RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Money + MU = bad

["Spurling, Shannon" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

...

And as Shannon says, the staff who run the servers are seldom consulted
about the decisions (or if they were at the beginning it's lost in the
paperwork), especially if it's going to be a multi-campus one. 

Jim 
...

Also, I think it may be time to reevaluate the package they are using, but that's not in line with some people's political agenda. I think there are some less expensive solutions that might be more scalable, but since they are not Microsoft, they won't look at them. Now, when I say this, I am not talking about a CC:mail to Exchange type migration. I am talking about these interesting products that are supposed to be drop in replacements for Exchange. Those are some interesting products. I always find it interesting when a second company bests Microsoft or Intel at their own game, and within the law. I enjoyed using Dr Dos, AMD has made some fine processors, and there are several other examples that Microsoft has squashed. This was the whole point of the anti-trust lawsuit. Microsoft, under the banner of a free market, is using it's large size to kill companies that have made innovations on products that they sit on. 
So, here's a topic for discussion. When do you punish large companies for being to big? And when do you make sure they receive protection from having their IP stolen? The crude fact of the market is that a good balance is hard to maintain, and now we have swung to the side of large protected corporations. This is what I think they tried to fix back in the early 1900's with anti-trust laws. And then, when they didn't do enough, we ended up in the great depression. Well, the food market is controlled by one or two mega-corporations. The airline industry is collapsing into one or two big shops. The aerospace industry is one big company and a few small specialty ones. The phone companies are reconverting, and then we have Microsoft, who is trying to own the computer industry. And all the recording and entertainment companies are forming "Unions", through the RIAA and the MPAA. Isn't there laws against price fixing and stuff like that? What do you think the main purpose of the RIAA and MPAA are? Protecting their property? That's part of it, but where do you draw the line between that and price fixing? When they have complete control over a product, they can produce market pressures that will fix the price. They don't have to come out and make any formal agreements or verbally say let's fix at this price...
Okay, how'd I get to this point! Ah! Thread creep! :-)

Shannon Spurling
WAN Engineer -Specialist

MOREnet, Network Services, Core Network
3212 LeMone Industrial Blvd.
Columbia, MO 65201

Main:(573) 884-7200   Fax:(573)884-6673

EMAIL:PROTECTED
EMAIL:PROTECTED



-----Original Message-----
From: Heivilin, Jim 
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 9:14 AM
To: EMAIL:PROTECTED
Subject: RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Money + MU = bad


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Spurling, Shannon 
> Subject: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Money + MU = bad
> 
> Would here be a good place to insert a snide comment on the 
> University/Hospital's complete disregard for fiscal matters? =)
> Rick
> 
<snip>
> Actualy, the migration to Exchange wasn't exactly driven by staff 
> either.... Several evaluations of the exchange platform pointed out 
<snip>
> and I doubt they would let it happen.
> 
As a general rule I usually delete-without-reading most of the far
reaching discussions you guys have here but I saw the subject and budget
concerns caused me to read this one.  I always have a few comments when
people start poking at the email folks since I've watched from the
sidelines for quite awhile now.  

Point 1. 
Exchange with the problems it has is still better than ccMail.  Which is
not to say that ccMail is a *bad* program, but rather than having a
hundred post offices, each with three hundred users is WAY beyond the
scope of what the program was designed to do in the first place.  It was
intended to be a small business email system with maybe 10 or 15 post
offices with  a 100(?) users on each.  (my numbers may be off, that was
a long time ago and I was never the ccMail expert anyway)  We weren't
using it the way it was designed so it shouldn't be a surprise that it
didn't work very well. 

Point 2. 
Our exchange setup now has one set of servers and 50+k users in the
global address book.  From what I understand we have one of the largest
implementations of it anywhere.  I had heard that we were told Microsoft
didn't recommend we do things the way we have.  So, again, we seem not
to be using the product the way it was designed and again, we shouldn't
be surprised if there are problems.  

--
To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/

--
To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/