Its my understanding based on conversations in bars (stratumsein) that Exchange mail is taking up THREE times more disk space than notes mail. there goes the 'it costs less to run' argument....

---* Bill

hehe... this "problem" seamed to be similar which a customer hat 4 month ago. Some hosted MS Small business Server (no I will not tell the hoster *g*) send received emails in a loop. The hoster was working with MS on the problem but it took 2 days to create a hotfix. Oh... and the customer got every spam email and all other emails more than 30 times :-).

thanks for sharing!

Its my understanding based on conversations in bars that it's impossible for a messaging system to be as inefficient as Lotus Domino - and to suggest that Lotus consumes less disk-space or network is laughable.

@4 Oh, it's hard to be worse than Notes/Domino for email, that's what it takes a big company like Microsoft to succeed every time it tries.

@4 - you can accuse Lotus Notes/Domino of many flaws, but being "inefficient" is really not one of them.

Then again, all sorts of strange conversations happen in bars. I actually had a conversation with somebody in a pub a while ago where he tried to convince me that Vista was good. Ha ha ha.
:-)

@4 - how do you justify your comment that Notes/Domino is inefficient? Please explain.

@4 - Im interested in your argument. If you are just trolling... then dont bother, but I am surprised by the disk space statement vis a vis domino-exchange. I would expect Domino to take up a lot more disk space then exchange due to the nature of mail file storage. Im interested to see why this is not the case. As for server level performance... Domino seriously beats the crap out of exchange, unless someone starts quoting an MS sanctioned report/advertisement.

Thanks for sharing this with us Vince.

I've been meeting customers exploring Notes vs. Outlook that think their decision is based upon the UI, because 'users like it more'. There's so much more into messaging system, including server admin and related costs - that sometimes get overlooked, until it's too late - like in Philips.

@4 - I was in a bar recently and was convinced by someone that pigs do indeed fly...

Schadenfreude . . .

I find the comments quite interesting. It is quite possible to produce a completely crap exchange implementation and it is quite possible to produce a completely crap Notes/Domino installation.

Not so long back I had two Exchange servers performing pitifully over an 8mbit wan based VPN. I simply couldn't get the network guys to look at it. It's just Exchange, it's crap.

Then I finally got a Domino server on the other end. Bingo. Same crap performance. When I finally got the network guys fully engaged they found that half the packet were going to North America before coming back to Germany.

Cool, but Exchange is crap isn't it... This was E5.5 also. When we got the network fixed it was rock solid and performed perfectly.

I'd be interested to see that Philips were using more than 100 Terrabytes for mail under Exchange. I wonder if all the users now have 9 mailboxes for clustering instead of the 3 under the large Domino clusters?

I simply can't believe it. Unless it's E2007 and they now have full indexes to cope with too. Wouldn't that be funny.... :-)