Please Login to Remove!
haha. wow. we went through 3 test runs on 5.5 to 2000 and about 2 test runs on 2000 to 2003. the 5.5 to 2000 migration was absolute murder that took about 2-3 weeks out of my young life. i've heard good things about 5.5 to 2003 migrations (i'm sure there are nightmare stories there too, though). our AD still has some issues from this moron who was in charge of our NT 4.0 to 2000 migration a few years back.
our 2000 to 2003 migrations, for all intent purposes, have been painless ... on AD, Exchange and BES.
but in all honesty, for smaller companies that do not have a very hefty IT budget, staying with 'what works' (so long as its not broken and non-functional) is more incentive than shelling out money (that they may not have) for new hardware, possible training on the new server-side software (and OS), licensing for the new software, etc. a lot of companies spend very little money on their IT infrastructure in their infancy. these companies will likely never have a huge IT budget unless they are acquired by a publically traded company, or they launch an IPO, or they are tied to customer contracts, or something else along those lines that may dictate the requirements for a secure and redundant infrastructure (compliancies, etc).
__________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move.
Last edited by jibi; 03-14-2006 at 11:21 PM..
|
