GW vs Exch - Network Admins Only please!!

[Sketcher]

I run a 8 Server Novell Netware 5.1 (soon to be 6.0) Network with Novell GroupWise 6.0 w/less than 100 users (+2 Win2k application servers non-AD, they work great). Our new CEO is familiar with the "Outlook" client and insists that we need to be running Microsoft Exchange to be competetive in today's market.

Here's a question and answer between my new CEO and I:

(Me to CEO):

1. Can you detail for me the sales management objectives in regards to IT?

It would be helpful to me (regardless of whether you're referring to GroupWise or Exchange) to know what it is that you are trying to do and what it is that you would like to do.

Thank you,


(CEO to Me):

Short term I want the freedom for any staff, but especially sales and marketing staff to use any PDA in a seamless manner with the company email system and especially the contact database. Mid term I want the ability to consider at will any of the various CRM solutions that exist in the marketplace, when the need exists to add such to the company. Unfortunately no one considers GroupWise in their development plans these days; exchange is the standard everyone configures for with the lone exception of Lotus from IBM. Bottom line, as the company grows our options are open and many if we are on exchange and closed if we stay with Novell/GroupWise. Therefore if we need to change I want to do so now when we are only 35 persons as opposed to later when we are 100 persons. Regarding the consultant I have given him your number so he should be calling you shortly.

********************************************************

1. First of all - Yes, I know. He's the CEO.

2. I'm not anti-Microsoft (read my other posts, I support MS for the right reasons).

3. Compared to MS Exchange: Novell GroupWise is not prone to memory leaks, data corruption, doesn't have a heavy client footprint, is faster and more secure in remote than Outlook, does not propogate Virus infection via address books, is very easily centrally managed (w/out 3rd party software) from within the GroupWise Server and Client, does not have a hefty hardware requirment for optimal operation and certainly does not have to be babied with frequent security patches. There are soooo many more points - I'll leave it alone for now.


********************************************************

What I'm asking for (from those of you who understand the security, virus and management issues/non issues of GroupWise and or Exchange) is input on why I shouldn't drag my feet about moving to Exchange or why should kick and scream to stay with GroupWise. (I'm interested in keeping my job, helping the CEO make an informed, responsible decision - not narrowmindedly championing a product and getting the boot).

I'm in daily meetings with engineers and consultants who understand the stability and security of Novell GroupWise but they're just as eager to get my business with a move to Exchange - so they're not entirely impartial. If I stay with Novell, they don't make money off me.

I understand that more applications work with Microsoft products, but that functionality comes at a price - primarily security and instability. To date, the new CEO is unable to detail exactly what it is he and his sale's team needs to do that he cannot do with our existing infrastructure. He simply has the perception that Microsoft marketshare means they're the best way to go. Like I said, if there were a specific critical function he needs to perform and cannot with our current system - we'd be having a different discussion. So far, it just seems like a bunch of ignorance and ego pushing.

This whole dig isn't meant to be a Pro Novell/Anti- Microsoft flame starter. I like both products for the right reasons. It's just that for the reasons described above - I'm looking for more information than what I have available thus far.

I welcome the interest and input!

Thank you,

-Sketcher

 

[Oaf357]

I think quite honestly you've already answered your ultimate question.

The fact of the matter is you have to convince your CEO that your current infrastructure will support what he wants to do in the next five years. You are right that everything your CEO wants to do is easily done with MS products, but at a significant cost (money, time, and overtime, and most importantly security). A vantage point you might want to take is to find a listing of bugs and viruses that have affected Exchange in the past year then collect that same data for GroupWise and that might be in your best interest.

The thing is can you do what he wants to do with your current infrastructure. If you can, then explain to him how you're going to do it. If you can't then he wins. I imagine you can. I know Novell will help you if you stick with their products, especially if you tell them the situation.

I know this wasn't a whole lot of technical advice (but I wouldn't use either Exchange or GroupWise unless I walked into a company already using it) but I hope it at least started a train of thought for you.

 

[Fatt]

If you really don't want to go the MS route and you are certain that you can do what the CEO wants if you stick with Novell, then you have to sabatoge the bosses plans in a way that makes him think it was his idea.

The best way to do this is to completely cataloge EVERYTHING you need to do in order to switch to an MS solution including the extra security measures you will need. Emphasize the costs involved and present things in such a way that it looks like you are just trying to carry out his orders. Let HIM decide that it's too much expense and potential trouble in terms of everything from hardware upgrades to support the clients and servers, and potential security problems.

Now, if for some reason he wants to do it anyway then you're at least already set in terms of him knowing what the migration is going to cost.

Also, if you do go to an MS solution then I suggest you use your Active Directory to lock down your users TIGHT.
Take Updater off their start menu, don't let them change ANYTHING or install any software at all.
Also, set it up so that when a user logs on his client will automatically go to the server to get a daily virus update and install it. That way it's hard for your users to screw you up.

 

[Santa]

Apparently the CEO is not asking for your oppinion in this matter.

Whats the most important rule in Networking? Keep your Job!

The rest only matters if someone aboves you says it matters.

Just be glad he isn't chosing to outsource it all and make your job obsolete. This is not a way to say do whatever anyone says but to think that a decision has been made and you as a good Network Administrator are just a cog in the whole company machine and must do what you can to keep them from replacing you.

You have to realize that if he has a vision and he feels that he is to use the companies money to realize this vision that is his job. Yours/Mine is to help him realize that vision and offer advice when requested. If you have already offered the advice then let it be and do a good job on the migration and go on with the rest of your life.

 

[ScottMac]

Perhaps you can keep your existing system / structure, and just ADD Exchange for the functionallity your CEO feels he won't get from Novell. I'm sure there's SOME common protocol you can use to parallel the information between the two servers.

Chances are you're gonna need to replace / upgrade the mail server (by a factor of four or more) to accommodate the MS server platform (with Mail) anyway. Just spring for the new box and stitch it to the old system; the inside clients keep the GroupWise (or optionally use Outlook / OLW) and the external /sales / marketing folks can go with Outlook.

Worse case, it gives you some breathing room for the migration, and allows you to come up to speed on the new system (and find all the hidden potholes). Maybe if the CEO hears ('We can't do that, it's too much of a security risk" or We can do that, but it'll cost another $35,000 for the (disk sub, software, security, etc) .... he can be convinced of the error in his ways...

IMHO, your only hope is to do a complete audit of the system and figure out EVERYTHING that must be done to change JUST the mail system. It's likely to be a pretty big ticket upgrade.

The grief of giving up NDS/eDir for MAD, and all the other changes you need to make for compatibillity sake .... I feel sorry for ya, I really do.


Good Luck

Scott

 

[Agamar]

Well, if I were in your position, I would definitely make a checklist of all the pros and cons of each package and then present that to your CEO and any other technical savvy higher-ups. It usually is a lot easier to make the final decision if everybody knows all the pros and cons...Don't forget that it just takes one glaring con to wipe out all the pros.

 

[N11]

ScottMac couldn't be more on target with this -- without getting into the nitty gritty of your post I can tell you that an exchange migration is not as simple as dropping a couple win2k servers in your network, one running exchange the other an OWA frontend if you were so inclined-- exchange is entirely AD dependant. You're going to need at least one server independent of your exchange servers running AD, and it almost goes without saying that some form of multi master replicator for a redundant AD is going to be necessary.

If I were in your situation a talking point would definitely be the size and scope of such a migration, if he wants exchange he's going to get every ridiculous creation microsoft ever released onto the unspuspecting IT industry, for the most part including IIS even if you don't want it you'll have to learn to accept it. It isn't as simple as putting in a single exchange server and moving over some mailboxes. Sometimes I wish it were. I'd rather deploy sendmail and 3rd party complements than outlook/exchange in this day and age.

 

[Sketcher]

Finally have a chance to pitch the pros/cons - to present a best/worst case pitch for both systems as if we were considering a completely new configuration from the ground up. Though I nearly lost my job presenting the case. I figure it's worth standing up for my conviction though, because I'm the one who has to answer if/when it doesn't work.

Everything from staffing requirements, IT Training, employee training, licensing & hardware requirements, security & downtime liabilities, Tier One support as well as future expansion and functionality.

I'll present more post information as the situation nears its closure.

Thanks for the input everyone!

-Sketcher

 

[spidey07]

Good luck.

Others have stated the difficulty and apparently you also understand the pros and cons.

But one word of advice - if the CEO wants exchange then he'll get exchange. If there is a "fly in the ointment" so to speak then that's you. He's thinkgin "Just get rid of the fly and everything will run smooth."

be careful.

 

[Saltin]

It seems like you are assuming Groupwise is more secure and stable than Exchange 2000.
What are you basing these assumptions on? Your own experience?

I can tell you, in my experience (as an admin), Exchange 2000 is by far and away the best mail server out there. It uses industry standards (SMTP, POP3, IMAPv4, NNTP, LDAP). It has *native* tools to help admins move from any major mail platform (Notes, GW, etc), which really arent that hard to use IMO. It's also so feature rich that user's wont like anything else once they get used to it.

Exchange 2000 is only superceded by Notes in regard to security (and Notes goes to annoying lenghts to make security prioroty #1, as any Notes admin will tell you). This of course assumes you don't pull any boners like publishing OWA via HTTP or forgoing a firewall. Any competent mail design doesnt expose the mail server directly to the Internet. My Exchange server's are behind proxies, which are behind a firewall. Even if you hack the proxy, you get nothing but the machine, it's a standalone (as all mail proxies should be). So what exactly are your security concerns? Detail them!

As for stability, well, I am of the opinion that stability is a function of three things

1) Hardware quality
2) Administrative Competence
3) Application Code

On a good platform, if you follow best practices it is safe to expect 5 9's of reliability from Exchange 2000. Ive come very close to it myself.

How comfortable are you with Exchange 2000? Is it something you want to avoid b/c you will need to re-tool?

 

[Buddha Bart]

Seriously.... You've got a good CEO.

1.) He's right, having Exchange down the road will make adopting 3rd party applications muuuuuch easier.
2.) He's right, doing it now rather than later will make it easier.

You have a CEO that knows of three competing email platforms, their relative market strength, what that means for future applications, and the very fact that application integration will be an issue. Christ man, thank your lucky stars.

Now's when you get your way.
1.) more toys
2.) more staff
3.) more training
4.) more authority (using AD for security and virus policies)

Roll with it man. Get him to pay for you to get your MCSE. Then get him to pay for a staff member to help you out. Then top it all off with some consulting to do a bit of the work for you. (don't ask for just the staffer and no consulting, otherwise he'll think he can pay a one-time consulting fee instead of hiring you somone. make him think you need both.)

Upgrading legacy systems is never easy, and its a lot of work. But we're not getting paid to pick our noses and watch the green lights on our monitoring tools.

bart

 

[Soybomb]

I've seen something similar happen a couple times now. You're getting exchange if you like it or not would be my guess. Try to get a pda for your self out of the deal

 

[networkman]

Nearly all of the responses I've seen so far have been excellent - good posts folks!

A couple points to consider: Are there any other projects that the CEO would like to implement in the short term? For instance, with my employer, Kent District Library, we were going to be installing an entirely new phone system, specifically a VOIP solution. The solution we chose was/is designed around interfacing with a MS Exchange server - there was no provision for a Novell product, period. Since we had no compelling reasons to keep Novell in place(4.x), this wasn't an issue for us.

Another factor could well be the software your organization uses; again, for us, the makers of the accounting software we use decided to drop all support for Novell's NOS and instead concentrate on NT/W2K. Migrating to a new accounting software simply wasn't an option for us, but since we'd already defined what we wanted to accomplish, and how, this wasn't a problem either.

As Fatt already pointed out, locking down the security for your users is of paramount concern. Our own network is very secure with none of the "virus horror stories" you read and hear about with MS-based networks. But getting to this point took a good deal of time and alot of planning to get it right.

For us, the benefits of migrating to an MS based enterprise have been fully realized.

 

[ScottMac]

Again, the best you can do is a fair comparison using all the facts (and educated supposition) available to you. Moving to Exchange for the sake of moving to Exchange or because all the boss' golf buddies are using it, is a bad reason.

Present the facts, then let the decision-maker make a decision, and go with it. Do your best.

"You can get used to hanging if you hang long enough"

FWIW

Scott

 

[Sketcher]

Excellent Input people,

Thank you for taking the time to post. I would like to clarify that I am not Novell Biased in blind fashion. I enjoy gadgets, jump at opportunities to learn new technology & alternate platforms and I full well understand that if the CEO say's we're going there, we're going there with or without a cheerleading admin! I just want to do it as responsibly as possible and not throw out the baby with the bathwater - if you take my meaning.

I'm running a MSDN version of Exchange 2000 in my home network and I like much of the administration and functionality that I've played with so far - (though I'm somewhat disconcerted at the default levels of security and policy configuration that seem to be left unattended with a basic configuration - my preference would be to start out locked down and then open up as needed rather than have a friggin' huge open courtyard and make sure I get all the right windows and doors shut before someone shows me I'm too late - I suppose that's what the consultants are for). It's not a question of which GUI or surface level Admin interface is preferrable - it comes down to a nutz and boltz what we need to do and how we should responsibly do it.

That said: approximately 75% of the CRM software I've been asked to validate integrates client side only, does not require AD or NDS integration, therefore only requires an Outlook Client on the desktop/laptop. The approximate 25% that does in some way require schema integration either is not currently available or is too largely enterprise based to give a reasonable ROI regarding our small user base and intended use.

Being that CEO does not understand that an Outlook Client can front-end many different systems (and I've tried to explain it), it is irresponsible to say that we need MS Exchange so that we can run Outlook. I am quite literally running an Outlook 2000 front end to my GroupWise 6.0 server and you cannot tell the difference. It looks like chicken, tastes like chicken. I'm compatible with at least 75% of the CRM market and I've literally spent $0.00 on other than testing (We have full Office Professional Corporate License).

Regarding the push for the ultimate Wireless Road warrior enablement: We are now more concerned about wireless communication via cell phone/pager/PDA/Laptop/Local & International etc. GroupWise 6.5 have wireless compatibility built in. No EXTRA server or licenses required!! And I'm up and running with a few hours of updating and maintenance. There is also the cost factor that we have another full year of license protection in that we don't have to pay for the next updates/generations of GroupWise software.

I'll stop the sale's pitch. These past weeks I?ve had an equal number of Pro Novell, Pro Microsoft Reps, Salespeople, Consultants, and Engineers in here to make a body want to give up on IT entirely!! The Microsoft guys are good sale's people - I don't seriously consider the sale's pitch of any of their reps unless they bring an engineer who can speak intelligently in support of Microsoft. I find it pretty funny that the MS Engineers often roll their eyes when their Sale's reps get on their soap box. The Novell Sale's Reps on the other hand - ARE the Engineers. Well, at least most of the consultants I've met with anyway. The Reps that aren't engineers don't promise what they personally don't understand and they are very capable of speaking on a detailed technical level if not CNE level.

Now, an interesting point to consider: Of Seven very reputable consulting firms in my area, I've narrowed the bidding down to three firms, one of which will be considered for a second level support group. They all have to be deep in Novell & Microsoft Certified Engineers because I run a hybrid environment and I want a one stop shop to full support. I want that shop to have intimate knowledge of my network past, present and future expectations and be able to support my company from the ground up. The proposed new Microsoft implementation has to play nice with my existing Novell and vice versa. I won't consider a plan that says we should be able to do it, we have a couple people who have done it - or Joe Schmoe is really good on that, and we can get someone for this... I've chosen the firms that already have clients listed as references who are doing what I am asking for.

I've given all of this background to say: Each of the three firms who are completely competent to support me on both Novell AND Microsoft platforms ask me to tell them what I need Exchange for. And all three firms said - at the risk of losing a lot of business supporting your proposed move to Exchange, your needs might be better realized if met through enhancing your existing GroupWise system until you specifically find something you cannot do without, which cannot be done with your existing system. Being that this is a CEO directive AND because I?m a Team Player I insisted that each firm proceed with in-depth proposals for the migration to Exchange.

For you Exchange Admins, I am not knocking your excellently cared for systems. I understand and agree with you that a properly configured and maintained Exchange Server is a force to be reckoned with. Even my secure and robust GroupWise server wouldn?t be worth a bean if I didn?t maintain it, err I mean keep it plugged in. j/k. But something that concerns me is that I?ve printed off security reports for Exchange and GroupWise dated this last year (throwing out issues that are common to both platforms as a result of running IE, Outlook or MS OS on the desktop) and what I have is nothing to sneeze at. I literally have a six inch, that?s ?6.0 inch? stack of security issues specifically regarding Exchange, compared to literally one ? that?s ?ONE? pamphlet regarding GroupWise. No exaggeration there. No biased security reporting. Keep in mind that I?m doing this research with the mindset that I HAVE to move to Exchange and have to properly account for my staffing needs and have to be aware of what I?m getting into.

I?m going to completely leave the issue of Virus Propagation alone, because the reality of that issue has many times brought me back to wondering why any of this is being discussed in the first place.

I think, no matter which platform you support ? you have to agree that ANY migration needs to be done responsibly, WITH competent support. Saying that a migration NEEDS to be done YESTERDAY so that we are ready for what comes at us 2+ years down the road and that there is nothing right now that technically or logistically necessitates the change is not only short sighted but irresponsible use of authority.

The company WILL pay for my training and certification whether it is with Novell, Microsoft or both and will allow the hiring of staff if it is justifiable to do so. My departmental budget and company expense already allows me gadgets and nice hardware (All my servers are Compaq Dual Proc?s w/5 Drive Raid 5 banks & Gig?s of Ram and are all mounted in enclosed server racks, Dual Flat Panel Viewsonic VG800?s on each of my IT workstations and Palm, IPAQ, Jornada handhelds aren?t just wish list gadgets anymore. I buy one of each product my Sale?s people use. I do not say all of that just to brag ? I say that to diffuse the argument or compulsion to make any decision based on what it personally GETS me.

It all comes down to trying to be responsible for what we have and where we need to go with IT. If the Pro?s and Con?s don?t factor in at CEO level, then at least a responsible way of forcing the change needs to be acknowledged because if it?s not done responsibly, it doesn?t matter how much of a cheerleader I am for Exchange and personal growth ? I?ll be out on my ass when the kids in the playground start throwing rocks at each other.

Thank you all again for the Excellent input! Especially from you Admins and Techs who really do deal with this stuff.

Keep it coming!!

-=Sketcher=-