Ed Brill posted it first, so thanks Ed. I wanted to get this up on my space ASAP so that people on this side see how it does not make any sense.
OK So I have some issue with what he posts as “normal”
“Given the rapidly improving hardware and the fact that the most expensive component (storage) wears out. Regular hardware refreshes in the order of every 3-4 years are needed. Doing both a major-version in-place upgrade followed by a migration to new hardware is a model that combines the worst of both approaches.”
Yes and in the Lotus Domino arena we take advantage of those improvements too only we don’t have to come up with a 3 month plan to migrate a single server, rather we upgrade in place then run a few commands (if needed) to upgrade the mail box and we are done. When did storage start to “wear out” again? I missed that tech note?
“The migration model is well suited to most organizations because it allows you to move your least sensitive mailboxes first, your most sensitive mailboxes ( execs? application mailboxes?) last and have a great coexistence story.”
This comment or point makes no sense at all. Why worry about any mailboxes at all when I can upgrade the entire server in under an hour and walk away knowing it all upgraded without any issues because we did not have to touch any of the data and Lotus Domino still will see a performance gain because of the new release of the server.
This entire post is moronic at best in explaining what is accepted as normal in the Exchange world. In the past I have upgraded 10 – 20 Lotus Domino Server with over 5000 mail boxes and 200 – 300 applications in less than an 8 hour period with no down time and few issues. Most of the issues we did see were Administration(back-end) problems that did not impact the use of the server or mail delivery.
Using the “path” for Exchange you would see many hours of downtime and I would submit tons of issues with logistics and mail box location, plus all the moving mail here, migrating this and “storage wearing out”, lord knows there are going to be some big time failures.
Now if I ran a small 10 – 20 person company with Exchange that would be fine. I could take the entire weekend, waste it in the office and eat lots of junk food. All while my family and friends are out enjoying the weekend.
Or I could have 30,000 users and 300 servers and upgrade them in the same amount of time and still be able to enjoy my Sunday….you pick your poison! Not to mention all that Exchange handles is MAIL! While Lotus Domino is doing Mail, Applications, HTTP and all kinds of other things. So not only did I upgrade my mail delivery system I also upgraded a few others things as well all at the same time. If you want to upgrade Microsoft’s Exchange, Sharepoint, Application Systems, and IIS Web Servers all in the same weekend you are asking for trouble.
I ask the CIOs and CEOs, why on earth would you pick a Microsoft solution over the much simpler Lotus solution? Why would you waste time and money keeping alive an Exchange Solution that clearly by this example is not doing what they can to simplify your IT or reduce costs? Start doing the math on this and figure out that Microsoft is only interested in making tons of money and keeping it’s partners busy doing MIGRATIONS! They could care less about your costs, your business, and lowering them. Microsoft is slowly destroying itself with these types of 1990 IT moves. IT needs to be simple and easy to manage. Microsoft is not making it easy or inexpensive for anyone right now. Not to mention the colossal failings of Windows Desktop (Vista) and the inefficiencies of the Windows Server too, they don’t make a very good case for the future.
This is where Microsoft loses every argument based on logic and common I.T. sense!