Order Now!
Windows 7 for XP ProfessionalsUpdating Support Skills from XP to Windows 7by Bink.nu's Raymond Comvalius
There are 53 guest(s) online.
There are 0 member(s) online.
I just read this article, where IT analysts "Directions on Microsoft" and "Gartner" criticize Microsoft's decision to release Exchange 12 in 64 bit only:
"Sixty-four bit is definitely coming on, and as people move forward to new systems, they'll buy 64-bit servers," said Pawlack. "But we're not there yet. I think upgrades and migrations [to Exchange 12] are going to be very slow."
When Exchange 12 is released at least a year from now, you cannot buy a 32 bit server hardware, there are companies buying new servers today, who don't even realise they buy 64bit hardware. Early adapters of Exchange 12 probably adapted Exchange 2003 early too, so chances are next year it's time for new hardware anyway and that will be 64 bit. Exchange 12 adaption might be slow but it has nothing to do with 64 bit.The article quotes Eileen Brown's article on 64 bit performance gains on 64 bit platform. The analysts reply:
"It's a move made not on technical merit, but because Exchange is running into scheduling problems. It was done to reduce the test matrix and help move the schedule forward. We feel that's the only rational reason for doing this."
Only rational reason? what's wrong with a technical merit, implementers of Exchange 12 need less storage or get more users with same storage. What's wrong on giving the customer the best solution available.
The 64-bit-only characteristic is going to make migration difficult, said Pawlack, who cited a lack of in-place migration tools -- and a lack of any Microsoft talk of such tools -- and an inability to run Exchange 12 on Microsoft's Virtual Server, which is to support 32-bit only through next year's edition.
"Migration difficult"? 32 bits apps are 100% compatible with x64 Windows, only issues are drivers. x64 bit Windows has been released since April of this year, when Exchange 12 comes out (end 2006 begin 2007) all Windows enterprise hardware and software vendors will have 64 bit drivers available."inability to run virtual"? If according to these analysts Microsoft's customers are uncomfortable to implement 64 bit Windows, in that case they will be terrified to virtualize their OS'es. Virtualization has more impact. But even then, when Exchange 12 comes out, Virtual Server v NEXT (longhorn) will have 64 bit guest support.
Gartner: "The change will make the typical Exchange version migration slower and more complex,"
Bink,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. However, I must disagree. I've blogged on several reasons for my position (http://cgenius.blogspot.com). Being in the trenches as an Exchange consultant for clients in the 500-5000 user space, I can tell you not one of them thinks this is a good idea either. I'm not sure Microsoft will change their minds on this one... but it will slow adoptions if they don't.
Thanks
Hi Schvanz, thanks for your comment, I read your blog but I'm still on the pro 64bit side.
"customers who deploy Exchange 2003 between now and then will have a short 18–month window after the Exchange 12 launch in which to to perform an OS rebuild, or purchase new x64 hardware."
Customers who implement exchange2003 now do it on new hardware which is 64bit. If they re-use 32bit hardware, it is most likely when they implement Exchange 12 in 2007 or 2008 that they'll buy new hardware.
As was mentioned at http://blogs.technet.com/eileen_brown/archive/2005/11/15/e12_64bit_only.aspx E12 on x64 will have 1/4th the number of random IOs/sec as has been seen with E2K3 on 32 bit. So even smaller shops will see the perf improvements, in addition, even with /3GB enabled, Exchange on 32 bit wont use more than about 2.5GB of RAM (/3GB increases the user mode memory space to 3GB, but with other processes running in this space, Exchange will typically get a max of about 2.5GB). x64 will remove these limitations on memory currently experienced with the x86 machines (the same holds true for x64 domain controllers). The last company I was at only had about 800 mailboxes on their Exchange server, but we were already hitting the limitations of an x86 architecture, x64 will improve things dramatically for ALL Exchange users.
Also, have you looked at hp.com or dell.com lately? Even today, it is difficult to find a machine that isn't x64. By the time E12 RTMs, x64 will have a solid foothold in the world's datacenters (small and large). x64 laptops are comparable priced to their x86 cousins, so if folks are running x64 on their laptops, (IMO) they've likely got little reason why they haven't already deployed it on their servers as well. But then again, what do I know about Exchange, I spend most of my time working with domain controllers.
Hello Steven and other BINK.NU readers,
I am Peter Pawlak, an analyst with Directions on Microsoft, a 12-year old independent research firm exclusively focused on Microsoft (see http://www.directionsonmicrosoft.com/press/peterpawlakbio.html). I go way back with Exchange, having covered it for Directions over the past 5-1/2 years, and prior to that I’ve had extensive experience installing and managing Exchange and Microsoft Mail (I even had a brief stint as a Microsoft program manager in Microsoft Mail for Macintosh in 1989!)
As is usual when interviewed by the press, they take only a small snippet of what I said, so I’d like to clarify a few things re: my comments on the 64-bit only Exchange 12 decision by Microsoft.
First off, I absolutely concur with Microsoft’s decision to ship an x64 version of Exchange 12. 64-bit hardware will be the norm by the time it ships, and it’s part of the decision Microsoft made as part of its Common Engineering Criteria that all 2005 and later versions of server products would be available as native 64-bit apps for x64 Xeon/Opteron. This makes complete sense.
What I told the press is that I did not agree with Microsoft’s decision to drop the 32-bit version on this release, for the following reasons:
I for one agree with Bink - MS is being (finally) forward looking here...I really hate seeing legacy stuff in MS's arsenal (SMS that doesn't require AD / use of Netmeeting in MOC etc.). We started buying x64 before we even know it...HP's DL380 G4 about a year ago. I do think MS should do an x32<>x64 upgrade path - especially for EA holders like us.
Exchange12 or I rather Exchange 7 - what are the binaries? ...will rock.
-trevor
If Microsoft wants these people to upgrade to E12, then it’s going to be on the basis of features such as E12’s unified messaging, better security/antispam, log file shipping, or the new Web service API, not for better performance or scalability. The 64-bit only decision will put up a major roadblock to getting these customers to upgrade, even if they have Software Assurance and can get the upgrades at no additional cost.
3. Microsoft claims Small Business Server 2003 is selling briskly, but SBS is 32-bit only, even when it goes out preinstalled on x64 hardware. (For readers unfamiliar with SBS, it is a bundle that includes Exchange 2003 Standard). I myself have an x64 Dell 2800 with SBS 2003. Microsoft’s plan to ship a 64-bit only Longhorn version of SBS is going to be a huge problem for existing customers. Unlike mid- and large IT shops who can migrate data (such as AD data and mailboxes) to new 64-bit systems, SBS users don’t have that option. My take is that few if any of the existing SBS installed base will upgrade, even those whole already own x64 hardware. Furthermore, these small customers could care less about theoretical 64-bit performance advantages when they are hardly taxing their current servers.
4. We at Directions feel there is a major shift underway in datacenter architectures where organization large and small are beginning to think of using server virtualization wherever possible. By decoupling the software from the hardware, the benefits to customers and hosters can be enormous as long as the performance hit can be tolerable. The problem is that Microsoft is still about 2 years off from being able to support 64-bit guest OSs (although VMWare is much closer). This means that any customer who wants to run Exchange in a Microsoft virtual machine will not be able to do so until 2008 or so.For these reasons, I think that the lack of a 32-bit version will hold back many existing Exchange customers who would otherwise upgrade.
Microsoft has not given me an adequate reason why they don’t simply ship both (as they plan to do with Longhorn server), so those of us at Directions who have managed software projects before (at Microsoft and elsewhere) see it primarily as a resource and time issue. By cutting out the 32-bit version, the dev cycle and test matrix gets simpler, and the dev team can completely disregard the need to build a mechanism for doing in-place upgrades of Exchange 2003 servers. Microsoft will not admit this, but the spin machine is in full force and I don’t really expect an honest assessment of their schedule status. However, we do know that the company wants to stay closely in synch with the release of Office 12 (which has Outlook 12, the key client for E12), and is trying to remove risks that could cause it to slip.However, we believe that the company will lose far more in Exchange and SBS upgrade revenue than what an E12 schedule slip might cost it.
Yours truly,
Peter Pawlak
Score me on Bink's side here....here's why.
64 bit change is coming...you have to pick a brake point, why not now?
Most anyone who is running exchange 2003 (or 2000) at a enterprise level and wants to deploy excahnge 12 WILL deploy it on new hardware. In this day, you do not upgrade in place your mail server (unless you want to get fired!). So migration is simple....build new server in existing domain, move mailboxes....
As Bink says..why not offer all the proformance that you can and lower support costs at the same time...
As also pointed out- most servers sold today are 64 bit and by next year ALL will be.
64 bit only will FORCE exchange add on vendors to support 64 bit...
For less than 500 user shops Microsoft will offer 2 different answers that roll the whole EX 12 and server OS up...and yes they are 64 bit only as well....and if you are smart you'll deply them on new hardware anyway...Plus Microsoft has built in migration in those products.
I say the time for 64 bit migration is now (or at least it will be time a year from now!)
I agree with Bink here, it's time to move forward with what we all understand a huge leap in technology.
At some point there does have to be a break in supporting both 32-bit and 64-bit, and next year is a great time for it.
Some people seem to forget that they don't NEED to upgrade to E12, Exchange 2003 will be supported for serveral more years to follow. If you only have 32-bit hardware, and you want to keep using that, just keep running Exchange 2003. If the benefits of E12 are that important to you, than the hardware descision will be an easy.
I'm just guessing here, but Exchange 2003 life cycle might even outlive existing 32-bit only hardware life-cycle support from most high-end hardware vendors.
Thanks for joining the discussion Paul, here is my reply.
1. There was a program for Windows XP owners to get a free x64 "upgrade" Not sure if there is/will be one for x64 Windows 2003 Server. I agree with you that their should be an option for current 32 bit licenses. But in the Exchange 12 case, when a company wants that (in at least 13 months) it is a reality that hardware needs to be replaced anyway, Exchange can be a resource intensive server, so why re-use that 3 to 5 year old hardware.
2. So customers that run Exchange 2000 that didn't see the need for Exchange 2003 want to re-use that hardware for Exchange 12? again by that time, that hardware will be 4 to 5 years old. It would be a bad decission if they would re-use hardware of that age for such an intensive and critical service.
3. I agree that MS should make some tools available for for upgrades, in this case not even on the same hardware but migrate SBS 2003 to SBS Longhorn on new hardware. But SBS LH is not here yet, I assume Microsoft will have a solution in place by then. Maybe a super Files&Settings Transfer wizard[:P]
4. Yes virtualisation is getting more populair, but in my experience Exchange is not often a candidate to be virtualised. I'm not sure it will take Microsoft another two years to support 64bit guests, as fas as I know Microsoft will support 64 bit guest beging 2007 so that is before LH server/Hypervisor release. But like you said, Vmware has it ready soon and their ESX solution is superior and enterprise production ready.
5. Sure the lack of in place upgrade tests will benefit and speed up the development. But I don't proces that part is such a big of the whole product development.