Software optimize

10 reasons why you should begin phasing out Exchange public folders

The Exchange public folders feature has become a little long in the tooth. Brien Posey explains why it's time to consider alternatives.

Although many organizations make use of Exchange Server's public folders feature, the time may be right to start phasing it out. The following is a list of possible reasons why you should get started now.

Note: This article is also available as a PDF download.

1: Microsoft says they're going away

Since before the release of Exchange 2007, Microsoft has been telling us that public folders will eventually be discontinued. This hasn't happened just yet though. Public folders are alive and well in Exchange 2010. Even so, public folders probably won't be supported in the next version of Exchange.

2: Public folder stores can be resource intensive (full text indexing)

Public folders can rob your Exchange Server of memory, disk, and CPU resources. By offloading your public folder data, you may be able to improve your Exchange server's performance.

3: Public folders are not designed for archiving data

Many public folder stores are misused. According to Microsoft, public folders are not designed for archiving data. If you use public folders to archive Exchange data, you would be better off using a journaling mailbox instead.

4: Public folders are not designed for document sharing and collaboration

Microsoft also says public folders are not designed for document sharing and collaboration, yet that is exactly what many organizations use them for. Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is much better equipped for collaboration tasks and for document sharing than public folders have ever been.

5: Public folder data can be difficult to restore

In Exchange 2007, Microsoft introduced the recovery storage group feature as a way of making it a whole lot easier to perform granular restorations of mailbox data. Although public folders are a part of the information store, just like mailbox databases, they can't be restored using recovery storage groups. This means that if you ever have to restore a public folder, you may be in for a headache.

6: Public folders are finally optional

Prior to the release of Exchange 2010, public folders were used for storing free/busy data, and they were also used for OAB (offline address book) downloads. In Exchange 2010, however, public folders finally became an optional feature. As long as all of your clients are running Outlook 2007 or Outlook 2010, you can get rid of your public folder store.

7: The concept of public folders is dated (long filenames, indexing)

At one time, there was a good reason for using public folders. Back in the days of Exchange Server 4, not many organizations were using long file names yet, and server indexing was still primitive. Public folders provided organizations with a great way of describing their data in granular detail and indexing it. Today, though, there are better tools for the job.

8: Public folders have been deemphasized

In Exchange Server 2007, Microsoft decided to deemphasize public folders. They're still fully supported, but no new features were introduced. Public folders are also supported in Exchange 2010, but once again, there aren't any new features. Essentially, this means that public folders are a stagnant feature because they have changed very little since Exchange 2003.

9: The management tools leave a lot to be desired

When Microsoft initially released Exchange Server 2007, you had only two options for managing public folders. One option was to manage public folders from the command line, using EMS commands. The other option was to keep an Exchange 2003 server on your network and use the Exchange System Manager for public folder management. SP1 for Exchange 2007 contains GUI-based public folder management tools, as does Exchange Server 2010. Even so, the tools aren't anything to write home about.

10: Public folder data tends to collect dust

Several years back, I worked for a large organization that had an absolutely massive public folder hierarchy. The problem was that most of the public folder data had been in place since the days of Exchange 4. None of the current employees had a clue what the public folders had actually been used for, but nobody wanted to take responsibility for deleting them. My point is that you may have unimportant public folder data that's just taking up space. What better time to prune the archives?


Check out 10 Things... the newsletter

Get the key facts on a wide range of technologies, techniques, strategies, and skills with the help of the concise need-to-know lists featured in TechRepublic's 10 Things newsletter, delivered every Friday. Automatically sign up today.

About

Brien Posey is a seven-time Microsoft MVP. He has written thousands of articles and written or contributed to dozens of books on a variety of IT subjects.

63 comments
The-Messenger
The-Messenger

I have not been a fan of public folders but as has been stated in comments here over and over again, there is no replacement - SharePoint? Not even close! First the people that manage SharePoint are not the people that manage public folders, this is huge in my opinion. Next, how long does it take to create a SharePoint site? Someone needs a place to archive email or a central calendar and in seconds they're setup with public folders - this can't be done with SharePoint. Public folders are much more usable, convenient, practical for organizing email, calendars or contacts ??? Public Folders do not compare. Disk Space cost ??? how much disk space does a typical SharePoint site take up? Compare that to a typical public folder. Agreed Public Folders are not the best design for document archiving or sharing, this is really the only place we currently should be looking for an alternative to Public Folders and it is the place that MS should provide a solution. Again ??? how long does it take to create a SharePoint site from the moment a user decides one is needed? When SharePoint reaches the place where any user can open up Outlook, right click, enter a name, type and press enter to get a site up and running, then we could at least start talking about how much more disk space we will need.

vigremrajesh
vigremrajesh

Finally what's thing you are coming to say? is public folder necessary for exchange or no need..

schmidtd
schmidtd

Allow users to quickly scan available conference rooms, and cross check with meeting attendee's calendars? So an event can be easily scheduled from one interface?

cricket4b
cricket4b

The public folder also holds the public calendar. How can we share across network the calendar information? Running Exchange 03 and Office 07.

brian.catt
brian.catt

We agreed so much about the need for something better we have created it. Sort of makes clunky e-mail into what Domino should have been - in the cloud for a few $$$ per month. Would love feedback as this is bang on topic as investor's "experts" only ask dumb questions about Outlook Shared Folders and Google...so we are doing it anyway as investors are too stupid to understand. With the arrival of E-mail collaborating organisations (the successful kind) lost the crucial shared paper Chron file to private e-mail boxes. The loss of instant collaborative access to this Business Information made managing a business with multiple collaborating and changing virtual teams a lot harder. Notes addressed this problem but was techy enterprise solution = IBM BigCo only = failure. Kids have not noticed this problem as they never had the facility and are used to writing stupid mails on company time so are slightly anti-sharing. Serious collaborating businesses need a fix. We looked and found no solutionso we created one to run in house. We first created a Web 2.0 product then re architected it as a SaaS cloud solution for any single or multi server SMTP based mail system. It simply captures ALL business e-mail in a separate highly optimised for search database which is a shadow of the mail server content (Mail Servers make bad Data Servers). Users can now search the whole company mail database, including large attachments, for relevant mail on any context the specify, with policy management safeguards, etc., using a simple Browser search window with near real time response (its the power and optimisation algorithms of the server that matter not the client or network bandwidth). Obviously with a restore capability you also have a real time discovery and recovery tool so no need to keep older mails or Archive them in big fat .pst files to keep your client quota down, a barmy way to run a mail system anyway. So you don't have to go browsing, be clever about defining shared folders, or have any foreknowledge of your enquiry. Just ask the whole knowledge base. Think company wide Xobni with instant restore, discovery and off site archive as a plus one. If this would work for you please let me know, we will be piloting it under NDA very soon. While SaaS is the SME implementaion this would obviously run inside a VPN on a corporate server using secure Extranet access from the Internet as a supported product Sound good to anyone?

rcfoulk
rcfoulk

We find public folders to be instrumental to our operations. Much like scrabling the UI for Windows, Microsoft has a nasty habit of deciding for users how they should operate their work environment. Why would anybody want to support a SharePoint server do do what Exchange Public Folders already does perfectly? The answer is they wouldn't be interested in changing as well as paying for another server license which only serves MS. I guess MS is working to ensure that a non-trivial portion of the installed base of legacy Exchange will remain static once they drop that feature. Frankly Outlook/Exchange is the primary reason we stick with MS OS options. They continue to work with each new product release to make the decision to move to alternatives much easier.

Dr_Zinj
Dr_Zinj

Some of that data in the Public Folders may be very detrimental to your organization if released to the wrong people, or if subpeonaed. If you don't need it for business or regulatory requirements, get rid of it!

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

1: Microsoft says they?re going away. Microsoft has said that for the last two versions. It would be wise to plan for their eventual demise but even if the next version doesn't include them, who deploys an MS product before the first SP? 2: Public folder stores can be resource intensive We don't index them. 3: Public folders are not designed for archiving data E-mail isn't designed a filing cabinet. Excel isn't designed as a database. TR isn't designed as a social site. They seem to be fulfilling those purposes. 4: Public folders are not designed for document sharing and collaboration ... Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is much better equipped for collaboration tasks Then what exactly are they designed for??? Of course MS recommends SharePoint; they're trying to sell a product that competes with a function of another one. That's the only reason to remove the public folder functionality from Exchange in the first place. 5: Public folder data can be difficult to restore Okay, I can't speak for restoring to SharePoint. Is it any easier? 6: Public folders are finally optional Just because they're an option doesn't mean it's time to stop using them. If we didn't want to use them, we would have locked users out and never started. 8: Public folders have been deemphasized Like being optional, just because nothing is changing doesn't affect the existing functionality. 10: Public folder data tends to collect dust This is an institutional issue. If the data is gathering dust, it would do so regardless of how it's stored.

pcolbert
pcolbert

If used properly, public folders are an excellent communication vehicle. Public folders serve us well at the University as faculty use them for delivering materials to students on a term by term basis. Registered students are given permission to access the folders and receive weekly reading/assignment materials. Each term materials are deleted and new material is posted for new students.

The 'G-Man.'
The 'G-Man.'

so I guess they will be supported until 2015 at the very least.

AV .
AV .

I can't disagree more with #4 "Public folders are not designed for document sharing and collaboration." People where I work share departmental emails and contacts all the time via public folders. We have a document management system, but sometimes it makes more sense to use a public folder; especially if you use Outlook rules to auto-forward the emails. I definitely agree with #10. People tend to forget about public folders. It can get out of control if you don't restrict who can create a public folder or keep on top of it. Aside from that, I think they are very useful for temporary collaborations. Sharing contacts or emails via a public folder is easy to do. Maybe there are other ways, but they're not as easy. AV

RechTepublic
RechTepublic

Regarding #10, just because you have seen them collect dust doesn't mean that others don't use them. You were doing pretty well until this became about "you". You should have stopped at #9. Fact is that many people do use Public Folders. That is why MS has not completely discontinued them. We can give reasons to leave PF until we are blue in the face but it is counter-productive until we have an equivalent replacement. Hopefully, that will happen before I have to take away something that I gave to my clients with Microsoft's blessing years ago.

pat
pat

PFs are only required if supporting legacy versions of Outlook. If you're environment is all Outlook 2007 or later, then Public Folders aren't *REQUIRED* when using Exchange 2007 or later. If your org has Public Folders, they are still there in Exchange 2010, with the same cmdlets available for managing them. Microsoft has said that they will eventually be phased out, but there is no concrete timeline that I'm aware of. Migrating to another solution, such as SharePoint, should certainly be on the radar of any org that is using Public Folders. But for now, you're safe.

paulenet
paulenet

There are multiple ways of achieving this, from building a custom webpart with a calendar and event / conference room schedular. If you are not familiar with building webparts, another option would be with the Bamboo Solutions Team Calendar webpart, which you can see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsRNJEnLLC8 Or, perhaps for a more simple and solution, you can just build a Meeting Workspace Site in SP. Hope some of this helps.

Joanne Lowery
Joanne Lowery

My Clients use PF calenders to allocate resources such as vehicles, conference rooms, projectors etc. What other tool integrates as nicely into Outlook to manage booking then? Sharepoint simply means another user interface and adds complexity to the users' lives.

ksm1192
ksm1192

Try SharePoint Online! I've migrated Public Folder contacts & calendars to SP Online. Now my client's employees can get to those SP lists from anywhere they can get to the internet. KSM

dean.murray
dean.murray

What is the difference between the product you're proposing and Microsoft's Exchange Hosted Archive product? As a hosted service, it provides unlimited email archive for up to 10 years, web browser search capabilities for each user, and enables legal hold, audit, and company-wide search for users with appropriate rights.

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

"Obviously with a restore capability you also have a real time discovery and recovery tool so no need to keep older mails or Archive them in big fat .pst files" Users don't want to wait on IT to restore a message. They want it where they can get at it quickly without having to contact IT. They also want to access it when they're offline. .PSTs do both of these. I'm not knocking your overall approach, just pointing out what I see as a potential user complaint.

paulenet
paulenet

I don't subscribe to changing for the sake of changing, and if public folders is working for you just fine, then I would probably say stick with it, as it will likely be a few years before PF is deprecated. However, many IT shops get stuck in a rut with outdated technologies, processes, and procedures, and put up a wall of resistance to change. In the IT world, changes often come quickly, and to stay in this business you need to have a good attitude about issues like this, and be prepared to embrace change, or newer technology will eventually overrun you. I have used SharePoint Server and SPS quite extensively, and have found that it definitely works well as a replacement for PF, and it allows much better control and collaboration as well. Those that want to get on their MS bashing soapbox, I would say download the free SPS 3.0 (or SFS 4.0), and stop whining.

wdewey@cityofsalem.net
wdewey@cityofsalem.net

Any data stored anywhere can be detrimental even if it is just the time and effort to produce it because it exists. It doesn't matter if it is a public folder, a file share or if it's sharepoint data. Bill

jvellek
jvellek

We have literally hundreds of projects per year and users share their project correspondence in project folders located in Public Folders. While not used for long term archiving it keeps individual mailboxes manageable, locates all correspondence for project teams and allows for archiving to PST at project closeout. I have tested moving data to Sharepoint (WSS) and it does not come close to handling this data with any kind of reasonable feature set. I would love to see a cost-effective solution to the PFs

Tom-Tech
Tom-Tech

...this is the sort of thing Microsoft wants you to do in Sharepoint now. They Have Decided.

wdewey@cityofsalem.net
wdewey@cityofsalem.net

Concerning #10, I have that problem with file shares as well. Should we get rid of those too? Bill Edited for clarity

reward
reward

The very first question that popped in to my mind, even before reading the first reason! Very first thing in article: "Takeaway: The Exchange public folders feature has become a little long in the tooth. Brien Posey explains why it???s time to consider alternatives." WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES????

brian.catt
brian.catt

Totally agree there is a place for a topic related drop box like PF and taking it way would be dumb. However people have to know how to use it and remember to put content there. Isn't the ability to search all mail in any context with no prior organisation far more powerful and useful if you need Business Intelligence on an account/domain/user name/project/topic, any search criteria of choice, across ALL the enterprise's mail and attachments as I described? There are better newer solutions - to complement the old user dependent information bucket solution that is PF. Best,

PCF
PCF

You said it. Amen.

dsouzawl
dsouzawl

For some of us oldies does it ring a bell. History says listen to the customer. ccMail was simple to use and had Bulletin Boards. Lotus Notes was superior at that time but folks choose Exchange instead. Again it was simple to use and still awesome. I love it. I do use Sharepoint and it is a decent collaboration tool. There is some integration with Exchange/Outlook. I am hoping there is more. SharePoint cannot and will not replace public folders. I cannot speak for everybody I have played around with configuring mailboxes to do lots creative things. Configuring PF or Exchange Mailbox does not need huge investment for a small organization. For Large Enterprise too some of the major projects yes SharePoint is the answer. There is a cost associated. But in large enterprise there are the have's and the have nots. So What I am saying is what is the big deal keep PF's and show me more cool stuff integrating with Exchange. Also show me how do I migration path for those who are interested.

Melar
Melar

I think the general vibe is that you're using public folders, there's something better than what you're using it for. Contacts, Files, Calendars: Use sharepoint. Archiving: Use journaling mailboxes. Resource scheduling: Use resource mailboxes. Public folders need to be managed and people need to follow policy for them to work. The problem is, that this sort of thing should be automatically mananged (which the alternatives do) and _people_ don't as a rule always follow policy.

deea
deea

Seriously....

brian.catt
brian.catt

Our service is not archive focussed, Its primarily for knowledge management. Archive/Back Up and Shadowing are a useful spin off and much faster and cheaper because our architecture has to be much faster better that MS' for the purpose of real time content search - the key functionality. Out solution provides real time search for business management purposes, so you can know about all relevant correspondence and attachments relating to a particular search criteria with seconds. If those mails are not current in your mail box they can be restored almost instantly. It will also include VoIP records in future search engine evolution.

brian.catt
brian.catt

Sorry if I was not clear. Outside policy management and adding and deleting users this solution is admin free. All the functionality of search and restore in context is available directly to the user under policy admin. If what they need has been deleted from their current mail box its instantly available and restorable through their Browser window. No wait, no help required. Instant easy DIY.

brian.catt
brian.catt

Sorry if I was not clear. All the functionality of search and restore in context is available directly to the user under policy admin. If what they need has been deleted from their current mail box its instantly available and restorable through their Browser window. No wait, no help required. Instant easy DIY.

GraemeLeggett
GraemeLeggett

You can keep them on the network so they are backed up but with big files you get access errors (can't see items). If you have them on the local machine, then they are not backed up. However a private (through permissions) public folder works as an accessible, backed up personal archive and can also be accessed by PAs as necessary. Not the best solution, but you can pretend you are enforcing mailbox limits for very senior staff this way.

AV .
AV .

It depends on what version of Outlook you used to create them. If they're from Outlook 2002, they're not compatible with any versions after that. There are workarounds from MS, but its a time-consuming process if the .pst files are big. AV

rcfoulk
rcfoulk

Frankly I doubt if any organization is going to get run over simply because they don't embrace new just because it's new just because a software company wants to push in a different direction. For business it's about getting the job done without spending resources unnecessarily. The "stop whining" crowd can spend organization resources for new to functionally do the same thing but only in a different way but frankly if I caught someone doing that they would be disciplined. Yes, big guy, change is inevitable but as it comes with real costs in terms of purchase/installation/support and user retraining it should not be embraced until it makes good, bottom-line business sense. Trust me, nobody running Share Point will be running over me any time soon. And for the misuse of Public Folders noted, that's a management problem and I'll never embrace the idea that software replaces operational policies and procedures. It really offends me that a subset of folks try to paint anybody who isn't giddy about software change when the "new" really does basically the same thing as the old software as out of hand some type of Luddite. That good sir is far from the case.

darrin
darrin

We also use public folders for project work. We have a folder called "projects" and that has sub folders for each project in question. Those folders have a sub folder called "inbox" and that receives project related mail (projectname@myorg.dom). Replies to incoming mail go into a "send items" folder also under the project folder as well, so everything is together. Finally the entire PF structure is replicated to our other offices Exchange servers across cheap-n-slow DSL vpns. Now tell me how we are going to replace that neat solution if PF's disappear ? Sharepoint doesn't cut it and shared (non-public) mailboxes don't replicate as far as I am aware.

ken
ken

I started using WSS 30. I stopped using it because couldn't find a decent way to back it up using current tools except for stsadm which is extremely weak for this putrpose.

devolution23
devolution23

i read in a post on msexchangeteam.com (MS Exchange Team's blog) a few months ago that Microsoft's official policy at this time is to support public folders for 10 years after Exchange 2010 comes out. they encouraged organizations that are newly implementing Exchange to use Sharepoint instead of PFs, but if you are already invested into PFs, there will be support in Exchange for another 10 years. the poster did encourage people to consider migrating to WSS, however, for all the reasons that are listed here and elsewhere on MS site. the question is, 5 years from now will they still feel the same or will they decide that another 5 years is too long and start forcing the issue? to some extent i see where they're coming from with regard to not using PFs for general document sharing and collaboration, but for companies like ours who use them solely for email archiving, Sharepoint is a needlessly expensive and complicated alternative, and as one user points out, difficult to back up and lacking a PST export capability. Not much of an alternative. And of course, WSS means another pile of money going to MS for something that's probably not as good as it could be.

AV .
AV .

You just have to manage them. AV

MrRich
MrRich

The main thing is the packaging. If Microsoft simply created a packaged "SharePoint Public Folders" thingie - that includes all the requirements (install SQL, install SP, install templates) - then it would make sense to migrate. Effectively they could just ship Exchange with Sharepoint and some really good templates. The problem with this replace PF with Sharepoint mantra is that Sharepoint requires way way too much care and feeding. In fact so does the new multi-server footprint of Exchange - but that's beside the point. By just packaging Sharepoint in the Exchange product Microsoft could begin to move Exchange off of the Jet engine. If they don't, we will continue to use PF because the cost and aggrevation of managing them is much much lower than SharePoint.

dsouzawl
dsouzawl

Currently I synchronize the Contacts in Public folder to my Blackberry. How do I do this via SharPoint?

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

PFs weren't a stopgap when they first appeared. Many of the alternative technologies didn't exist then. Like many other systems, inertia keeps PFs going; that and the cost of adding second or even third enterprise-level applications to replace the functionality MS is removing from Exchange.

Marcelo Yamada
Marcelo Yamada

I've been reading a little bit more about the journaling mailboxes feature and I believe it's not appropriate for companies who couldn't get rid of public folders yet. That's my situation. We do not save messages in public folders for auditing or compliance matters. We just need a place to save messages that are important during (and after) our projects, with shared (but restrict) access to them and in an easily searchable way. Nothing seems to beat the ease-of-use of Outlook when we are talking about browsing e-mail messages. Sharepoint treats them like any other kind of file. That's too poor for our needs.

paulenet
paulenet

...and given YOUR location, I would say that you are a blue-haired, nose-pierced Linux rebel that rejects any MS solutions, or anything else that isn't open source. Now, was that fair? Of course not. You know very little about me, so it is very foolish to make such rediculous assumptions. If you cannot contribute to the technical solution at hand instead of proving your ignorance or intellectual laziness, then please go somewhere else, because you are not adding value to the discussion.

paulenet
paulenet

I totally agree! Also, I would add that in order to obtain some of the greatest efficiencies, such endeavors often come with upfront costs (especially for some of the most significant efficiency improvement projects). This is where potential implementation challenges often begin. I have seen organizations attempt costly projects with assumed efficiencies that are never realized. (e.g. Someone's pet IT project). Subsequently, this scenario is one of many reasons why some organizations become afraid of change, after making inneffective, or just flat out, poor decisions. Ironically, this serious problem can be further exacerbated, where some organizations develop negative and costly attitudes to the point where they will even reject new innovations that would significantly reduce operational costs and increase productivity. In which case, decisions are often quickly made to reject sound and efficient solutions before objective reviews are even possible.

paulenet
paulenet

I never said that people should be giddy for the sake of software change. What I am saying is that people need to be more adaptable to change, whether YOU perceive such changes as "bad" or not. People that do not adapt well to changes (or being far to quick to resist change) are the ones that do fall behind and get overrun. I have seen this happen to too many organizations, where many immediately dismiss solutions as "really does basically the same thing as the old software", are among those that know little about newer technologies, are more comfortable with technologies they know, which makes it far more difficult for them to keep an open mind for any in-depth reviews if technical solutions. There are plenty of good reasons to stick with technical solutions that are well established, but at one time, such solutions were just as new as SharePoint. From my experience, most folks know very little about SharePoint and its capabilities, let alone the new SPF 2010 platform that is coming out.

Melar
Melar

If you've got a system that needs to be managed and can't manage itself, and you've got policies that need to be followed and aren't automated and systematically enforced, then you're not running efficiently. Efficient is not "getting the job done". It's getting the job done, with the least amount of effort required, and the lowest margin of error possible.

panthyr
panthyr

...given his location, it makes sense that he'd be enthused about new MS products...

Melar
Melar

DPM for just about anything MS works pretty well from my experience.

RitaGurevich
RitaGurevich

Managing shared folders becomes just as daunting as managing public folders, and mostly for all the same reasons. There is a ton of unused data, and what is being used is rarely structured, and most importantly, it is difficult to ensure the right people have access and the wrong people don't. I work at SPHERE Technology Solutions, where we not only remove stale data, add structure to used data, but we also implement access control. Additionally, we show you how to maintain a recertification process to ensure your system stays controlled and managed. Email me at rgurevich@12sphere.com or visit our website www.12sphere.com if you're interested in more information on what we do and how we do it!

Jessica Lynn
Jessica Lynn

I would love a way to sync public folder contacts to blackberries, how do you do that?? We're using BES 4.0. Yes yes I know but it would be a great stop gap solution to issues I'm having. thanks!!

RitaGurevich
RitaGurevich

Before you can phase out public folders, you first need to remove the stale data, add structure to what's used, and have a consistent access control model. You also need to truly understand all the uses for public folders, and choose the appropriate alternate technology. Sometimes SharePoint does the trick, but special attention needs to be given to mail-enabled folders, folders used for archiving. etc. There are sometimes better solutions, depending on the the use case. I work at SPHERE Technology Solutions, where we not only remove stale data and implement access control, but also identify and migrate to the appropriate alternative platform. Email me at rgurevich@12sphere.com or visit our website www.12sphere.com if you're interested in more information on what we do and how we do it!

Fyrewerx
Fyrewerx

We already have SharePoint (not 2010) and is purely a piece of dung for the purposes we use our Public Folders in Exchange. In our business, we must be able to go back to correspondence since the product was installed -- currently, as much as 10 years. Prior to that, we used Lotus Notes, but poorly implemented for the correspondence. To try to move the information to SharePoint now (several terabytes), would cost a fortune in time. Not to mention that the "search" in SharePoint is far slower, and inaccurate, compared to the tools we use in Exchange.

mstevens
mstevens

While I was busy phasing out public folders today, I realized I need 10 reasons to keep Exchange.

Petetm
Petetm

So MS is telling you, you NOW need to buy yet another product. That's great. Good God, why do people use Exchange in the first place?

DABowers
DABowers

You should phase to Notes :)