jkroll at fas.harvard.edu
Thu Oct 30 13:21:38 EDT 2008
This claim strikes me as ridiculous. Integration is the PROBLEM with
using Exchange. It doesn't play well across platforms, versions, etc.
It's also very heavyweight. Otherwise, it's an excellent product,
That said, every organization I've been involved with that used
Exchange has suffered severe mail downtime on a regular basis. I don't
know what has happened with newer versions, so they might be more
stable, but I'm very wary.
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 1:19 PM, Bruno Afonso <bafonso at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, if it makes you feel any better, harvard's faculty is moving to
> exchange too. The main reason is actually that scheduling is very very
> good. That's a fact and no matter how much you hate m$ it will still
> beat most systems out there in terms of integration, etc.
> Also, microsoft is very aggressive in their proposals to schools.
> On 10/30/08, Quentin Smith <quentin at mit.edu> wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 Oct 2008, Joshua Kroll wrote:
>> > On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Quentin Smith <quentin at mit.edu> wrote:
>> > > On Thu, 30 Oct 2008, Bruno Afonso wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > - harvard would never be able to give to their students 5gig emails
>> > > > anytime in the near future. outsourcing would be the only way.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > MIT does their own mail hosting. Our quotas are currently 1GB by default
>> > > 2GB for the asking; it's totally plausible to have 5GB quotas on
>> > > mail.
>> > >
>> > I agree with Quentin. Let us do a small calculation:
>> > There are, I think, about 10,000 FAS users (does anyone know?). If
>> > they each had a 5GB quota, we would need about 50 TB of storage plus
>> > maybe the same amount for backup/mirroring. If we assume Harvard is
>> > smart enough to figure out how to buy this equipment for $0.50/GB (HCS
>> > just bought 24 TB at $0.56/GB), they would only need to spend about
>> > $50,000 on equipment. Now, they would have to spend money on staff
>> > time to install/configure/maintain this equipment, but I'll bet you it
>> > would even have been CHEAPER than the outsourcing.
>> > Please quibble with my figures if you think they're off.
>> I think you're making the big assumption that each user is actually going
>> to use their full quota. It's more likely than with generic file storage,
>> maybe, but I still doubt most users are going to fill their quota. You can
>> probably knock 50% or more off the requirements. (Though, honestly, $50k vs.
>> $25k is probably about the same for an organization the size of Harvard)
>> Also, note that MIT has at least 20,000 accounts, all with >1GB mail
>> Unfortunately, MIT is also currently looking into moving into some kind of
>> hosted system. They seem to have already dismissed most of the big names,
>> and they're currently running a pilot of... Exchange.
>> > Josh
> Bruno Afonso
> http://brunoafonso.com (personal, mostly portuguese)
> http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:BrunoAfonso (Professional, english)
More information about the hcs-discuss