think IT is one of the few 'professions' where people feel free to comment about things they have never seen, never touched, but trust the word of mouth of others long enough to pontificate.
Can you imagine construction workers having so much to say regarding Black & Decker power tools vs. Makita?
Companies are delaying/canceling IT projects all over the place. My company had a client last week, whine about needing a server upgrade, but cant do it because we actually charge for that shit. Says, if we would be willing to do the work for free, we can make it up on follow-on work next time around. We don't work for free, so his org will pound sand, or find some starving IT workers on Craiglist to do the work for Top Ramen. Fuck em. (yeah you, asshole, I KNOW you read Slashdot. Don't call me when your cheap-ass SATA-driven MOSS server goes tits up, baby.)
Nobody is willing to spend any money, which will only cost them down the road. IT requires investment in systems, people and maintenance. Skip on one, pay double for the others later.
IT is not just employees. Consultants are taking it in the shorts too.
"Why should a friggin' IT pro be doing COST ANALYSIS? "
Uh, because that is one of the things that defines an "IT PRO", as opposed to merely an IT WORKER?
An IT Professional, is someone who is concerned about IT's relationship to the overall business, understands the difference between IT being simply a cost-center, or a profit enhancer.
No professional is going to stroll into management offices proclaiming the need for more hardware without some metrics to back it up. I realize that there are IT primadonna's who think their word should be accepted as if from God, that they should never be questioned, at the fear of locking up the network on a tantrum. That attitude is how we got the San Francisco fiasco. That dude was less concerned for the REASON for that network, than for the network itself.
There are too many pasty-fat bastards with poor social skills managing networks and scripting Excel macros who have never taken a look at the very data they are supposed to protect.
A professional does whatever it takes to become more effective at their job. If you work in IT, and have never done a cost analysis, never done a P&L document, or a gap analysis, than you are a mere technician, and will eventually be replaced by a trained monkey, and blame your management for sending your job overseas.
Who said anything about NEEDING a $500 box? I think I said a $500 box would keep 20 users happy. By that, I mean something running SBS, SQL, Exchange, and AD.
Exchange is not a simple POP/IMAP server, and Windows Server comes with an SMTP service, if simple mail is all you want to do with it. Surely, before commenting, you could at least read something about what Exchange is?
How is that 'Exchange' in action? Seems more like 'stupid users and poor admin' in action. What you mentioned is easily prevented through proper configuration. Thanks for helping make my point.
True, but Microsoft bares some blame too (GASP). Initially, Microsoft marketed their tools as easier to maintain than the competition, which was true up to a point. However, beyond a 30 person shop, it is a good idea to have someone on staff who really knows what they are doing, not just the CEO's nephew who likes to tinker with shit.
Microsoft is also to blame for the ease of passing the MCSE exams, resulting in a lot of people thinking they knew a lot more then they really did. A guy shows up with his shiny certification, and proceeds to fuck up your servers, and then it is EASY to blame the software, rather than the "genius" with the cert.
So tell me; did you present your management with a cost/benefit analysis, supporting your request for additional hardware? Did you point out what a catastrophic failure of the Exchange infrastructure would cost them in lost man-hours and productivity? If everyone in your company is getting "mailbox -full" notices, it would seem to me an easy argument to make in DOLLARS, as to the amount of time spent by staff just to find items to delete each week. Am I wrong?
Have you looked into tools like GFI's Mail Archiver or the Mimosa tools to get you some disk space back, and bump up overall performance?
See, it is very easy to just say, "management sucks, exchange sucks, yada, yada", but until or unless you have done all you can do to make your case, I repeat: IN DOLLARS, you have to bear some responsibility. This is what is wrong with IT these days. I'm guessing you didnt do a cost analysis, and you would not be alone in that regard, but someday, IT folks are going to have to prove that we are REAL professionals, or management has no good reason to pay any attention to us. IT is not just about technology, you have to sometimes be a teacher and a salesman to be effective, even when Management makes you not want to really give a shit.
Personally, if you had done what I suggested, and gotten the response you described, were I you, I would have walked out of there, before I let anyone put my name on a fucked up server.
And, what do they mean by "via an additional schema"? Sorry to nitpick, but I dont need no schema changes to enforce that stuff in Exchange out of the box.
Instead of "Drop in, they should say, "wedge in, or pry in"?
It could mean that they do a simple ACL ping. That doesn't mean its going to enforce OU or GPO restrictions. If so, that's awesome, but I seriously doubt it.
Things like what you posted are why I got out of IT and into Consulting. I realized that as an employee, it was much more difficult to get end-users to adhere to best practices. However, as a consultant, that 1G Photoshop attachment would void a clients SLA.
Exchange cant be blamed for the things that happen when used like a storage tool. If I walked into a place where the CEO had a 2G pst file and would not adhere to a quota, I would not take that contract, plain and simple.
This is how a lot of tools, not just Microsoft stuff, gets a bad rap. Somewhere along the way, IT lost their balls in dealing with Management. Exchange is not fragile when used within the guidelines. Raise your hand, if you integrity tested the Store every couple weeks, with a decoupled-defrag every other time? Proper quotas, attachment controls, and proper monitoring can keep any Exchange server rockin, assuming proper disk, bandwidth and memory.
PSTs are a necessary evil, but if you run in Cached Mode, and again, with the proper setup, and headers-first connections, you can get away with stuff.
As I continue to point out on Slashdot, the reason there are so few competing options to Exchange, is that its a fucking hard app to build, and little available return without a true feature-for-feature fight.
I wont say that Exchange is awesome stuff, its just better than everything else.
What do you say to the Hundreds of Thousands of clients who get their Exchange via SBS (Small Business Server)? And that's just the 2003 version.
How many Enterprise apps do you know of by ANY vendor that dont degrade with low disk space? Come on, dude, that aint fair and you know it.
Exchange is one of those apps that can look bad if installed by an idiot. You would think a proper architect would have worked out space and usage requirements early on.
How do you reach a low space condition ANYWAY, if you are making proper use of quotas? No product takes more abuse due to stupid administration than Exchange server.
But please, inflexible? When you have dozens of 100K+ client installations of Exchange humming along at places like Chevron and others, while the very same product can keep 20 people happy on a $500 box, you cant call it inflexible. Thats just wrong, pal.
True, regarding Market Manipulation. Say goodbye to Naked Shorts. What kind of country would want to prevent me from selling shares that I don't own anyway? ARRRGH!
The Cherry and Hickory woods were not 'burned' so to speak, you soak the wood blocks in water overnight, so that when they are placed atop the Charcoal, they dont burn, but release lots of wonderful smoke. So much smoke, that the meat (PORK) is infused with the flavor of the smoke. If you slice the meat when done, you can see a discolored ring down through the meat where the smoke has actually penetrated it.
The stupid neighbor was taken aback by how much smoke is actually generated through this process, where from a distance, it can appear as though one's house is on fire. Neighbor comes out back, sees the smoke, does not apparently notice the wonderful aroma. Me, cigar in mouth, scotch in hand, looking as much the redneck as is possible in California, in an inebriated hog-heaven, was in no mood to explain the science of real BBQ to that loafer-wearing pussy.
I suspect that Polar Bear would taste great too, but if you are someone who has never had REAL BBQ, the slow smoked kind, run down to Home Depot and buy a Smoker, especially if you want to piss off a neighbor!
When you factor in the fact that I drove my Hummer(yeah, the BIG one) round trip about 45 miles to the nearest "Barbeques Galore" store, to find the nice Cherry wood chunks, the night before the big smoke, I suppose maybe I did contribute to the demise of a bear or two?
But...
For a good rack of Baby-backs, I'd run down Bambi. Twice.
Slashdot Mirror
I just know, that with enough free time, I will be the one to take down Exchange Server! That's right, ME! I can DO it!.
First, I'm going to toss out all that stuff that nobody uses, because essentially, we are talking EMAIL here, right?
And now that I am unemployed, I don't have to waste my weed money on CalTrain, bitches!
I'll only point out, that a local install of SQL is no longer need for BCM, except if you want an offline copy. You can put the BCM database, shared or unshared, on a centralized SQL server.
And, wanting Microsoft to make Project Server play well with others, is like asking Chevron to start investing in Wind Farms.
If you can admin SharePoint server farms, write web parts in C#, and know Forms Server inside out, I would be THRILLED to pay you in Top Ramen. In fact, I will through in tons of extra seasoning packets, since I have to keep my salt down, ya know? Say the word, baby!
Can you imagine construction workers having so much to say regarding Black & Decker power tools vs. Makita?
Oh, wait...
Companies are delaying/canceling IT projects all over the place. My company had a client last week, whine about needing a server upgrade, but cant do it because we actually charge for that shit. Says, if we would be willing to do the work for free, we can make it up on follow-on work next time around. We don't work for free, so his org will pound sand, or find some starving IT workers on Craiglist to do the work for Top Ramen. Fuck em. (yeah you, asshole, I KNOW you read Slashdot. Don't call me when your cheap-ass SATA-driven MOSS server goes tits up, baby.)
Nobody is willing to spend any money, which will only cost them down the road. IT requires investment in systems, people and maintenance. Skip on one, pay double for the others later.
IT is not just employees. Consultants are taking it in the shorts too.
Look into MOSS. (Microsoft Office SharePoint Server) It directly addresses your issue.
Uh, because that is one of the things that defines an "IT PRO", as opposed to merely an IT WORKER?
An IT Professional, is someone who is concerned about IT's relationship to the overall business, understands the difference between IT being simply a cost-center, or a profit enhancer.
No professional is going to stroll into management offices proclaiming the need for more hardware without some metrics to back it up. I realize that there are IT primadonna's who think their word should be accepted as if from God, that they should never be questioned, at the fear of locking up the network on a tantrum. That attitude is how we got the San Francisco fiasco. That dude was less concerned for the REASON for that network, than for the network itself.
There are too many pasty-fat bastards with poor social skills managing networks and scripting Excel macros who have never taken a look at the very data they are supposed to protect.
A professional does whatever it takes to become more effective at their job. If you work in IT, and have never done a cost analysis, never done a P&L document, or a gap analysis, than you are a mere technician, and will eventually be replaced by a trained monkey, and blame your management for sending your job overseas.
Be a fuckin asset, not a liability, baby!
Exchange is not a simple POP/IMAP server, and Windows Server comes with an SMTP service, if simple mail is all you want to do with it. Surely, before commenting, you could at least read something about what Exchange is?
How is that 'Exchange' in action? Seems more like 'stupid users and poor admin' in action. What you mentioned is easily prevented through proper configuration. Thanks for helping make my point.
Microsoft is also to blame for the ease of passing the MCSE exams, resulting in a lot of people thinking they knew a lot more then they really did. A guy shows up with his shiny certification, and proceeds to fuck up your servers, and then it is EASY to blame the software, rather than the "genius" with the cert.
Have you looked into tools like GFI's Mail Archiver or the Mimosa tools to get you some disk space back, and bump up overall performance?
See, it is very easy to just say, "management sucks, exchange sucks, yada, yada", but until or unless you have done all you can do to make your case, I repeat: IN DOLLARS, you have to bear some responsibility. This is what is wrong with IT these days. I'm guessing you didnt do a cost analysis, and you would not be alone in that regard, but someday, IT folks are going to have to prove that we are REAL professionals, or management has no good reason to pay any attention to us. IT is not just about technology, you have to sometimes be a teacher and a salesman to be effective, even when Management makes you not want to really give a shit.
Personally, if you had done what I suggested, and gotten the response you described, were I you, I would have walked out of there, before I let anyone put my name on a fucked up server.
But, that's me. (climbing down from my soapbox)
Instead of "Drop in, they should say, "wedge in, or pry in"?
It could mean that they do a simple ACL ping. That doesn't mean its going to enforce OU or GPO restrictions. If so, that's awesome, but I seriously doubt it.
Exchange cant be blamed for the things that happen when used like a storage tool. If I walked into a place where the CEO had a 2G pst file and would not adhere to a quota, I would not take that contract, plain and simple.
This is how a lot of tools, not just Microsoft stuff, gets a bad rap. Somewhere along the way, IT lost their balls in dealing with Management. Exchange is not fragile when used within the guidelines. Raise your hand, if you integrity tested the Store every couple weeks, with a decoupled-defrag every other time? Proper quotas, attachment controls, and proper monitoring can keep any Exchange server rockin, assuming proper disk, bandwidth and memory.
PSTs are a necessary evil, but if you run in Cached Mode, and again, with the proper setup, and headers-first connections, you can get away with stuff.
As I continue to point out on Slashdot, the reason there are so few competing options to Exchange, is that its a fucking hard app to build, and little available return without a true feature-for-feature fight.
I wont say that Exchange is awesome stuff, its just better than everything else.
Sure you can, but Zarafa aint no gun.
"Drop in Replacement" wasn't MY words.
Say what you want about the product, but MUCH of Exchange's value comes from what it works with.
But fine, I'll bite.....
QUOTAS?!?!? Kinda important, wouldn't you say?
Exchange inflexible?
What do you say to the Hundreds of Thousands of clients who get their Exchange via SBS (Small Business Server)? And that's just the 2003 version.
How many Enterprise apps do you know of by ANY vendor that dont degrade with low disk space? Come on, dude, that aint fair and you know it.
Exchange is one of those apps that can look bad if installed by an idiot. You would think a proper architect would have worked out space and usage requirements early on.
How do you reach a low space condition ANYWAY, if you are making proper use of quotas? No product takes more abuse due to stupid administration than Exchange server.
But please, inflexible? When you have dozens of 100K+ client installations of Exchange humming along at places like Chevron and others, while the very same product can keep 20 people happy on a $500 box, you cant call it inflexible. Thats just wrong, pal.
Drop in replacement, you say? Will MOSS or CRM play with it? Will it pick up AD rules and GPOs? What about BCM and Project Server?
OR, is it just another glorified POP/IMAP box?
I read the feature set from the web site.
I know Exchange, I was in the original product group way back when. This AINT no DROP IN REPLACEMENT.
That said, for what it does, good for them!
But people should watch their words. Side by side against Exchange 2007, it would not be a fair fight.
Cant argue with you, its total bullshit. But then, it always was.
True, regarding Market Manipulation. Say goodbye to Naked Shorts. What kind of country would want to prevent me from selling shares that I don't own anyway? ARRRGH!
Yeah, I know, I couldn't resist....
I suppose that works too, but not having looks in her favor, and brains already ruled out, only boobs will keep this girl off government assistance.
Her family has decided to pray she one day grows big boobs, or she may never leave home. That our bloodline shares this DNA is soooooo depressing.
The stupid neighbor was taken aback by how much smoke is actually generated through this process, where from a distance, it can appear as though one's house is on fire. Neighbor comes out back, sees the smoke, does not apparently notice the wonderful aroma. Me, cigar in mouth, scotch in hand, looking as much the redneck as is possible in California, in an inebriated hog-heaven, was in no mood to explain the science of real BBQ to that loafer-wearing pussy.
I suspect that Polar Bear would taste great too, but if you are someone who has never had REAL BBQ, the slow smoked kind, run down to Home Depot and buy a Smoker, especially if you want to piss off a neighbor!
When you factor in the fact that I drove my Hummer(yeah, the BIG one) round trip about 45 miles to the nearest "Barbeques Galore" store, to find the nice Cherry wood chunks, the night before the big smoke, I suppose maybe I did contribute to the demise of a bear or two?
But...
For a good rack of Baby-backs, I'd run down Bambi. Twice.