Home
%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-597737%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EExchange%20Server%20TechNet%20Library%20URLs%20updated%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-597737%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3E%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%20class%3D%22alert%22%3EWe%E2%80%99ve%20heard%20your%20concerns%20and%20take%20them%20seriously.%20We%E2%80%99re%20looking%20into%20what%20we%20can%20do%20to%20improve%20this%20situation%20for%20you%2C%20nothing%20definitive%20yet%20but%20be%20assured%20we%E2%80%99re%20working%20on%20it%20and%20will%20post%20an%20update%20asap.%3CBR%20%2F%3E%26nbsp%3B%3CBR%20%2F%3E%20%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22bold%22%3EUpdate%2011%2F30%2F2012%3A%20%3C%2FSPAN%3E%20Please%20note%2C%20ExBPA%20content%20does%20not%20have%20multiple%20versions.%20Content%20(links%20from%20the%20ExBPA%20tool)%20may%20currently%20display%20%22Exchange%202013%22%20as%20the%20version%2C%20but%20it's%20the%20same%20content%20the%20ExBPA%20tool%20linked%20to%20earlier.%20The%20CMS%20team%20is%20working%20to%20fix%20this.%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3EQuick%20note%20to%20inform%20you%20that%20we've%20updated%20Exchange%20TechNet%20Library.%20Starting%20today%2C%20if%20you've%20bookmarked%20an%20Exchange%202010%20article%20in%20the%20library%20(for%20example%2C%20%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22url%22%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Ftechnet.microsoft.com%2Fen-us%2Flibrary%2F%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Ehttp%3A%2F%2Ftechnet.microsoft.com%2Fen-us%2Flibrary%2F%3C%2FA%3E%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22lightyellow%22%3Ebb124558.aspx%3C%2FSPAN%3E%3C%2FSPAN%3E)%2C%20it'll%20take%20you%20to%20the%20Exchange%202013%20version%20of%20the%20article.%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3ENote%2C%20if%20an%20Exchange%202013%20version%20of%20the%20article%20does%20not%20exist%2C%20the%20URL%20will%20still%20take%20you%20to%20the%20Exchange%202010%20version.%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CH3%20id%3D%22toc-hId-1563543363%22%20id%3D%22toc-hId-1621035219%22%3EHow%20do%20I%20get%20to%20documentation%20for%20previous%20versions%3F%3C%2FH3%3E%0A%3COL%3E%0A%3CLI%3E%3CP%3E%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22bold%22%3EOther%20versions%20menu%3C%2FSPAN%3EYou%20can%20still%20reach%20the%20Exchange%202010%20version%20of%20a%20particular%20article%20by%20using%20the%20%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22UI%22%3EOther%20versions%3C%2FSPAN%3Eoption%20right%20below%20the%20page%20title.%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3E%3CIMG%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Flegacyfs%2Fonline%2Fmedia%2FTNBlogsFS%2Fprod.evol.blogs.technet.com%2FCommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles%2F00%2F00%2F00%2F31%2F06%2Fpostimages%2F6330.ExchangeLibraryNav-OtherVersions.png%22%20alt%3D%22%22%20%2F%3E%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3C%2FLI%3E%0A%3CLI%3E%3CP%3E%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22bold%22%3EAppend%20version%20info%3C%2FSPAN%3EYou%20can%20also%20get%20to%20the%20Exchange%202010%20version%20of%20a%20particular%20article%20by%20appending%20version%20information%20%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22url%20lightyellow%22%3E(EXCHG.141)%3C%2FSPAN%3Efor%20Exchange%202010)%20at%20the%20end%20of%20the%20URL%2C%20right%20before%20the%20file%20extension%20(%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22url%20lightyellow%22%3E.aspx%3C%2FSPAN%3E).%20So%20the%20Exchange%202010%20version%20of%20the%20above%20URL%20will%20be%20%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22url%22%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Ftechnet.microsoft.com%2Fen-us%2Flibrary%2F%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Ehttp%3A%2F%2Ftechnet.microsoft.com%2Fen-us%2Flibrary%2F%3C%2FA%3E%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22lightyellow%22%3Ebb124558(EXCHG.141).aspx%3C%2FSPAN%3E%3C%2FSPAN%3E.%20Please%20update%20your%20browser%20favorites%2Fshortcuts%20and%20links%20in%20any%20blog%20posts%20if%20you%20still%20want%20them%20to%20point%20to%20the%20Exchange%202010%20versions.%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3C%2FLI%3E%0A%3CLI%3E%3CP%3E%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22bold%22%3ENavigation%20tree%20%3C%2FSPAN%3EYou%20can%20use%20the%20navigation%20tree%20(on%20the%20left%20side%20of%20each%20page)%20to%20easily%20navigate%20to%20documentation%20for%20each%20Exchange%20Server%20version.%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3E%3CIMG%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Flegacyfs%2Fonline%2Fmedia%2FTNBlogsFS%2Fprod.evol.blogs.technet.com%2FCommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles%2F00%2F00%2F00%2F31%2F06%2Fpostimages%2F1425.ExchangeLibraryNav.png%22%20alt%3D%22%22%20%2F%3E%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3C%2FLI%3E%0A%3CLI%3E%3CP%3E%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22bold%22%3EShort%20URLs%3C%2FSPAN%3EYou%20can%20also%20get%20to%20the%20main%20documentation%20page%20for%20each%20Exchange%20Server%20version%20by%20using%20the%20following%20%3CA%20class%3D%22bold%22%20title%3D%22See%20prevoius%20post%3A%20'Navigating%20Exchange%20Content%20Like%20A%20Pro%20Using%20Short%20URLs%22%20href%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.technet.com%2Fb%2Fexchange%2Farchive%2F2011%2F07%2F22%2Fnavigating-exchange-content-like-a-pro-using-short-urls.aspx%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22nofollow%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Eshort%20URLs%3C%2FA%3E%3A%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CUL%20class%3D%22arrowlist%22%3E%0A%3CLI%3E%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22bold%22%3EExchange%20Server%202013%3C%2FSPAN%3E-%20%3CA%20class%3D%22bold%22%20title%3D%22Go%20to%20Exchange%20Server%202013%20documenation%20on%20TechNet%22%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fex2013docs%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Eaka.ms%2Fex2013docs%3C%2FA%3E%3C%2FLI%3E%0A%3CLI%3E%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22bold%22%3EExchange%20Server%202010%3C%2FSPAN%3E-%20%3CA%20class%3D%22bold%22%20title%3D%22Go%20to%20Exchange%20Server%202010%20documenation%20on%20TechNet%22%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fex2010docs%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Eaka.ms%2Fex2010docs%3C%2FA%3E%3C%2FLI%3E%0A%3CLI%3E%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22bold%22%3EExchange%20Server%202007%3C%2FSPAN%3E-%20%3CA%20class%3D%22bold%22%20title%3D%22Go%20to%20Exchange%20Server%202007%20documenation%20on%20TechNet%22%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fex2007docs%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Eaka.ms%2Fex2007docs%3C%2FA%3E%3C%2FLI%3E%0A%3C%2FUL%3E%0A%3C%2FLI%3E%0A%3CLI%3E%3CP%3E%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22bold%22%3EDownload%20help%20files%3C%2FSPAN%3EYou%20can%20also%20download%20the%20standalone%20help%20files%20in%20compiled%20HTML%20format%20(aka%20%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22newterm%22%3ECHMs%3C%2FSPAN%3E)%20from%20the%20following%20locations%3A%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CUL%20class%3D%22arrowlist%22%3E%0A%3CLI%3EDownload%20%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22bold%22%3EExchange%20Server%202013%3C%2FSPAN%3Ehelp%20-%20%3CA%20class%3D%22bold%22%20title%3D%22Download%20Exchange%20Server%202013%20help%20file%22%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fgetex2013docs%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Eaka.ms%2Fgetex2013docs%3C%2FA%3E%3C%2FLI%3E%0A%3CLI%3EDownload%20%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22bold%22%3EExchange%20Server%202010%3C%2FSPAN%3Ehelp%20-%20%3CA%20class%3D%22bold%22%20title%3D%22Download%20Exchange%20Server%202010%20help%20file%22%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fgetex2010docs%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Eaka.ms%2Fgetex2010docs%3C%2FA%3E%3C%2FLI%3E%0A%3CLI%3EDownload%20%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22bold%22%3EExchange%20Server%202007%3C%2FSPAN%3Ehelp%20-%20%3CA%20class%3D%22bold%22%20title%3D%22Download%20Exchange%20Server%202007%20help%20file%22%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fgetex2007docs%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Eaka.ms%2Fgetex2007docs%3C%2FA%3E%3C%2FLI%3E%0A%3C%2FUL%3E%0A%3C%2FLI%3E%0A%3C%2FOL%3E%0A%3CP%3E%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22author%22%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fbsuneja%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22nofollow%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3EBharat%20Suneja%3C%2FA%3E%3C%2FSPAN%3E%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%20class%3D%22note%22%3E11%2F12%2F2013%3A%20Post%20updated%20to%20show%20additional%20navigation%20options%20and%20links%20to%20help%20file%20downloads.%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-LABS%20id%3D%22lingo-labs-597737%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CLINGO-LABEL%3EAnnouncements%3C%2FLINGO-LABEL%3E%3CLINGO-LABEL%3Edocumentation%3C%2FLINGO-LABEL%3E%3C%2FLINGO-LABS%3E
Microsoft

We’ve heard your concerns and take them seriously. We’re looking into what we can do to improve this situation for you, nothing definitive yet but be assured we’re working on it and will post an update asap.
 
Update 11/30/2012: Please note, ExBPA content does not have multiple versions. Content (links from the ExBPA tool) may currently display "Exchange 2013" as the version, but it's the same content the ExBPA tool linked to earlier. The CMS team is working to fix this.

Quick note to inform you that we've updated Exchange TechNet Library. Starting today, if you've bookmarked an Exchange 2010 article in the library (for example, http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb124558.aspx), it'll take you to the Exchange 2013 version of the article.

Note, if an Exchange 2013 version of the article does not exist, the URL will still take you to the Exchange 2010 version.

How do I get to documentation for previous versions?

  1. Other versions menu You can still reach the Exchange 2010 version of a particular article by using the Other versions option right below the page title.

  2. Append version info You can also get to the Exchange 2010 version of a particular article by appending version information (EXCHG.141) for Exchange 2010) at the end of the URL, right before the file extension (.aspx). So the Exchange 2010 version of the above URL will be http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb124558(EXCHG.141).aspx. Please update your browser favorites/shortcuts and links in any blog posts if you still want them to point to the Exchange 2010 versions.

  3. Navigation tree You can use the navigation tree (on the left side of each page) to easily navigate to documentation for each Exchange Server version.

  4. Short URLs You can also get to the main documentation page for each Exchange Server version by using the following short URLs:

  5. Download help files You can also download the standalone help files in compiled HTML format (aka CHMs) from the following locations:

Bharat Suneja

11/12/2013: Post updated to show additional navigation options and links to help file downloads.

128 Comments
Not applicable

Why would you do this?

What is the logic behind punishing your techs by making them edit / update their links?

Wouldn't it be much easier to leave the existing links, and adding a link or pop-up to the Exchange 2013 updated article.

This is very poor support.

Not applicable

Just leave the existing links they way they were and add the one specific to Exchange 2013. This is WAY too confusing now. I'm never going to remember to type in v=exchg.141 at the end of the URL.

Is this REALLY the best way you could have handled this? Is this how other companies handle things? No.

Not applicable

Yea - like that's not going to confuse the heck out of people trying to find information. Change the URLs back!

Not applicable

everything I have bookmarked is now no longer valid? why did you do this? change it back please.

Not applicable

Why does Microsoft feel that anything that we have linked to from internal training and have in our bookmarks should change to the latest version, which is not what we are running? WTH???

Not applicable

I must admit, this is a very odd way of handling documentation. Basically all the old content is not going to be a pain in the ass to find unless we remember to modify the URL string on our bookmarks. Are you also going through all the Windows 7 links and replacing them with Windows 8 material too? Why keep the craziness limited to Exchange, let's just descend into total anarchy while we are at it..

Not applicable

noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Not applicable

In the same way most other consultants and admins would track articles for the products they work on I have a favorites folder for each version of Exchange, 5.5, 2000, 2003, 2007, 2010, 2013 so that I can look and see if I have pulled an article for a particular issue or process before. Why would you point everything for one version to another version, thats the most idiotic thing I've ever heard. Why don't YOU put a pop up asking if we WANT the 2013 version of the article before pushing us there automatically. Its like you guys do this stuff to piss your customers off on purpose.

Not applicable

Why on earth would you think that breaking previous established URLs was a good idea? What nutjob at Microsoft decided on this approach? Regardless, change it back to how it was NOW. All you needed to do was put a link in to help us go to the new Exchange 2013 articles under a different URL. Why are you making this so complicated and obfuscated? You picked the WORST possible option you could have chosen to do this.

Not applicable

I'm certainly glad everyone else had the exact same reaction as I did.  Why on Earth would you do this???  There's is virtually NEVER a time I would want to look up an old article but get sent to the new version. That is just stupid. Think about your customers Msoft, not what is easiest for you.

Not applicable

..not to mention every 2010 era blog post that links to source material is now wrong and confusing.

Can you take the time, step back and understand the consequences of this action to every other social/support platform out there that now links to the wrong info?

Not applicable

Let me just add my vote in here to revert back to the way it was and simply add the additional Ex2k13 material. I'm not looking to deploy Ex2k13 for at least another year and Ex2k10 is still fully supported. I don't want to change my links for the material I already have linked.

Not applicable

well - my job just got a lot harder. thanks Microsoft.

Not applicable

This makes perfectly good sense. After all, we have all replaced our 2010 environments with 2013, so why would we have any need for articles on Exchange 2010? I'm surprised Microsoft is even keeping the 2010 articles around, since we obviously have no use for them any longer.

Not applicable

I'm quite surprised by this. I suspect less than 1% of companies have even migrated to Exchange 2013 yet. I still know companies that are on Exchange 2003, 2000, and one that is still running 5.5. Why are you updating and removing critical information used to support your customers when the vast majority are not on 2013 yet? 99% of your support base is NOT going to be referencing Exchange 2013 stuff yet. You are jumping the gun here and made a big mistake. Change it back, please, and include the new information separately from the Exchange 2010 stuff.

Not applicable

"Note, if an Exchange 2013 version of the article does not exist, the URL will still take you to the Exchange 2010 version."

so, we're never really sure where the information is going to be at this point. It may be in our previous linked article references, it may take us to new information that we don't want, or we have to manually change html version string info.

Okay, who is the knucklehead that came up with this plan? This is idiotic.

Not applicable

PLEASE do not break all of >OUR< documentation by changing yours. That makes no sense.

Make a product selection link to go to the 2013 on the 2010 document so we can opt to go there, don't force us to the wrong version just because of some marketing ploy...

Not applicable

Folks, thanks for all the feedback! We're looking into it. We will update this post if and when we have more to share - likely by end of next week.

Note that this isn't the first time - it has been a practice since Exchange 2007 > Exchange 2010. This is perhaps the first time you've seen a post about it on EHLO, and it has provided us the opportunity to get your feedback.

Not applicable

Thanks for the update.

I have to add that this has to be the most ill-thought out plan for updating documentation I've ever seen. How many companies have deployed Exchange 2013? Maybe 1000 - at most. Yet, you've updated the documentation links that now affect 100,000+ companies still running Exchange 2010. Where is the sense in that? What a really, really, ill thought out process you came up with. Let's switch things back to what they were and come up with a better plan. Really.

Not applicable

Wow. Lot's of negativity here about this change. How about just putting the Exchange 2010 articles and web links back. Then you can create new Exchange 2013-specific ones and create a link at the top of each Exchange 2010 articles stating "for more information on the changes in Exchange 13, click here". Then everyone would be happy. Changing address pointers to information that has been present for the past 3 years is going to generate a lot of negativity, especially when almost no one has moved to 13 yet.

Not applicable

I couldn't figure out why I kept hitting 2010 stuff when I was googling for 2007.  Your comment that this isn't the first time you've done this, is now making sense of why when I search I'm not hitting links that I think I should be hitting.

You may have done it before, but that didn't make it any more logical the first time.  Think of the impact to people who link - including your own Ehlo blog past posts.

Not applicable

So THAT is why I had such a hard time a few years ago trying to find the 2007 reference information. You changed it. Ah-ha! I thought I was going crazy at the time, but no - you bozos changed things and that's what actually occurred. Now it makes sense.

MS is really trying to piss people off. You need to hire someone who can do this right because you have made the exact same mistake all over again. I'm flabbergasted that this was the defacto way of updating TechNet articles (aka just overwrite the information with new information ala Fahrenheit 451 style).

Not applicable

microsoft did this before as well. please change all the exchange tech references back incl 2007. they should all be separate and not overwritten. not smart. will you change it back?

Not applicable

@Bharat Suneja,

Why would u ever think that overwrite current information links would be a good idea? What a crazy chaotic mess of method you have. And we reveal it has been going on for years now. Wow. You must like very angry admins because% not upgrading our 600 user exchange 2010sp2 setup for at least another year. It is good to know that we won't have access to any of our current linked information. Way to screw everything up. Nicely job guys. Now PLEASE change things back where was.

Thanks >

 Josh R-----

Not applicable

- just add the Exchange 2013 info as a new hyperlink and leave the old links as they are? Why is there a need to replace previous (And still relevant) information while making it harder for us to find things? What you should do IMO is add a hyperlink at the top of each existing article pointing to the new articles and vice-versa (a hyperlink on the new articles pointing back to the old ones).

G.

Not applicable

I appreciate the efforts to consolidate everything in one place and I save most of my stuff in Evernote so this is mostly irrelevant, but same thing as the other commentators are saying. Change things back and make it all separate. You've broken valuable links that people depend on to get their jobs done and that is not cool.

Not applicable

I agree with Team Terry. Why are you punishing your techs with changing all the links? This is very poor support. You did this before too? Shame on you all. You are making life hell for all techs.

Not applicable

Thank you for listening to our comments and reconsidering how you publish this information. Breaking URL reference links for such a well established and still used product such as Exchange 2010 is probably not the best idea. Glad you are taking our comments to heart.

:)

Not applicable

Is this just an Exchange "thing" or is Microsoft also planning on overwriting the documentation for other products like Windows 7 (replaced with Windows 8), Server 2008R2 (replaced with 2012), and SCCM 2007 (replaced with SCCM 2012)? If Microsoft is overwriting all their previous documentation and links, this is a tragic revelation indeed. Can you provide more insight into what product links are no longer valid?

Not applicable

I have a ex2k10 book on my shelf that has reference in to TechNet articles now no longer works. will micsft replace my books for free now? this totally bs.

Not applicable

You overwrote critical and current information links to support a newer product that hasn't even yet hit 1% penetration? Are you trying to make supporting Exchange as painful as possible?

Not applicable

This is a really, really horrible idea!  I'm an MCT and I have a MS Word Doc that contains many helpful links that I distribute to my students.    So, now my document needs to be updated but what about the hundreds of students that I've already sent the doc to?  Now they have outdated information as well.    I do remember seeing the Exch07 links update to Exch2010 but did not realize that it was a common practice.  I actually thought those were simply errors.  Why would anyone think it is a good idea to do this on purpose?

Not applicable

@Bharat - yes we noticed this isn't the first time you have changed documentation on us, but this is the first time you have given us the opportunity to voice our frustration on this action in a single location.

No that you are, but please don't take the approach of "you didn't complain last time" because if you had made a post such as this the last time we certainly would have.

And just to be clear, we are asking that you NOT change the topic of your published articles (Exchange 2013 versus Exchange 2010) any more than you would a technet artcile, white paper, or even published book. Revisions, tweaks, clarifications are fine and encouraged, but changing the source topic on a published artcile is like trying to change the Exchange version in a book you have already published and people have purchased. You wouldn't do it in that case, so why do it in all of the other cases where people use the electronic published versions of data?

Links to new product version articles in existing articles = yes, changing existing articles to be the new product version and then providing a new link to the older data = no.

Not applicable

Same thing everyone else is saying........change it back so our documentation works. We aren't even thinking about deploying 2013 yet and need the links to remain as they were.

Not applicable

is a matter of practice at Microsoft? I don't even know where to begin on the stupidity involved. Does Microsoft not find it troublesome for internal reference, let alone customer reference to do this? How come no one saw how poor of an idea this all was before now?

Not applicable

Brilliant I say! Let's keep those admins on their toes. As a sadomasachist, I completely agree that erasing linked data and replacing it with different information is the way to go. I love the pain and so will all the other admins out there. If they complain, they are wusses. I say go for it! Full speed ahead. Let us erase all the data on ALL the linked MS articles and replace it with different data. Love the pain. Be the pain. If it doesn't kill you it makes you stronger. Way to go MS!!! You guys (and gals) totally rock!

Not applicable

That's all I can say about it. This sucks!

Not applicable

Amen to all the other comments here - this is a poor practice.  Perhaps it wasn't a bigger issue during the 2007 -> 2010 transition because a lot of people skipped 2007 and went from 2003 directly to 2010?  I would say at this point the majority of people are on 2010 and not 2013, why alienate your audience?

Not applicable

In other words, when we get a new e-mail in our inbox can you implement a feature that will just overwrite the previous e-mail from that user. That way not only will we have this awesome new experience when searching for TechNet articles to solve problems, but we'll also have the great experience within our Outlook clients as well? If you could also port this new feature over to Word too, that would be fantastic. I can't wait to tell all my end users that their pesky docx files will simply be overwritten each and every time they create a new document.

Oh, the fun we'll all have!

Seriously, though. The idea, as countless others have pointed out, sucks royally. Please change things back to the way they worked and not this broken hodge-podge mess you've created.

Not applicable

Hi

Impacts of this massive Weblink changes : URLs in ExBPA's tool reports are broken ?

I recently noticed that web links (used for redirect to fix errors/warning/info entries)  included in reports of any "Exchange 2010 SP2 Best practice Analyzer" tools are now BROKEN (ie HTTP 404).

To me, the behavior is compatible with your massive changes of links in Exchange documentation.

Not applicable

Lots of people agree with the views expressed in www.windowsitpro.com/.../exchange-technet-update-unwelcome-unwanted-144781 and itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/.../exchange-technet-library-urls-updated-but-why. I have received massive feedback on this topic and none of it is positive towards the stance taken by Microsoft. Please revert to the previous situation and allow people to choose the information they get from the Internet rather than forcing Exchange 2013 down their throats.

Not applicable

Well this is a fine kettle of fish you've gotten us all in. Now my Exchange v10 BPA links are broken. Sounds like more than Steven Sinofsky should have been fired at Microsoft.

Not applicable

why does microshaft insist on changing everything? we all hate win8. now you change support links exchange too?  you hate us. why do you hate us? we want to do our jobs and you make things a problem

Not applicable

Gee Bharat, you added more information about how WE can change our process to access info that was previously working perfectly. This decision shows Microsoft is just as arrogant as Apple. Remember the famous 'YOU are holding it wrong' in reference to antennae issue with the iPhone. Sometimes the customer is RIGHT.

Please just accept that you guys made the wrong decision. We all make wrong decisions, but it is how we act on those wrong decisions that we are judged.

Just roll back the old links and include a link to the same info for Exchange 2013. Keep your techs happy.

We are the ones that guide Management decisions that can result in Microsoft's bottom line.

We are the ones that have to suffer the nightmare of supporting Vista / Windows 8 in an Enterprise environment.

Please make our life just that little bit easier.

Please... just roll back the links.

I think you can see by the 42 negative comments here, this is NOT a popular move.

Not applicable

"We're looking into it"? Just undo it.

Not applicable

Is this the fall out from legalizing Marijuna in Washington?  "Dude, where's my link?" LOL

Not applicable

I like it.  It was painful to find a link to e2007 when I'm looking for the e2010 version.  This will be great in the long run.  

Not applicable

Unbelievable. 99% of the existing customers can't migrate to Exchange 2013 yet because co-existence is not ready yet, but you force us to the new version of the documentation. What's the point to that?

Not applicable

Tony Redmond has described the reasons why this is a PR disaster.  It's an example of techies "in too deep" and not taking a step back to look at the big picture of what they're presenting.  It's simply astonishing that intelligent people in this team didn't sit down and ask "what's this change going to be like in real life to use?" A classic example of all brains and no common sense.  

Not applicable

Please, please, please change it back. Then decide the best way forward. Even when I search for Exchange 2010 articles and it returns a list (this is in your search engine on your technet site), it then opens the 2013 pages. Insane!