We can't even use the SMTP gateway for our BI platform, since our Domino server doesn't like PDFs sent in via SMTP
Sorry to hear about your issues. Again, it sounds like you need a better administrator. I've worked in multiple environments using Domino successfully as an SMTP MTA for third party application servers, including Oracle and including PDF output files. There's nothing inherent to Domino which is causing your problems.
For the dummy return addresses, have your admin disable anti-relay checks for the sending app servers. Domino has plenty of anti-spam features, if they're used right they won't cause problems for you.
when someone sends a 5 meg video clip to 100 people in the office, the server only stores one copy, not 100.
That's true if the sender and all 100 users are on the same Exchange server and in the same mail store.
If all users involved are housed on the same enterprise class Exchange 2K3 server using the MS recommended maximum 20 mailbox stores, a random distribution would give you an average of 5 users/store. This would result in 20 copies of the 5 MB video clips. On an Exchange 2K7 server with the maximum 50 stores, you'd average 2 users/store and have 50 copies of the message.
In Outlook 2K3, there's a PST limit of 2GB. You do not want to go over that limit as the whole file becomes unusable and the MS fix is a truncation tool which chops off the tail end of your file to get it back under 2 GB, a process which obviously results in data loss.
Outlook 2K7 and 2K3 can use unicode format PST files under different circumstances (default for 2K7), and can then go up to 20 GB.
How many servers are being used to deliver those 40,000 mailboxes? There's an architectural limit in Exchange of no more than 20 mail stores in 2K3, and 50 in 2K7 with Enterprise Edition. In each case you're not going to be able to host more than perhaps 4000 users per server, so at least 10 servers will be in use in the Cobweb environment, and I'd hazard a guess that it's significantly more than that.
Not to say that number of servers should be the primary decision point on the supportability of an environment, but I'm aware of real-world Domino shops running 10,000 users on a single system (multiple Domino partitions on a single large AIX box), which shows a difference in architectural considerations.
Note is most definitely a groupware platform, if you have only used it for e-mail then I can understand why you aren't interested in it, you'd have been better off with Thunderbird or other e-mail only application. But every company I've worked with that used Notes/Domino in any capacity had Notes/Domino work flow applications.
To extrapolate on that point, what you'll find in almost every shop that did migrate to Outlook/Exchange from Notes is that they still use Notes for a variety of applications which are too important to abandon, and which can't be easily recreated in other platforms which are ill suited for work flow applications.
Actually, the per seat cost for Lotus is less than that of MS if you compare the groupware functionality rather than just basic e-mail.
With MS, to be able to do discussion databases, blogs, document stores, etc, you're going to need the whole MS product line: Office, Outlook, Exchange, IIS, SQL, AD, SharePoint. You're going to be paying a lot in both server licesnsing and CALs.
With Lotus, you're going to have Notes (which comes with Symphony) and Domino.
For MS Office integration the MS stack is naturally better, but the SharePoint groupware sites I've seen are in general no better, and often times much worse, than the comparable function applications I've seen in Notes/Domino.
And we need them in a serious way. People who know their stuff, know what the legal system is supposed to be used for, and stand up for themselves in a positive way.
I hope we see more small companies and individuals do this in the future.
I do believe the likes of Google and Sun were firmly on IBM's side in pushing back against MSOOXML. Goes to show, it takes a group effort to stand up against a monopolist.
I've posted this before, but it's pertinent and bears repeating, it's not just P2P traffic that Comcast is filtering. A sysadmin I know has been blogging on Comcast filtering corporate e-mail traffic as well.
United Airlines is another prime example of acompany that came out of Chapter 11. UA declared bankruptcy to give them better control over their assets and to give them better leverage to renegotiate contracts with vendors and unions. Neither of those apply to seem to apply to SCO in this case, so I'm doubting they'll come out as well...
The source article and the current debate being waged by the MPAA are just smoke and mirrors to distract us from the real issue: freedom of personal use.
As Moraelin is saying, copyright law should only apply when I reproduce someone else's work for gain. It should not apply at all when a legally purchased work is used for personal use, even if that personal use differs from what the original manufacturer/distributer thinks it should be. The only reason it does apply now is the ill advised piece of legislation called the DMCA, and even the DMCA doesn't technically limit our personal use, just our ability to remove the copy protection schemes.
The elephant in the room here is that copy protection schemes on CDs, DVDs and software are having little to no impact on piracy, but are limiting the freedom of personal use of law abiding consumers. Why, as a consumer, should I have to re-buy the same music/movies/software in order to use them in different ways, as long as I'm using them for personal use in each case? I'm willing to bet that Apple already has an update lined up for iTunes that would allow ripping of Movies, but they're sitting on it until copyright law changes before they release it to consumers to avoid getting sued for circumventing the already cracked CSS encryption.
I'd say they're not missing anything, and that they've thought this all through very carefully.
I'm guessing that the MOOXML standard was scrutinized by MS lawyers for a good long time, and that it carefully draws the line between what is MS intellectual property and what is not.
The MOOXML standard has plenty of flaws, which has been detailed in various places. If it becomes a standard and a new company wants to write a program to create OOXML format files or update existing MOOXML files, they're almost guaranteed to run into problems. Microsoft will have no responsibility to fix those problems - because it's an open standard! BUT they will be able to sell services or products to support development using OOXML files, and there's no requirement that their support and additional tools be based on any open standards, other than a final result of an OOXML format file. Since any company can also offer supporting services and products for OOXML, Microsoft can say that they're not extorting anyone, and that there's an open and competitive market to choose from, while at the same time everyone outside of Microsoft is left to muck through the 6000+ pages of spec trying to figure out how to get it to work.
A lot of media sources and technology companies are taking this to the extreme because a) scary news sells more ad space and b) scary news sells more servers.
Here's a link to the original document:
http://www.uscourts.gov/rules/Reports/ST09-2005.pd f [PDF file]
Focus on pages 24-36 of the pdf, which discusses the background of the new rules, and 103-240 which include the actual regulations. The new e-discovery rules do not require everyone to keep copies of everything forever.
Note that the full 332 page document includes multiple topics, only one of which is e-discovery.
And in closing, IANAL.
Am I the only one wondering why the original article was posted with pictures from the board game instead of the CCG?
Actually, I was more upset that the current list of redeemable items doesn't have anything usable for the CCG - currently t's just on-line game trinkets and wallpaper.
Link to available items:
http://entertainment.upperdeck.com/points/store/c- 11-new.aspx
Slashdot Mirror
We can't even use the SMTP gateway for our BI platform, since our Domino server doesn't like PDFs sent in via SMTP
Sorry to hear about your issues. Again, it sounds like you need a better administrator. I've worked in multiple environments using Domino successfully as an SMTP MTA for third party application servers, including Oracle and including PDF output files. There's nothing inherent to Domino which is causing your problems.
For the dummy return addresses, have your admin disable anti-relay checks for the sending app servers. Domino has plenty of anti-spam features, if they're used right they won't cause problems for you.
While by no means a replacement for custom development, check out OpenNTF for tons of great open source Notes applications.
when someone sends a 5 meg video clip to 100 people in the office, the server only stores one copy, not 100.
That's true if the sender and all 100 users are on the same Exchange server and in the same mail store.
If all users involved are housed on the same enterprise class Exchange 2K3 server using the MS recommended maximum 20 mailbox stores, a random distribution would give you an average of 5 users/store. This would result in 20 copies of the 5 MB video clips. On an Exchange 2K7 server with the maximum 50 stores, you'd average 2 users/store and have 50 copies of the message.
In Outlook 2K3, there's a PST limit of 2GB. You do not want to go over that limit as the whole file becomes unusable and the MS fix is a truncation tool which chops off the tail end of your file to get it back under 2 GB, a process which obviously results in data loss.
Outlook 2K7 and 2K3 can use unicode format PST files under different circumstances (default for 2K7), and can then go up to 20 GB.
How many servers are being used to deliver those 40,000 mailboxes? There's an architectural limit in Exchange of no more than 20 mail stores in 2K3, and 50 in 2K7 with Enterprise Edition. In each case you're not going to be able to host more than perhaps 4000 users per server, so at least 10 servers will be in use in the Cobweb environment, and I'd hazard a guess that it's significantly more than that.
Not to say that number of servers should be the primary decision point on the supportability of an environment, but I'm aware of real-world Domino shops running 10,000 users on a single system (multiple Domino partitions on a single large AIX box), which shows a difference in architectural considerations.
Note is most definitely a groupware platform, if you have only used it for e-mail then I can understand why you aren't interested in it, you'd have been better off with Thunderbird or other e-mail only application. But every company I've worked with that used Notes/Domino in any capacity had Notes/Domino work flow applications.
To extrapolate on that point, what you'll find in almost every shop that did migrate to Outlook/Exchange from Notes is that they still use Notes for a variety of applications which are too important to abandon, and which can't be easily recreated in other platforms which are ill suited for work flow applications.
Sounds like you're saddled with a bad Domino Administrator. Any system is a beast to manage if it's administered poorly.
Actually, the per seat cost for Lotus is less than that of MS if you compare the groupware functionality rather than just basic e-mail.
With MS, to be able to do discussion databases, blogs, document stores, etc, you're going to need the whole MS product line: Office, Outlook, Exchange, IIS, SQL, AD, SharePoint. You're going to be paying a lot in both server licesnsing and CALs.
With Lotus, you're going to have Notes (which comes with Symphony) and Domino.
For MS Office integration the MS stack is naturally better, but the SharePoint groupware sites I've seen are in general no better, and often times much worse, than the comparable function applications I've seen in Notes/Domino.
And we need them in a serious way. People who know their stuff, know what the legal system is supposed to be used for, and stand up for themselves in a positive way.
I hope we see more small companies and individuals do this in the future.
I do believe the likes of Google and Sun were firmly on IBM's side in pushing back against MSOOXML. Goes to show, it takes a group effort to stand up against a monopolist.
I've posted this before, but it's pertinent and bears repeating, it's not just P2P traffic that Comcast is filtering. A sysadmin I know has been blogging on Comcast filtering corporate e-mail traffic as well.
http://kkanarski.blogspot.com/2007/09/comcast-filtering-lotus-notes-update.html
United Airlines is another prime example of acompany that came out of Chapter 11. UA declared bankruptcy to give them better control over their assets and to give them better leverage to renegotiate contracts with vendors and unions. Neither of those apply to seem to apply to SCO in this case, so I'm doubting they'll come out as well...
The source article and the current debate being waged by the MPAA are just smoke and mirrors to distract us from the real issue: freedom of personal use.
As Moraelin is saying, copyright law should only apply when I reproduce someone else's work for gain. It should not apply at all when a legally purchased work is used for personal use, even if that personal use differs from what the original manufacturer/distributer thinks it should be. The only reason it does apply now is the ill advised piece of legislation called the DMCA, and even the DMCA doesn't technically limit our personal use, just our ability to remove the copy protection schemes.
The elephant in the room here is that copy protection schemes on CDs, DVDs and software are having little to no impact on piracy, but are limiting the freedom of personal use of law abiding consumers. Why, as a consumer, should I have to re-buy the same music/movies/software in order to use them in different ways, as long as I'm using them for personal use in each case? I'm willing to bet that Apple already has an update lined up for iTunes that would allow ripping of Movies, but they're sitting on it until copyright law changes before they release it to consumers to avoid getting sued for circumventing the already cracked CSS encryption.
See the EFF for a better resource on the DMCA: http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA
Another good resource: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#106
Notice how copyright holders only retain the exclusive right to public performances.
I'd say they're not missing anything, and that they've thought this all through very carefully. I'm guessing that the MOOXML standard was scrutinized by MS lawyers for a good long time, and that it carefully draws the line between what is MS intellectual property and what is not.
The MOOXML standard has plenty of flaws, which has been detailed in various places. If it becomes a standard and a new company wants to write a program to create OOXML format files or update existing MOOXML files, they're almost guaranteed to run into problems. Microsoft will have no responsibility to fix those problems - because it's an open standard! BUT they will be able to sell services or products to support development using OOXML files, and there's no requirement that their support and additional tools be based on any open standards, other than a final result of an OOXML format file. Since any company can also offer supporting services and products for OOXML, Microsoft can say that they're not extorting anyone, and that there's an open and competitive market to choose from, while at the same time everyone outside of Microsoft is left to muck through the 6000+ pages of spec trying to figure out how to get it to work.
A lot of media sources and technology companies are taking this to the extreme because a) scary news sells more ad space and b) scary news sells more servers.d f [PDF file]
Here's a link to the original document: http://www.uscourts.gov/rules/Reports/ST09-2005.p
Focus on pages 24-36 of the pdf, which discusses the background of the new rules, and 103-240 which include the actual regulations. The new e-discovery rules do not require everyone to keep copies of everything forever.
Note that the full 332 page document includes multiple topics, only one of which is e-discovery.
And in closing, IANAL.
Am I the only one wondering why the original article was posted with pictures from the board game instead of the CCG? Actually, I was more upset that the current list of redeemable items doesn't have anything usable for the CCG - currently t's just on-line game trinkets and wallpaper. Link to available items: http://entertainment.upperdeck.com/points/store/c- 11-new.aspx