Quote:
Originally Posted by Korbyn
With 60-65% of the market still running on Exchange 2003, and it being in extended support, we are already seeing clients opting to skip 2007 and chomping at the bit for 2010.
Normally I would agree with you, on the revolutionairy phase of a product, i.e. 5.5-->2000 or 2003-->2007 but this is more of a evolutionairy phase, i.e. 2000-->2003. I was appart of a +10,000 environment, and we went quite quickly from 2000-->2003, many things fixed, very few processes changed, I suspect the same for 2007->2010 environments too.
Aging hardware and canceled projects due to recession, and timing of the release of 2010... next year will be a very busy year of people skipping 2007 and going to 2010 and I've already got clients on 2007 chomping at the bit to get to 2010.
Granted I'm not dealing with +4000 user evironments, more SMB's, but I know of a few large organizations that are looking at waiting, to many things fixed in 2010. While Beta1 is receiving rave reviews, I did find it buggy and inconsistant, contrary to the hype that's out there, so I'm very much looking forward to the next beta or RC, which should be Aug/Sept to see how much it will really be improved.
|
And that's what Microsoft relies on is you little guys switching to the latest and greatest broken product so that they can fix it eventually pushing the 4000+ user businesses to using it.
Oh and what's going to be more interesting, with all the people you upgraded to Exchange 2007, once Exchange 2010 comes out I am willing to bet you that the hardware they have now will require more upgrading to be able to handle Exchange efficently. :o)
I have seen companies throwing 30k or more into hardware alone just to run Exchange 2007 following Microsoft best practices with 100 mailboxes. I doubt Microsoft or the guys in India will make the final product any easier when it comes to hardware constraints as that's always the rule of thumb when it comes to Microsoft! ;o)