I don't disagree with that. That is, in fact, a bit of the tact that the OpenExchange product of another thread follows - you drop the CD in a new box and off it goes - OS, app, etc, all as a single install.
I fully expect the evolution of small business boxes to probably accelerate. Things like the Colbalt Cube that are simple, multifunction boxes for sub-full time admin places. But I also see an evolution of remotely managed appliances - where professional admins do remote management of multiple customer's appliances. Roger ------------------------------------------------------ Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA > -----Original Message----- > From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:craig.dupler@;boeing.com] > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 2:30 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: somewhat OT > > > So Roger, does this mean that you are getting ready for the sobering > messages? > > First, let me say that I am not privy to any advanced product > planning in > what I am about to say, and am only speculating. I fully > expect to see a > pure hardware version of an entry level Exchange Server > within ten years. > The design goal would have to be such that a professional sys > admin is not > required. My guess is that initially it would be targeted at > that same > mid-tier that you identify, but perhaps a bit lower (25-100 > seats) at first. > It has to go that way. If you look at what is happening in > networking as a > whole, you have companies like LinkSys and D-Link that are > almost totally > focused on idiot proof boxes for basic functionality. Intel, > Nortel and > more recently Microsoft have all gone chasing after this > space as well. It > only makes sense that this space will grow up to include a line of > mini-blade or little box headless servers that do all of the > basics (mail, > telephony, web hosting, etc.). General purpose storage and > print servicing > is already happening. > > As we all know, little machines grow up to become big > machines. 20 years > from now, it is not unreasonable to project that even quite > large systems > will be simple hardware modules that you add to your pile of > network pieces. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad@;inovis.com] > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 11:15 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: somewhat OT > > > Simple. Its not cost effective to outsourse at the levels > they target. They > missed the boat from day one. > > There is a relative break even point for having your own "IT" staff, > generally in the 25-75 user range, depending on what your > company actually > does. More than 100 or so, and you really need someone. Once > you've got > someone inhouse, they tend to have to be a jack-of-all-trades > type, and do a > lot of fumbling through. But the job gets done. > > Traditionally, an NT box with Exchange 5.5 Standard wasn't really that > expensive - you could probably do that for <$10k. Win2k with > E2k has raised > the prices a bit, but not exhorbinantly such. With leasing > options, that > server could be a few hundred a month. > > Like any service provider, the good fruit is in the middle of > the tree, not > the low hanging stuff. SO they tended to target 500 person > plus orgs. This > 600-ish person company has 8 sysadmins - we have enough time to manage > Exchange. Without it, maybe we'd have one less headcount, but > I'd bet that > the headcount loss isn't drastically different than the cost > of 600 users' > outsourced mail needs. > > Now, the other side of this equation is that email is a core > business need > for most companies, and isn't that hard to at least get > running[1]. More > specialized things, like e-commerce and line of business apps > make more > sense in a managed environment. Email never did. > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE > Sr. Systems Administrator > Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity > Atlanta, GA > > [1] Running well is a different question, but running and running well > aren't the issue here. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg@;infonition.com] > > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 12:25 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Re: somewhat OT > > > > > > You've hit the major players. The entire email hosting > > business has pretty > > much flopped and consolidated. Critical Path handed over its hosted > > corporate messaging services to HP. United Messaging was acquired by > > Agilera. Commtouch sold its hosted Exchange business to > TeleComputing. > > > > USA.NET and Mi8 are still hanging in there, for now. But this entire > > market space has just been decimated of late. I still think that the > > business case is there for outsourced messaging, but > > apparently not enough > > people have the same attitude that I do. > > > > Anyone else care to comment on why they think that this > > market space has > > flopped? One would think that in a time of economic hardship, > > companies > > would really be looking to outsource anything and everything > > they can in > > order to lower costs. If outsourced corporate messaging can't > > make it in > > today's economy, I have serious doubts that it will ever make > > it. But the > > question is why? Outsourced messaging holds the promise of > > lower costs, > > flexibility and the ability to focus on one's core business. > > In addition, > > many of the outsourced providers can put together systems > > that have a mix > > of high-end and low-end mailbox services that are all tied > > together as a > > single system. This means that companies can have Exchange > > mailboxes for > > those that need it and low-cost IMAP/POP mailboxes for > > everyone else and > > the outsourcer ties it all together to look like a single > > email system. So > > why did this market fail? > > > > > Who all is left in the Hosted E2K (asp-model) game?=20 > > > > > > USA.NET? > > > MI8?=20 > > > Critical Path? > > > > > > others?=20 > > > > > > j > > > Regards,=20 > > > > > > > > > John Henley > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
