Subscribe to Windows IT Pro

 

Get Newsletters

  • Get the Latest News
  • Product Updates
  • Helpful Tricks
  • Productivity Tips

Subscribe Now!

March 15, 2006 12:00 AM

Tooling Up for Exchange Migration

Windows IT Pro
InstantDoc ID #49684
Rating: (2)

Last week, I briefly mentioned that Microsoft had released an updated version of the Application Analyzer 2006 for Lotus Domino (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?amp;amp;displaylang=en&familyid=D94C5719-570D-4ADB-B449-70E1E42CBFC5&displaylang=en ), and I promised to talk more about it this week. More generally, though, it's interesting to look at the state of the art and state of the market, for Exchange migration tools.

First, it's important to use the right vocabulary--or at least the same terms that Microsoft uses in the official documentation. If you move from some other messaging system (e.g., Lotus Notes or a UNIX POP3 server) to Exchange Server 2003, that's a migration. If you move from Exchange Server 5.5 to Exchange 2003, Microsoft also considers that a migration. However, if you move from Exchange 2000 Server to Exchange 2003, that's an upgrade. I'll stick with these definitions for the remainder of the column.

Microsoft has always offered some set of migration tools as part of the Exchange product. The Migration Wizard (migwiz.exe) in Exchange 5.5, for example, could migrate mail and calendar data from several foreign system types (including LDAP/IMAP systems, cc:Mail, Lotus Notes, and Novell GroupWise 5.x). Over time, Microsoft's commitment to shipping migration tools has waxed and waned; in Exchange 2003, the in-the-box tools include an updated version of migwiz and connectors to allow message, calendar, and public folder data interchange with selected versions of GroupWise and Notes. For example, the latest version of GroupWise is version 7.0, and the Microsoft GroupWise connector doesn't officially support that version (although I understand that it works fine). There are many third parties that offer migration tools for other messaging/calendaring systems; for example, Simpler-Webb offers tools to migrate from HP OpenMail, Samsung Contact, and Scalix, whereas Quest Software offers well-regarded tools for migrating from GroupWise and Notes.

For many migrations, it's enough to just move email and calendar data; mail-moving tools are sufficient for users migrating from Oracle Collaboration Suite, IMAP or POP-based systems, GroupWise, and a variety of lesser-known products. However, Notes migrations are a different animal because many Notes customers are also using collaborative applications built with Notes; although Exchange clearly offers a better messaging and calendaring system than Notes (particularly when you include the desktop client in the comparison), companies that have invested heavily in Notes application development quite rightly worry about preserving their application investments.

Microsoft's tack toward these customers is straightforward: The company has moved away from claims that migration is easy to a more nuanced position that admits the way things really are--some applications are harder to move than others. In addition, it has proposed a framework that classifies applications according to the amount of customization and embedded logic in the application; lightly customized applications or those with minimal embedded logic are obviously easier to move than large, heavily customized ones. (To see more about this methodology, see the blog for the collaboration tools team at Microsoft ( http://blogs.technet.com/collabtools ). That's what the new Application Analyzer tool is for. It scans the applications in use on a set of Domino servers and reports back on which applications fall into which categories. As with any other automated tool that attempts to interpret code, its results still require human interpretation. (Oh, the stories I could tell about automated code analysis tools from the days when I wrote Ada compilers for a living!)

The missing piece in the migration story is moving the applications themselves to a new platform. There are several different ways to accomplish this, ranging from completely rewriting the application using the .NET Framework to writing a new front-end in .NET and exposing the existing data through the Component Object Model (COM) interfaces or by embedding Notes data and presentation logic in a SharePoint Web Part. Several companies make tools for moving Notes data (including document libraries) to SharePoint libraries or Exchange public folders, but as yet, the market for tools that attempt to convert the code is still fairly small in scope, with only a few vendors even making the attempt. I expect this situation to change as the battle between Microsoft and IBM intensifies; IBM is pushing Notes, and its successor, Workplace Collaboration Services, as a future-proof way to protect existing investments, whereas Microsoft is countering with the argument that its platform offers better technology, a lower total cost, and more functionality to boot.

Of course, in the Exchange world, most of the attention around migration is focused on moving from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2003. I had a great meeting with a customer this week that I think exemplified the *right* way to prepare for such a migration. Next week I'll tell you why I think so.

Related Content:

ARTICLE TOOLS

Comments
  • PAUL
    6 years ago
    Aug 01, 2006

    Sorry you didn't like the article. However, I stand by what I wrote. IBM has clearly indicated that WCS on the server will be its primary future direction. Rather than argue the point here, see my blog at http://www.robichaux.net/blog/2006/04/my_email_exchan.php.

  • Christopher
    6 years ago
    Mar 15, 2006

    Paul,

    I really hate when you get your basic facts wrong, creating fear, uncertainty and deceit.

    1. WCS is not a replacement for Lotus Notes. Notes is NOT going away. Hannover does represent the next step in a workplace managed client, but this is very different than WCS.

    2. The application analyzer tool has been evaluated and tested in both beta/production versions by Paul Mooney ( http://www.pmooney.net/blogsphe.nsf/d6plinks/PMOY-6MJ4MS )and others and found to basically be a piece of garbage (cannot put any other words here). To spin how nad this tool as one that "As with any other automated tool that attempts to interpret code, its results still require human interpretation." is disingenuous at best.

    I would encourage the editors of this publoication, and you, to do more fact checking before publishing inaccurate data.

    Oh, and I did not realize that MS was now referring to rip and replace of Exchange infrastructures as "Migration". Note that this is NEVER an ussue with Lotus Notes upgrades!

You must log on before posting a comment.

Are you a new visitor? Register Here

advertisement

advertisement

White Papers

Get your Windows 7 deployment off to the right start by implementing PC lockdown. A locked-down environment is easier and cheaper to support since users are less likely to make unnecessary changes to the core system configuration - read more here!

Essential Guides

Is your iSCSI "lossy"? The reality is that most off-the-shelf Ethernet hardware deployed for iSCSI can lose packets, resulting in slow performance or application downtime. Learn how to assess your current iSCSI infrastructure and engineer an advanced iSCSI SAN infrastructure.

Web Seminars

What's the best way to keep your network safe from malware? In this web seminar, security expert Greg Shields suggests an alternative method to the traditional blacklisting approach that is common with anti-virus and anti-malware solutions.

eLearning Series

We bring the experts direct to you to share their real-world perspective and expertise. During each event, three sessions stream in real time, so you can learn, ask questions, and get solutions.
Upcoming event: Getting the Most with Exchange 2010 with Paul Robichaux

Subscribe to Windows IT Pro!

Windows is a trademark of the Microsoft group of companies. Windows IT Pro is used by Penton Media Inc. under license from owner.