Exchange 2007 SP1

[PiqueABoo]

Just noticed they finally got around to releasing this. Amongst other things it's supposed to rectify the feature-incompleteness of the original RTM. We'll see...

 

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=44C66AD6-F185-4A1D-A9AB-473C1188954C&displaylang=en&mdc_uxref=sl

 

[in other bink.nu news techs are apparently not that interested in Server 2008. I am, but yup, can't spot a "have to use it eventually" a la Vista forum anywhere.]

[Oops_my_bad]

Service pack 1 already? Sheesh..

[CyberNerd]

Service pack 1 already? Sheesh..

 

Traditionally MS admins have learned not to deploy MS products until 'at least SP1' due to instability. MS have simply upped the anti, instead of releasing RC quality as final they now release beta quality as final then push out a service pack early.

[PiqueABoo]

Service pack 1 already?

 

It's close to a year now since RTM.

 

then push out a service pack early

 

Late compared to NT4 (six SPs in about 3 1/2 years).

[FN-GM]

@ PiqueABoo they was working on SP7 but abandoned it.

[Norphy]

[in other bink.nu news techs are apparently not that interested in Server 2008. I am, but yup, can't spot a "have to use it eventually" a la Vista forum anywhere.]

 

The most interesting new part of Windows 2008 for me is the improved Terminal Services facilities. I can see companies like Ericom and even Citrix to a certain extent having a harder time selling their product once that comes along.

[djm968]

Service pack 1 already? Sheesh..

 

Traditionally MS admins have learned not to deploy MS products until 'at least SP1' due to instability. MS have simply upped the anti, instead of releasing RC quality as final they now release beta quality as final then push out a service pack early.

 

 

This is a problem if you are migrating a school to Exchange. It is a no-brainer to install a brand spanking new server and run a 3 year old application on it when a new version has been out for over a year SP1 or not.

 

I have done three E2k7 installs and not had a issue with any of them except a migration from RM Sleazymail that went a bit pete, but was promptly resolved.

[Heebeejeebee]

I have done three E2k7 installs and not had a issue with any of them except a migration from RM Sleazymail that went a bit pete, but was promptly resolved.

 

Could you elaborate please?

 

We're about to do just that and wold like to know the pitfalls before hand if poss.

 

Ta

 

 

HBJB

[PiqueABoo]

It is a no-brainer

 

That used to mean "easy", do you mean "stupid"?

[zag]

Iv installed SP1 and it still doesn't solve our mail flow problems. I am still getting Authentication failed on all incoming messages through the connector from our 2003 box. Tried all the tools and still just report the same.

 

Im sure its something to do with the edge/transport role or something, should really read the manual I guess

 

I would not recommend installing 2007 yet, the support just isn't there yet. Wish I had just put in a new 2003 box now.

[Heebeejeebee]

I would not recommend installing 2007 yet, the support just isn't there yet. Wish I had just put in a new 2003 box now.

 

We already have 2003 Standard but I need to have more mail stores. I need to go to Enterprise but can't get hold of a 2003 version. We have purchased 2007 Standard which allows 5 mail stores and I suppose I could have bought 2007 Enterprise and downgraded to 2003 Enterprise (If I could get the media and license key).

 

We're in a bit of a dilemma because we installed 2003 to test and then realised that it didn't suite our purpose ('cos of the mail stores) so we're now in a position of needing to remove 2003 (and all the AD trappings) and put a new 64 bit server in and use 2007. Does it clean up nicely when installed?

 

HBJB

[djm968]

Why do you need 5 Mail Stores?

 

I have not had any issues with E2K7 other than the lack missing functionality (Now available in SP1)

[djm968]

I have done three E2k7 installs and not had a issue with any of them except a migration from RM Sleazymail that went a bit pete, but was promptly resolved.

 

Could you elaborate please?

 

We're about to do just that and wold like to know the pitfalls before hand if poss.

 

Ta

 

HBJB

 

Basically the RTM release of E2K7 has no support for direct PST migration. In the end I had to ExMerge the PST's to a E2K3 box and migrate accross.

 

The good news is that E2K7 SP1 supports direct PST import..... bye bye my faithfull friend ExMerge!

 

Take a look at the article below out for further info.

 

http://blogs.technet.com/eileen_brown/archive/2007/04/20/exchange-2007-sp1-now-available-to-download.aspx

[djm968]

It is a no-brainer

 

That used to mean "easy", do you mean "stupid"?

 

In my language it means "makes no sense"

[zag]

We're in a bit of a dilemma because we installed 2003 to test and then realised that it didn't suite our purpose ('cos of the mail stores) so we're now in a position of needing to remove 2003 (and all the AD trappings) and put a new 64 bit server in and use 2007. Does it clean up nicely when installed?

 

HBJB

 

I am trying to run them in parallel which is where the problems have occurred in the mail connector between the two. I think a standalone single 2007 box would have no problems.

[Heebeejeebee]

Does it clean up nicely when installed?

 

errr... I meant when it's uninstalled :oops:

 

... or will 2007 just re-integrate and take over the role?

 

HBJB

[PiqueABoo]

In my language it means "makes no sense"

 

OK, then I disagree. MS called it "feature incomplete". RTM wasn't finished and I think it's a good idea not to spend £££s until you know what you have to live with.

 

Especially when it's tax-payers money.

 

MS tell us about all the thought & effort that went into simplifying the GUI management, but couldn't get the screamingly obvious and relatively trivial to implement bulk-mailbox creation into the RTM GUI? Why ever not? That lack of PST import/export was the final nail: Exmerge has been useful to me for other scenarios in addition to initial config/migration.

 

It was definitely prudent to wait. That the world hasn't ended for people who put RTM in production the week it hit the streets doesn't change that.

[Psymon]

Couldnt install Exchange 2k7 on my Server08 RC0 test machine, with the SP1 build it will install on server 08.

[webman]

If you have problems with MSexchange just go with something better. Like Zimbra.

[djm968]

In my language it means "makes no sense"

 

OK, then I disagree. MS called it "feature incomplete". RTM wasn't finished and I think it's a good idea not to spend £££s until you know what you have to live with.

 

Especially when it's tax-payers money.

 

So you are basically saying that I should have made the client pay twice with tax-payers money?

 

Take this Example..... A public sector Client requests that an Exchange server is installed. I suggest that it would be better to wait until E2K7 is at SP1… and then install that however the, client insists that Exchange is installed ASAP and doesn’t want to wait.

 

I give him two options as follows.

 

Option1:

Install E2K3 then migrate to E2K7 when SP1 is released.

 

Option 2:

Install E2K7 RTM then SP1 when released.

 

Since the client had no PST data to migrate and no one on site with the required level of knowledge to even manage E2K3, I advised that the they went for Option 2 instead of charging twice. Once for E2K3 then for E2K7.

[zag]

Personally now I have installed 2007 I would recommend using 2003 for the next few years and then upgrading at a later date, I'm sure you can buy a 2007 license and run 2003 instead during that time.

 

It just seemed like an incomplete product at launch and even now. I remember 2003 was exactly the same(couldn't have mail stores larger than 10gb or something until a service pack upgrade).

 

Sometimes you forget how good a mature product like exchange 2003 is with mission critical stuff like email.

[PiqueABoo]

So you are basically saying that I should have made the client pay twice with tax-payers money?

 

No, I'm saying exactly what I said.