Microsoft Exchange 2010

So we have heard that in some circumstances upgrading to Exchange 2010 isn’t such a good idea. The expense, the basic archiving functions, the server overhead for indexing functions and the allegedly clumsy way of email retrieval. There are positive points to the new system though, and we shall highlight a few of them here.

While Microsoft doesn’t hide the fact that it’s going to cost more than the last version, it does cite the benefits. Upgrading is going to be a significant burden on IT departments that are already squeezed tight, but a study released by Forrester alleges the cost of ownership can be recouped within six months for the average rollout. This can be done by making savings in other areas.

There are a few assumptions made, but in an ideal world, they do make sense. The first is that an organization can save money by not having to purchase SAN solutions. Improvements in Exchange I/O handling means it now plays nicely with slower storage. So the extra capacity you’ll need to use the archiving doesn’t have to be at a premium price.

There is the first assumption. To be able to use the new function, you’re going to need more storage. The spin here is not mentioning the need for the storage, but the fact you can spend less money on it that you might have had to. Neat trick huh?

One definite benefit of Exchange 2010 is its ability to take voicemail. The assumption here is that once you use it to take voicemails, you won’t need other systems to do it for you. Therefore, saving money on a separate system. Another great theory, and if you can find me a medium to large organization that uses only one system, has no legacy systems or who uses nothing but Blackberries then they will be the ones who will save money.

The inclusion of the archiving element to Exchange 2010 has already been mentioned in the storage area of the benefits, but can also be highlighted again in its own right. The ability to archive its own mail is an added benefit, and one of the reasons the platform is more expensive. The cost saving implication is that you don’t have to use third party vendors for email archiving.

The assumption here is that you have enough IT staff to index emails, retrieve them from storage, can extract them and make them usable. Also that you don’t mind having your Exchange servers running the significant processing overhead of full-text indexing to allow this to happen.

For those organizations who are committed to use Microsoft products and have the spare budget, Exchange 2010 will be a good investment. It can do more, offers more and is easier to manage and use than Exchange 2007. The ability to have voicemails translated to text is a good feature, as is the archive function. From the beta, Exchange 2010 looks to be a polished and capable platform for future email messaging. If you have the budget to cope with the upgrade.

The impending launch of Microsoft Exchange 2010 got quite a few SaaS vendors worried when they first heard about it. The new built-in archiving features of the platform were one of the main reasons they were in business.

I don’t think it is the end of SaaS email archiving services, not by a long shot. Firstly the email archiving is basic, and requires the clients to use Outlook 2010, which isn’t out yet except in beta as part of the Office 2010 suite.

Secondly using Exchange 2010 involves a significant investment in hardware, software and support. Something which many organizations just can’t afford right now. Considering many vendors offer the equivalent benefits already for a much lower cost, take up of Exchange and Outlook 2010 is expected to be limited for a year or so. Or at least until the economies of the world pick up.

The Exchange archival model also depends on the storage capabilities of the company. Unless many companies drastically improve their storage solutions, mailboxes will be limited, or restricted and the archive facility will lay idle. While hard drives are relatively inexpensive, they are still an added expense.

Many organization don’t allow full-text indexing on their Exchange servers. We all know this puts quite an overhead on the Exchange server, and will only work efficiently on low scale or low use platforms. Larger scale organizations simply can’t afford the slowdown in performance full indexing involves. The multi-mailbox search in Exchange 2010 depends on full-text indexing to work, therefore is largely useless.

Email archiving is based on three requirements. Storage, discovery and compliance. Exchange 2010 only addresses two of these concerns and those only on a basic level. The storage needs a hardware solution to make it work. Exchange has done much to improve how it handles storage by allowing multiple copies of databases, mailboxes and data. E-discovery is only addressed on a basic level, and as we see indexing involves compromises. Also emails can only be copied to another mailbox, not extracted from the system and provided immediately.

Compliance isn’t even touched by the new platform, so many organizations, especially those regulated by the SEC will still need a third party solution.

Exchange a made great strides in increasing management, usability, scalability and seems to be trying to drive down the cost of ownership. There are compromises though, the initial installation will cost a lot, both in time, resources and money. A new infrastructure will most likely be needed, involving the hardware, software and network. Then training for the support staff, as the new platform has many new features, and ways of doing things.

So SaaS email archiving vendors don’t have too much to worry about just yet. It’s going to be a year or three before Exchange 2010 is rolled out across the globe.