Ed Brill

Post a Comment

1. 1  Bill medley  | 5/19/2008 12:29:01 PM

   Ok, I have to agree with Ed on this one, where is the ROI? I know for a fact that, yes Exchange online, can save a company money, IF, they limit all of thier users to a mere 50MB mail file, as this is the base offering that Microsoft has. If you want to go over that, say for instance in the environment i manage the average mail file for our 1800 employees is close to 1gb in size. If you try and outsource that to M$ then you are going to pay a very large monthly fee for the extra storage, then there is the cost of the backup/restore service, and then the couple million that you will have to spend for microsoft to covert your existing mail over to Exchange. Not worth it at all. The hosted model ends up being more expensive then keeping it inhouse.

1. 2  Jim Casale  | 5/19/2008 12:34:31 PM

   @Ed, It is funny you posted this as I just had a discussion about the future of Domino and Exchange with a mutual friend of ours that works here. His feeling was "Why would anyone want to handle their own email?" He also went on to say that hosted email (Exchange in particular) was the wave of the future. Could he have been drinking the same cola maybe? :-)

1. 3  David Gursky  | 5/19/2008 12:37:41 PM

   Anyone that is frankly STUPID enough to predict technical trends five years out is whistling Dixie (work with me - this is the family hour).

   Five years ago was only the beginning ofh hosted services and it was limited to email. Today, Google's web-based office suite does most of what you want in an Office Suite app. What insanely great idea comes up in the next five years? How does the notion of the social web alter the concept of email?

   50% on Hosted Exchange? Pulease...

1. 4  Dave Armstrong  | 5/19/2008 12:45:47 PM

   @3) 10 years ago, hosted apps were beginning. Just now are they making their way into some enterprise shops. It is quite possible to pick out trends that will take 5-10 years to develop and make predictions. You just need to look deeper than internet pop culture.

   But email isn't really the issue here. You aren't outsourcing just your email. You are also outsourcing the security surrounding that email. While that might sound nice from a spam-prevention and anti-virus perspective, it sounds downright terrifying to have either Microsoft or Google responsible for securing my corporate data.

1. 5  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 5/19/2008 12:53:24 PM

   I'm not sure whether it was CCE or TCCC, but recently one of those two established a policy of "no outbound email attachments allowed" due to an outflow of confidential marketing information.

   How would a policy like that work in an environment of 100% hosted email? If you're not willing to let people communicate via files to those outside the organization, how could you let ALL communication be processed outside the organization? That makes no sense, even putting aside the laughable concept of trusting a Microsoft hosted service to secure internal email.

   Heck, how are they even going to traffic-secure it? Exchange doesn't even have a robust PKI? If you're going to host Domino mail externally, at least you can secure the contents from the prying eyes of the actual administrators by handling your own authentication procedures.

1. 6  Jim Casale  | 5/19/2008 12:53:32 PM

   @4 I don't see heavily regulated companies using hosted email just for the reason you mention. In addition to security add compliance issues. Oh wait...would that be an additional option they want to sell you?

1. 7  Lars Olufsen http://www.olufsphere.com | 5/19/2008 12:59:41 PM

   Come on - that one is easy.

   They are struggling to get people to upgrade their Exchange installations, and the platform is tied into to a multitude of products that ALSO needs upgrading to work.

   Since companies are reluctant to upgrade, they won't be needing Windows server 2010 etc etc, which basically kills off Microsoft's entire strategy.

   So they're going to dump hosted Exchange on the market at a very low cost, and sell Hosted Exchange Cloud to Windows platform integration technology (MS Proprietary Integration Service Software - You do the abbreviation).

   If people won't do free migration to current Exchange installations, perhaps they'll do the free migration to the cloud.

1. 8  Danny Lawrence  | 5/19/2008 1:18:47 PM

   I"m with Lars on this one, note that they said "a portion" of the users would come from Domino, which is almost certainally true ("a portion" could be .001%). I think that the problem is that Exchanged is such a PITA to manage and upgrade that a certain category of business will jump at the chance to dump those problems on MSFT. These are companies who think that sending large amounts of money to MSFT every year is a good thing.

1. 9  caz  | 5/19/2008 1:36:45 PM

   Does anyone know how I can tell if my slow broadband connection is down to my pc or my broadband provider (Tiscali)? I ran a speed test here { Link } and it tells me I have a download speed of 2.06Mbs and an upload speed of 243 Kbps. My laptop a dell Inspiron 8600, is about 3-4 years old some and I have Windows and is running Windows 2000.

   Any or advice help would be greatly appreciated!

1. 10  Jon Mell http://jonmell.co.uk | 5/19/2008 2:28:54 PM

   This is great for SMB who don't necessarily have the security concerns. You can get hosted Exchange/Sharepoint/OCS for under $24/user/month from some Microsoft partners with minimal set up costs. Whilst I much prefer the IBM technology, I can't see anyone offering hosted Domino/Sametime/Connections at a similar price point (would love to be proved wrong!)

1. 11  Flemming Riis  | 5/19/2008 2:38:08 PM

   -I can't see anyone offering hosted Domino/Sametime/Connections at a similar price point

   dont belive IBM have anything that resembles the SLPA licensing type

1. 12  Dan Holzrichter  | 5/19/2008 2:49:26 PM

   If there is a big move to hosted mail I would be it is to something other than hosted Exchange (google mail maybe?) The companies I have seen using hosted exchange could care less if it is really exchange on the backend. They are more concerned with what they get in outlook and the cost.

1. 13  Randall Shimizu  | 5/19/2008 4:00:48 PM

   The real question is why companies would trust MS with their exchange data. Also why the shift if attitude.

   MS adding 10,000 computers a month.....????? Something does not sound right here. What ever happened to their notion of virtualization.

1. 14  Mike Lazar  | 5/19/2008 4:03:32 PM

   For those of you saying security is the issue, please feel free to ping me on this. Frankly, security is less of a concern in a proper hosted environment. There are far too many ways to skin the cat, so I won't get into them here. However, please think about it, and decide if anyone would ever be using this on an open, public network link. For enterprises, hosted enviroments are simply another node on their network. It doesn't matter where it is, it's secured as is any other site. For smaller shops, VPN tunnels, SSL, or HTTPS are the way they get at it. No one is ever running at this on a completely "in the clear" line. Couple that with the fact that you now have a 3rd party responsible for the integrity of your data, and you're actually more secure from a regulatory perspective. There's an independent body taking care of your information, and that's their bread and butter. From an archiving/compliance standpoint, it's considered a better choice to have 3rd party management.

1. 15  Keith Brooks http://lotustech.blogspot.com | 5/19/2008 4:38:24 PM

   I blogged on a similar topic yesterday.

   Let's say for the minute you all get over yourselves on security and think about it, security is just a CYA or job keeping answer.

   It is NOT very true in the long run.

   Once a company can prove they are just as, if not more, secure than your own, what is the problem stopping you from doing it?

   Who would pay using a credit card? Circa 1965

   Who would pay online? Circa 1980-present

   Who would give their waiter their credit card? and on and on

   Do you really think security is the issue? Security of what? SS#'s? Bank Account #'s? Intellectual property, yeah because there is still corporate secrecy these days? Aside form a few noted organizations?

   Flippant, maybe, realistic possibly.

   It is just now may be the right time. Would you complain so much if your Domino server was hosted? And if yes, Why? Don't you trust Domino or IBM or your host?

   If no you would not complain, then you just answered the way Microsoft/Google or IBM sees the future.

   My problem is what next? After the CLoud computing? A repeat of the late 80's early 90's where we go back to a distributed desktop method of some sort? Or do we see IBM selling better phones/laptops because equipment is going to get very small soon.

1. 16  Andy Steven http://www.cycle2max.com | 5/19/2008 5:27:09 PM

   All these discussions, where is the mention of customised mail. In my opinion integrating email with apps is Notes big selling feature (rarely mentioned in press). It would be hard todo that in a hosted environment.

   Remember people Notes is more than just email..

   Yes it might appeal to sites using Small Business Server, but well setup Domino sites, no.

1. 17  Kevin http://www.theglobalmind.com | 5/19/2008 10:00:35 PM

   The funnier, or perhaps stupid part of this is that anyone would actually believe that Exchange is the only mail platform which could be hosted.

   Not that truth has ever stood in the way of a story before. How many hosted Domino vendors are out there? A fair number I'd guess.

1. 18  Brian Medcalf  | 5/19/2008 10:02:58 PM

   And what does IBM host (at least in Australia)? Yep Exchange! Not Domino.

1. 19  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 5/19/2008 10:06:13 PM

   @18 depends on what you mean by "host". IBM Global Services runs Notes environments for several customers, it's just not pay-as-you-go. But I'm not sure IBM hosts a pay-as-you-go Exchange service either, do you have a link?

1. 20  Dave Madison  | 5/19/2008 10:42:52 PM

   @19 Not pay as you go?

   { Link }

   { Link }

   Unless Rhodin suffered a Steve Mills moment, looks like pay as you go to me.

1. 21  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 5/19/2008 10:47:54 PM

   @20 Thank you for giving me the opportunity to clarify my remarks in @19. Applications on Demand is indeed a Pay-As-You-Go service for Lotus Notes/Domino, with many successful customers.

   It is distinct from the hosting operations that IBM Global Services does in its strategic outsourcing practice.

   In the case of IBM Global Services and Exchange, as far as I know, the only IGS work with Exchange is in the strategic outsourcing practice or in the Microsoft consultancy around implementations, not in Applications on Demand.

   so, I am not sure what Brian means about IBM Australia hosting Exchange -- my expectation is it is in the context of strategic outsourcing.

1. 22  David Gursky  | 5/19/2008 11:04:42 PM

   OK, classically, Information Security comes down to three attributes:

   1. Assurance of Service -- Can you get to your information when you want to. Yes, there have been some notable failures in the Hosted App space, but by and large, if you want to get on to Google Apps or Yahoo mail, it's there for you.

   2. Data integrity -- The Wikipedia problem. Wikipedia's strength of course is anyone can contribute, but for business documents, the reverse is true. Hosted apps can only be successful if the end user has faith that the document they write on Tuesday is the hamburger Wimpy asks Popeye for on Thursday.

   3. Assurance of Privacy. Continuing the Popeye theme, that same document written on Tuesday is not the hamburger Brutus stole on Wednesday before Wimpy could eat it on Thursday.

   Underlying this is

   1 -- The question of identity management, but I'd like to believe that technical solutions exist today, even if they're not commonly used.

   2 -- Entrusting corporate data with a third party, although again, I'd like to believe that a Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, IBM, or whomever could take steps internally to encrypt stored data so that even if it is lost/stolen, it is unreadable by the perpetrator, and only appears in "clear text" in some intermediary (and uncached) processing, after being read from disk and then sent via secure HTTP.

   The issue with hosted apps IMO is not security, but compliance, auditing, and the ilk. Let's say Company A and B used Hosted App C. Company A is required to maintain docs by government reg. C fails to do so and causes problems for A, who in turn hold C liable, causing the business failure of C. What are the consequences to B then?

1. 23  Jonathan Kreizman  | 5/20/2008 5:07:17 AM

   Enterprises implementing OCS: Does anyone here have an idea of large scale enterprises apart from Coca-Cola which are implementing Microsoft's OCS (including voice applications)? Thanks

1. 24  Henry Ferlauto http://www.geniusinside.com | 5/20/2008 6:38:40 AM

   @10 - Spot on! Many small businesses would love to get rid of their AOL, Yahoo!, GMail, etc. accounts for the simple cache of their own domain; and having the benefits of groupware is an added bonus.

   @19 - I've read the articles, but I still can't find any place to actually purchase hosted Lotus Notes, Domino, Sametime and Quikr at even remotely reasonable prices.

   I always site "1and1" ({ Link } ) as the best example of Microsoft's groupware offerings being truly commoditized. Exchange mailboxes runs $6.99 / month / user; SharePoint for $19.99 / month.

   I don't think Lotus offerings need to be this low (although that would be nice). But if the basic mailbox were $9.99 including basic Sametime IM; then another $5 for the advanced; and have Quickr in the $25-$30/range, I think there's a huge potential for IBM.

1. 25  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 5/20/2008 6:49:35 AM

   @22 - The question of identity management, but I'd like to believe that technical solutions exist today, even if they're not commonly used.

   There are solutions today, though few are particularly robust. Particularly in the arena of web mail solutions, identity management is weak. SSLv3 implementations have generally failed. There is no cryptographically-secure mechanism to authenticate a web user.

   Entrusting corporate data with a third party, although again, I'd like to believe that a Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, IBM, or whomever could take steps internally to encrypt stored data so that even if it is lost/stolen, it is unreadable by the perpetrator, and only appears in "clear text" in some intermediary (and uncached) processing, after being read from disk and then sent via secure HTTP.

   Why would you believe this? Is there any indication at all that these vendors even have the CAPABILITY to ensure that on-disk information is encrypted?

   Even in the case of information transmitted over SSL, the requirement is that if you're reading with a dumb client, then the information must be decrypted before being sent to the client. SSL stands for secure SOCKET LAYER. It doesn't manage encryption of page content, just network packets. The transmitting server encrypts and sends whatever content is made available to it, which is decrypted to that same content at the receiving end. So if the transmitting server only has access to cipher text, then the browser receiving it will only get cipher text.

   To secure information from compromise at the host, you need end-to-end cryptography. Domino is the only platform that has a native PKI implementation as part of its base product. You can't have an intermediary, because by definition that is a man-in-the-middle attack.

   All the VPN security on the planet won't help if an attack comes from inside the hosting environment, because all the keys are already inside. To be secure against compromise from the host itself, an organization has to separate authentication and key management from maintenance and storage of the servers & network. If that's all the same authority, then that authority has all the power.

1. 26  Sean Jennings  | 5/20/2008 7:06:53 AM

   Correct me if I'm wrong, but essentially Microsoft is saying to all those Admins employed keep Exchange up-and-running is that it hopes to make 50% of them redundant within 5 years?

   Of course that also means a 50% reduction in potential customers for all those ISV's that develop add-ons for Exchange...

   To summarize then... "Microsoft expects the number of Exchange users to plummet by 50% within 5 years..." ;o)

1. 27  David Gursky  | 5/20/2008 8:29:42 AM

   The greatest weakness in any technical solution is the non-technical attack. How many stories have we read about white hat successfully penetrating a network as part of a security exercise? There was a story a year or so back about a bank that ran such an exercise. The attack team put a trojan on a bunch of promotional USB sticks, scattered them in front of a target branch before opening. Suffice to say, the bank was not happy about their employee's performance.

   Ultimately what I'm saying regarding hosted apps is that the issues are not the technical ones, and the marketing (unprintable) will play that to the hilt, but the logistical ones. I want to believe they will be solved. But more to the point of the original comment, MS's comment is just full of hubris at so many levels, because we have no concept as to what the social web/net (including email) will look like in five years.

1. 28  David Gursky  | 5/20/2008 8:30:28 AM

   { Link }

1. 29  Darren Duke http://www.simplified-tech.com | 5/20/2008 9:59:28 AM

   I think IBM (and Lotus before them) have suffered in this area. Mainly due to a lack of understanding as to what hoster/ASP deal with as to cash flow, license management, etc. As I do like to use RIM as an example, { Link } so I will continue with their hosting/ASP model.

   With RIM every month you take a screen shot of the BES showing the number of users using the service, you then send that to RIM. The number of users multiplied your cost (quite low compared to a BB CAL) is billed/invoiced/credit carded, ect. Each and every month you can have a different number of users. Perfect for hosting companies, whose numbers can differ drastically month to month. And this (to my understanding) is how most white label exchange shops do it too. Per month per user pricing. A pretty neat way to ensure your hosting providers (who are also now your cheerleaders) do not get left with a boat load of licenses during any given month/year/etc. More importantly this ensures they (the hosting co) make money and that they are always in compliance, as you only pay for active users.

   Now, does Domino licensing behave it like this? No. A hoster is either responsible for ensuring each server/user/whatever is licensed or they provide the licenses themselves. But these licenses are annual, so if a hoster is eating the cost of the license (the latter option) it is amortized over 12 months, not per month. This now becomes a cash flow nightmare (prepaying for licenses, yo may not use) and a compliance one too.

   FYI, I ain't a hosting co, but I know a few. Ask them if you don't believe me.

1. 30  Jon Mell http://jonmell.co.uk | 5/20/2008 11:49:33 AM

   @29 - you're right, I think this is pretty much a commercial / licensing issue rather than anything technical / security related

1. 31  NeilT  | 5/21/2008 5:13:47 AM

   Well I'm late to this one.

   Let me reiterate what I said two years ago (well it feels like it, maybe it was only a year), on this very blog.

   Yahoo sell me 500 mailboxes (then 2 gbytes, now unlimited), and a website with 400Gbytes per month of bandwidth

   For the princely sum of $20 per month.

   Given the title of this article and the above statements, would anyone like to revisit the continued and protracted attempts of MS to buy Yahoo???

   MS, Yahoo and Google all use their experience in online web mail hosting to push the reliability and stability of their online hosted solutions.

   I ask the same question I have been asking on this blog for two years (or is it only one?).

   Where is IBM in this market?

   I get the same answer every time. "We don't want to be".

   Well if MS Does manage to take 50% of their Hosted Exchange mailboxes from Notes/Domino, you'll know that this was an incrorrect answer.

1. 32  Brian Medcalf  | 5/29/2008 11:07:35 PM

   @23 Maybe talk to your local MS rep?

1. 33  Anonymous  | 11/21/2008 4:27:19 PM

   Deleted, no anonymous comments allowed