Exchange 2003 Service Pack 2 (SP2) is here!

One thing I noted, the sp2 release seems to have somewhat uncoordinated documentation. Even the page which says it has the "most up-to-date" documentation on Exchange 2003, the technical library page at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/exchange/2003/library/default.mspx , does not have any mention of anything newer than the sp1 release notes at present.

Anyway, the purpose of this comment is to say that using some direct examples from the custom weighting file in the release notes doesn't seem to work in my testing. I'm not sure if it's something in my environment or not, but I had my custom weighting file suddenly stop working (none of the entries were having any influence) and seem to have narrowed it down to whenever I have a text entry of 6 characters or less, the entire file's custom weights are no longer used, and no event log errors are logged. As soon as I remove any 6 character or less text entries, the file works again. The file is still being read by the process (confirmed by auditing) but there are no errors generated...

Eufreka: I use a Treo 650 daily, and no one would be happier than me if Palm updated the device to support Direct Push. However, given their lackluster support of EAS, I'm not holding my breath.

As for DataViz, I'm not sure why you think they think the Palm market is too small to "bother porting" the Direct Push version of RoadSync. I use RoadSync on my Treo and love it. Don't assume that they have the resources to do every potential product at once.

I don't think there's a conspiracy here. The Exchange team only stands to gain from widespread support of Direct Push, and they are working to make that happen.

other than IMF V1 the new version doesnt care at all for the ip accept list under connection filtering, which means ever mail needs to pass the IMF. Any suggestion how to implement a IP-based whitelist? I cant believe this important part has been forgotten...

Hal: If you don't mind, I will wait (anxiously) for more information from someone like KC Lemson or Paul Robichaux, or perhaps even Sami Khoury.

Or better yet, hopefully, eventually, someone in the press will actually ask a few pertinent questions, such as:

Will Palm update the Treo 650's software to enable Direct Push functionality? If, so, when? If not, why not?

Why does DataViz consider a market of 2+ million (today) PalmOS devices too small for it to bother porting its Direct Push-enabled RoadSync client? (Especially if there is no competing application or update from the manufacturer.) Remember, the sofware would be fully usable on ANY wireless PalmOS PDA, as well as on both the Treo 600 and the 650...

And finally, WHY did Microsoft delete the names of its EAS licensees from the EX2003 SP2 announcement webpage?

Okay, first things first: Who said the Treo 650 will be upgraded for direct push. Names, dates, places or publication, if you please.

Second, are you aware that Direct Push is an entirely different technology from today’s AUTD? Are you also aware that not only would Palm have to rewrite the code including drivers, the carriers would have to test and certify the upgraded device for their network? And who would bear the expense of supporting said upgrade? And all of this on top of the fact that Palm did not even license the entire ActiveSync product for the 650 to start with?

Now, before you go off half cocked, I am interested in upgrades. In particular there is a large installed base of SMT5600 and MPx220 users, of which I am one. I would love to just upgrade and have all the new stuff. But it is simply is not going to happen. Good for you if Palm elects to go the upgrade path, but it was a blinding flash of the obvious that it isn’t going to happen for me.

As I said before, I may be missing something here. So help me out and post the names, dates, places or publications where it was said the Treo 650 would be upgraded. That will give hope to all of us wanting an upgrade path. Otherwise this is a non starter.

Hal: You must spend more time at the water cooler than I, but I guess the good news is that you appear to now agree that Microsoft DID say that Palm could update its EAS-enabled devices to utilize Direct Push.

Clearly, that means that (contrary to what you previously claimed) while MSFP might be needed in new WM5 devices, it is NOT required in NON-WM5 devices. (Again, I say AGAIN, that is supported by the existence of DataViz's Symbian UIQ client that features Direct Push.)

So, that brings me back to a simple question that apparently ONLY I (and a couple of others) are interested in:

Since Palm *can*, WILL Palm update the Treo 650's software to enable Direct Push functionality? If, so, when? If not, why not?

Now, granted YOU may not be interested in the answer to that question, but I truly am. And I would think many other Treo 650 users (and LifeDrive users, too, for that matter) would be interested also.

Sure, I have other questions, but they are related to the fundamentals of how this is all playing out. I for one am simply STUNNED that apparently NOT ONE journalist has asked Palm this question (let me repeat it):

Since Palm *can*, WILL Palm update the Treo 650's software to enable Direct Push functionality? If, so, when? If not, why not?

So, really, Hal, as I asked you before (setting aside your personal prejudices about the issue), what is NOT newsworthy about that question?

eufreka, clearly we drink at different water coolers and must read different blogs, forums, etc.

"In its original announcement of Exchange 2003 SP2, Microsoft said EXPLICITLY that Palm (and Nokia, Symbian and even Motorola) COULD utilize DIRECT PUSH features of Exchange SP2." I think the key word here is COULD.

I feel like I am missing something in this conversation. Can you give a specific example of someone from MS or Palm saying that the 650 WILL BE upgraded?

Hal: Yes, I took your statements, "Eufreka, how in the world can you feel misled by MS on this???.... Don't blame MS for your lack of attention to detail." as an attack.

What I don't understand is your kneejerk defense of them, given that you are not familiar with the facts.

In its original announcement of Exchange 2003 SP2, Microsoft said EXPLICITLY that Palm (and Nokia, Symbian and even Motorola) COULD utilize DIRECT PUSH features of Exchange SP2. As continuing evidence of that FACT, please note that another EAS licensee, DataViz, has already developed and is previewing a working SYMBIAN UIQ client that does include Direct Push!

But behind the scenes, some strange things have happened (as described earlier in this thread and via the included external links)...and the Conspiracy Theory interpretation is pretty simple:

Even though Palm is an EAS licensee and Microsoft has explicitly said they could update their existing devices to utilize the Direct Push feature--there is absolutely NO DISCUSSION of this by the media!?!?!?!

Even though DataViz is an EAS licensee and originally announced its intention to produce a PalmOS version of RoadSync with MORE features than VersaMail; after the announcement of Exchange 2003 SP2, DataViz basically dropped all development of the PalmOS client, and publicly changed their Product Matrix to indicate they would NOT produce a Direct Push enabled client for PalmOS, even though they CAN, and even though they already have produced one for Symbian!?!?!?

What other event occurred between the original announcement of Exchange 2003 SP2 and today? Microsoft and Palm announced the WM5-based Treo 700w.

Reductionist thinking says that these things are related, and that view is reinforced by Microsoft's "quiet, behind-the-scenes" re-editing of historical documents to remove language that is no longer "convenient."

After all, as I have repeatedly stressed (along with others), all evidence suggests that the Treo 650 is (and the other EAS-enabled PalmOS devices with VersaMail are) emminently suitable for upgrade to include Direct Push capability.

So, I feel it is well past time to settle the issue, and cannot understand why the "professional journalists" that supposedly cover these issues (and companies) seem so reluctant to either understand or pursue the matter. And why, despite my own repeated inquiries, I cannot get an answer myself:

Will Palm update the Treo 650's software to enable Direct Push functionality? If, so, when? If not, why not?

Why does DataViz consider a market of 2+ million (today) PalmOS devices too small for it to bother porting its Direct Push-enabled RoadSync client? (Especially if there is no competing application or update from the manufacturer.) Remember, the sofware would be fully usable on ANY wireless PalmOS PDA, as well as on both the Treo 600 and the 650...

Hal, this is not a full explanation of the issue; only the highlights. But, really, what is NOT newsworthy in this situation?

We just started testing SP2 and getting an error at the ActiveSync sub component install. Error 0xc0070643. However, SP2 seems to have installed. At least according to System Manager...

Any idea?


By the way, MBSA is still not up to date and is reporting that SP2 isn't release yet.

eufreka, my apology if you took my last comment as an "attack". Not so. Sorry.

I must not understand your concern. Are you saying that MS posted somewhere that the Treo 650 would upgraded to WM5?