I recently (hopefully recently, my last post took two years to get published so I'm not sure when this one will go out, LOL) posted one of my typical light-hearted looks into life at Microsoft (it was about how office space is allocated, read it here). Although it was irrelevant to virtually everything, it elicited many interesting responses, including people complaining (I think) about us having it too good here. No argument there. Actually, I was intentionally portraying the situation in a negative light so as not to upset everyone too much. In reality, we all have 1000 square foot corner window offices (our office buildings were designed by MC Escher) that overlook a lake or mountains (our choice), with a private bathroom, a fold out bed for nap time, and a full service kitchen. But never mind that. There were also many comments on the feature set of Exchange 2007 (rather irrelevant to the pointless topic, but important nevertheless). They were mostly not liking certain feature take-backs in the release, particularly around the administrative GUI. I just want everyone to know that despite the light tone here, we do take these comments seriously. Let me assure you that the discussion that my post prompted generated many a transaction log on our corporate Exchange servers!! Some of you that have been reading our blog for a long time may have noticed that we have taken a very open position regarding the comments that we get on our blog posts. I believe that there were only 2 or 3 cases when we deleted a comment and that was because of some really inappropriate language. We want to keep your comments there, both positive and negative. We read every single one of them and respond to many. We do want to encourage you to post your opinions and ideas, but we do have ask something: if there is an area that is very upsetting to you or where you think we made a mistake, we ask that you would offer criticism about the product, and not the people who work on it. Also, since we actively look to these comments as evidence to make potential changes in our products, we again ask that you would provide specific, actionable feedback on our product. In other words, please explain what it is that bothers you and why it bothers you. What are you trying to accomplish that you can't? Sometimes the comments are obvious (we totally and completely get it that you need more GUI and it's unfortunate we weren't able to get as much of it in to E2K7 RTM as we'd hoped, but we hope that SP1 works better for you there), but sometimes they are not, so the more you explain your user scenario, the better a chance we'll be able to eventually do something about it. In closing, I'd just like to point out the obvious that every product that has ever shipped anywhere has had to make trade-offs between shipping on time, shipping with quality, and shipping with the right features. For Exchange 2007, we debated long and hard about features that we would ship. We had to balance investments that we wanted to make into the Exchange code base to allow for future innovation (would people be interested in a description of those architectural bets? Or if we posted it, would we just get more "you should have done <my feature foo>" instead? :), feature cuts we felt we had to make to get the quality we wanted to ship with and the timeline we felt it needed to ship in. We knew some of the cuts would be painful, and we have addressed many of the larger issues in SP1 (some posts on this coming your way, by the way!). Judging from the early success of Exchange 2007 sales, the many positive reviews we've garnered, and most customer feedback, we seem to have made some pretty good choices here. But obviously - not perfect. We always need to try to do better. I look forward to the responses this post may receive, and rest assured there are lots of people in Exchange who will be paying attention to them, as with all our posts on this blog. Thank you for coming back and caring enough to comment! - Jon Avner, Nino Bilic
Blog Post
60 Comments
- DeletedHi there,
it really would be good to see that full multi-language-testing is done everywhere. I saw problems with german umlauts (üöäÜÖÄß)in passwords in POP3 authentication. The testing group should have found that - reminds me of the early times of software.
Can you please state on this blog what's the right way for power users to administer public folders? The addpublicfolderpermissionrecursive.ps1 together with Outlook? EMS?
Also I'd like to know more about the fact, that sb. who has PF permission level 8 and EMS/EMC can mailenable the folder.
Some of my customers wanted to deploy Exchange UM to get rid of their variety of fax solutions that they "inherited" in decentralized Exchange 5.5 times. As soon as they figured out that Exchange is not able to send faxes, this thought was totally out of mind forever. So please implemet this with SP2 before more customers have been burnt.
About the help: can you please provide some examples for the CMDlets that are not the easiest imaginable? Some documentation about Exchange data types in Powershell would also be useful.
For future versions: Would it be possible to provide a managable way handle hosts that relay through Exchange? My customers are normally 20k seats and above and in such organizations there are normally hundreds of hosts that are not able to send authenticated SMTP emails. Some of them have Excel lists to keep track on who needs to send what for (or using CSVs and the set-receiveconnector, if admins are mature with EMS). Others are using dedicated internal sendmail relay machines just for that. Maybe that's an opportunity?
Last but not least I'd like to thank you guys for the great documentation. Without that, it would have been impossible to plan and deploy. - DeletedI just wanted to add my sincere appreciation for the work you do with this blog. It is one of the few sites with frequent and topical updates, that allow anonymous comments to be posted.
We all use Exchange and know the huge gains you have made with the product.
Thanks again for the opportunity to make these comments and have some input. It is refreshing to be able to explain our hurts to the actual developers. - DeletedQuote:
<Mike Lagase said:
lorennerol,
It appears that the issue you may be running in to is a possible trimming of working sets making task manager show that the overall memory for that process is only a certain amount of memory. >
Yes, I installed it immediately after that article was posted here (with great expectations). The problem persists. - DeletedAs I posted back when 2007 hit RTM, the split off from ADUC is killer for us. What we used to achieve with a Copy User in Ex2003-aware-ADUC now requires us to use ADUC, EMC/EMS, and AdisEdit. It really is inefficient and kills us as we are only a two man team.
I sympathize with those filling notepads and notecards with scripting syntax - we just don't use these commands enough to memorize them; but more than enough that it is very annoying not to have certain things in the gui. - Deletedlorennerol,
It appears that the issue you may be running in to is a possible trimming of working sets making task manager show that the overall memory for that process is only a certain amount of memory.
I talked about this in http://blogs.technet.com/mikelag/archive/2007/12/19/working-set-trimming.aspx. Have you installed the ntoskrnl.exe fix in http://support.microsoft.com/kb/938486 as this working set trimming issue will affect SQL servers as well.
Perfmon data should help show you what might be going on here with memory mgmt. - Deleted1) The ability to set calendar read permissions via GPO. Our company policy is that all calendars are visible to all employees, however there is no easy way to enforce this.
2) Support in virtual environments. This means VMware as well as Microsoft. If I can take a "whitebox" server and run tests on it to have it logo'd for Windows, why can't I do the same for a virtual server? Play nice with your competition, for the sake of your mutual customers.
3) I'll second (third? fourth?) the comments already posted on the SSL Cert thing. Too complex! - DeletedI would like to see a full article on troubleshooting the uninstall process of Exchange 2007. Uninstalling seems far from straight forward.
I'd also like to see an article explaining what changes are made in Active Directory on an install of Exchange and how to fix corrupted configuration. - DeletedAutomatic failover of send connectors on the HUB Transport boxes please. No longer having link-state status seems to kill this unless you use round robin DNS to a SMTP host.
- DeletedI'd like a documented way to get a count of messages into/out of a mailbox, either thru the Message Tracking GUI or thru PowerShell.
- DeletedThanks to everyone that commented! Keep it up! :)