jkOnTheRun: "Hosted Exchange Server and the Mobile Professional"

[Janak Parekh]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://jkontherun.blogs.com/jkontherun/2004/10/hosted_exchange.html#more' target='_blank'>http://jkontherun.blogs.com/jkonthe...hange.html#more</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Big companies have an advantage over the small company or individual when it comes to email handling and information utilization. Mobile professionals that don't happen to work for big companies with big resources have the same basic needs as those who do. Wouldn't it be nice to have the same setup to handle your email, PIM functions, and information distribution even though you are a little guy? There's a simple way to accomplish exactly that which I will discuss in this article. If this situation describes you then read on and see if this is a good solution for your needs."</i><br /><br />Microsoft's vision is using Exchange Server everywhere for collaboration and communication tasks, and it also integrates nicely with Pocket PCs. For those of you who don't have Exchange Server available at work, check out this article, which discusses using 3rd-party solutions for SOHO environments.

[brianchris]

Actually, over a year ago, within a discussion in a front page post by Jason Dunn (where he was asking how to get all his email on all his devices) was someone's suggestion to use a Hosted Exchange solution. Although I, myself, manage a couple Exchange servers for my clients, I had no idea there was such a service available. The more I thought about it, the more I fell in love with the idea, so I signed up.

Wow.....it was truly a life changing event (similar to how Tivo changes someone’s life :wink: ). So many benefits:

-All PIM data no matter which device (desktop, laptop, public terminal via OWA, PDA via OMA, PDA via Exchange Activesync).
-Connection independent SMTP server
-PIM data offsite and backed up, etc. etc.


Recently, though, there's been trouble in paradise. A trend has occurred in the hosted Exchange world: *most* hosted exchange providers are forcing all users to maintain a minimum of three mailboxes. For small business, that's not an issue, but for individuals (like me), it threatened to force me to stop using a hosted Exchange solution (GASP :eek: ).

Since I started, I had referred (at least) two other individuals to the same service, individuals who were going to be forced out as well. I therefore devised a plan that the three of us would merge into one account, thereby meeting the three mailbox minimum, but what a pain. And why? The only difference (that I can tell) as for as the hosted exchange provider was concerned is they were charging one credit card instead of three. It seems like any administrative benefit they would achieve via the three mailbox minimum would be far eclipsed by the number of people unwilling to pay for two extra mailboxes they wouldn't use and therefore cancel service. Can anyone explain what they may be thinking? When asked via email, they do not explain their reasoning other than "everyone else is doing it." :roll:

Anyway, I don't believe this unfortunate trend was mentioned in the article, and it really should be. HOWEVER, thanks to the article, the hosted Exchange provider he employs (and links to within the article) A) knows about the "three mailbox trend" and B) is not implementing such a trend for at least the next year or two (if ever). So, thanks to the article, it looks as though I have a new Hosted Exchange Provider!!!! All is well with the universe again 8)

[PR.]

Are you using eOutlook brianchris?

I know they have changed their pricing strategy recently :(

I found a UK hosting company who offer exchange hosting for their domain holders its £5.99 and offers Desktop/Web Outlook and ActiveSync and you only pay for the accounts you use. It however doesn't offer MS's IMF technology or the OMA for WAP phones. http://www.1and1.co.uk

I'm gonna stick with eOutlook for the time being despite the 300% charge increase. The benefits are still out weighing the price

[OSUKid7]

I've thought about getting Exchange Hosting several times. I know it's available for $6.99/month at 1&1 (http://order.1and1.com/xml/order/MailExchange;jsessionid=C91257D5F73167BB6B08D5D7A363CB13.TC61b?__frame=_top).

The thing that worries me with Exchange hosting is the size limite. 1&1's is 500 MB. I don't think my Outlook personal files folder is 652MB right now. Is it easy to archive old items to your hard drive?

[PR.]

I've thought about getting Exchange Hosting several times. I know it's available for $6.99/month at 1&1 (http://order.1and1.com/xml/order/MailExchange;jsessionid=C91257D5F73167BB6B08D5D7A363CB13.TC61b?__frame=_top).

The thing that worries me with Exchange hosting is the size limite. 1&1's is 500 MB. I don't think my Outlook personal files folder is 652MB right now. Is it easy to archive old items to your hard drive?

Outlook provides archiving based on time so you could archive items over 12months old. Obviously once this is down the archived files are stored on the local PC.

If there are emails with large attachments which you want to keep the email (e.g. Sent items) then the attachment can be removed leaving the email intact.

You can always pay for some more space! :lol:

[szamot]

I never could and still don't understand why people insist on thinking that email is the best way to store attachments. Save the attachment if you need it and whack the email. This way you only have to open one application to view the attachment - seems simple enough concept to me. I have seen people acquire 1.5 gigs of "necessary" mail in less than 6 months, its crazy, crazy I say. I bet most of the attachments are some lame PPT “cool” things or pictures in like a bmp or tif format. Get rid and you will be happy.

[brianchris]

Yup....I am (was) an eOutlook customer.

Beware of 1&1's hosted Exchange. A friend of mine (who I refereed to eOutllok), tried to set his brother up with 1&1. It was difficult as there weren't a lot of instructions, and when they called for support, 1&1 hardly even knew they offered the service (let alone support it). That was about two weeks ago.

[jkendrick]

I was trying to keep the article from becoming a testimonial to Mail Street. I will tell you I have seldom worked with any service provider with customer support so exemplary as theirs. I had a problem on a weeklong trip this summer and their solution just blew me away. I detailed it here at that time if you are interested.

http://jkontherun.blogs.com/jkontherun/2004/07/mailstreet_host.html

[Vidge]

This may be a dumb question but I'll ask it anyway. I know nothing about Exchange Server but it sounds like it may be the answer to my calendar sharing problem I've had ever since Microsoft took it out of Outlook. In any event, my question is does this do IMAP? I've been considering switching to IMAP just because I hear how great it is so if I were to switch, I'd like to just switch one time.

Thanks!

[Jason Dunn]

I kept meaning to post about this, but never did: I'm with www.mailstreet.com and am quite happy with them. I wish they offered more than 100 MB of storage space for the $12.95 a month that they charge but I archive most of my stuff so it's not a big deal. Their service is quite good, and they have excellent tech support.

If you happen to sign up, 11674 is my affiliate ID. :mrgreen:

[PR.]

This may be a dumb question but I'll ask it anyway. I know nothing about Exchange Server but it sounds like it may be the answer to my calendar sharing problem I've had ever since Microsoft took it out of Outlook. In any event, my question is does this do IMAP? I've been considering switching to IMAP just because I hear how great it is so if I were to switch, I'd like to just switch one time.

Thanks!

You don't actually need to use IMAP simply open ActiveSync on your PPC and click tools options then select the items you want to sync. Once you are done ActiveSync can then synchronise all your emails/calendar/contacts

[darrylb]

This may be a dumb question but I'll ask it anyway. I know nothing about Exchange Server but it sounds like it may be the answer to my calendar sharing problem I've had ever since Microsoft took it out of Outlook. In any event, my question is does this do IMAP? I've been considering switching to IMAP just because I hear how great it is so if I were to switch, I'd like to just switch one time.

Yes it supports IMAP, however, only for mail. EAS also will sync your calendar and contacts. Also IMAP is a pull only solution, EAS will tell your device when to sync, meaning your mail gets to you within seconds of it arriving if you have a smartphone or PPC Phone Edition.

[Vidge]

I know IMAP is only for mail. I was looking at it because it supports folders and such. Good to know that Exchange Server supports it. (I assume that's what EAS means!) I may have to give this thing a go. Thanks!

[Underwater Mike]

I use 1and1 for my regular hosting and was considering the Exchange hosting. But it sounds like you guys are dissatisfied.

I know that the Mail Street service is supposed to be good, but is it really worth twice the price?

[PR.]

Why don't you give 1and1 a go first?

If you don't like it export your email setup the new service then cancel the old one.

I noticed that MailStreet don't offer Exchanges IMF (Intelligent Mail Filter) either only a 3rd party service. I like IMF because it integrates with Outlooks junk email filters.

[jkendrick]

Someone has posted a complaint about 1and1 on my website this morning. He's having trouble syncing with Activesync to their service. It just goes to show you have to make sure you are comfortable with the service and options.

[beq]

I'm also curious about experiences with other hosted Exchange providers? There is eOutlook's short list (http://www.eoutlook.com/competitive_comparison.htm) (is it me or is this list missing one or two competitors that were included in the past?), and this independent BIG list (http://www.crowcanyon.com/ExchangeASP.htm). Anyone tried all of them? :)

I'd subscribed (http://www.emailaddresses.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21218) each of my family members (4) to both 1and1 and eOutlook hosted Exchange since May to compare, but had finally dropped eOutlook due to pricing even though it was better in some significant respects. Well, it was mainly because my family (even now) has not actually started to make use of any Exchange accounts or Outlook yet even though I'd set everything up for them -- they're stubbornly clinging to Outlook Express with their existing mail providers. So all that time I was paying for both accounts for each and they weren't even used :evil:

What frustrated me, all of last month 1and1 ran a promotion offering 3 FREE MONTHS of hosted Exchange service, but I can't take advantage since I'd already subscribed us (although again the accounts haven't been used). I couldn't just delete the old accounts because
a) it was just the first month into the 3-month billing cycle subscription
b) I had already taken the time to set up these accounts (importing everyone's mail/contacts/etc, setting up Outlook profiles, etc).

Anyways as mentioned ealier, 1and1 doesn't seem to support VPN like other providers, only RPC-over-HTTP. And unfortunately Microsoft really goofed up (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=30557&start=17) IMHO with Outlook not being able to save your Exchange account login/password. It's even worse with 1and1 because they assign you really hard to remember "e########" usernames instead of letting you create your own or using your email address. So each time one of us starts Outlook we'd have to retype this long "EXCHANGE\e########" then password.

Other 1and1 drawbacks include meager or no support for public folders and the GAL. You're limited to just 5MB total for all public folders, and cannot even create any custom folders. It's a big discrepancy from the 500MB user mailbox (whereas eOutlook for example offers 100MB user mailbox and 100MB public folder space). And the GAL is there, but they don't provide any user interface/access to it (whereas eOutlook for example offers basic add/modify GAL interface in their control panel). I realize these are not issues for individual customers, but family or small business subscribers might want to use these features.

eOutlook also provides more personable customer service. Many changes/customizations can be requested to be handled by hand even if there's no support in the control panel. Whereas I guess 1and1 is too big of a company, I didn't get the sense they could do the same. Actually whenever I called 1and1, their first-level tech support never seems to know anything about hosted Exchange, some of my long-standing questions were only answered after being escalated to the higher-ups.

But I'm not sure how 1and1 can afford the low $6.99/month pricing and 500MB user mailbox space (IIRC it was 200MB when introduced but quickly ramped up, I guess due to Gmail mania?). I've talked to eOutlook and they can't understand it either nor could they match -- eOutlook is already the 2nd cheapest compared to others though. In fact as mentioned some are increasing minimum number of mailboxes...

Anyways, I was told both eOutlook and 1and1 had added the Exchange IMF and updated to Exchange 2003 SP1. eOutlook uses GFI antivirus and antispam (not sure if the IMF actually replaced the antispam?). 1and1 uses Symantec Mail Security for Exchange antivirus/antispam (which is what we use at work haha). But both providers don't provide any interface access in the control panel to the GFI/Symantec stuff, though again IIRC eOutlook mentioned you can request manual customizations to the spam filtering. Do ya'll know what MailStreet uses?

[beq]

I forgot to mention that 1and1 does provide automated Outlook account configuration via customized .PRF file whereas eOutlook relies on manual configuration. But it's not a big deal I guess, and I'd recommend to still edit the file to suit your preferences anyways...

I also want to say it was frustrating dealing with 1and1 in trying to resolve the RPC-over-HTTP problem with Outlook not being able to save your Exchange account login. All their reps that I talked to always claimed never to have heard of this problem, and always tell me to just set the checkbox that saves your password or something. For awhile I thought it was a problem on my part. Luckily eOutlook was more knowledgeable and forthcoming about the problem.

What I don't understand is that since RPC-over-HTTP is 1and1's only method of Outlook access, all (100%) of their hosted Exchange customers must have this login problem right? So how could they claim not to know anything about such a problem?

Actually I'm also curious why this RPC-over-HTTP login problem hasn't been mentioned more often in general, especially since all the security hoopla over RPC (port 135) and its blocking. I guess customers of other providers are content to just use VPN?

[fmcpherson]

Ironically, I signed up with 1and1's Exchange hosting the night before this article was posted, so I am new user. Here is what I've learned so far.

First, as has been mentioned previously, the only access to Exchange that they support is RPC over HTTP. That appears to limit you to only being able to access their Exchange 2003 server using Outlook 2003 and Windows XP. Their doco suggests that you cannot access it with anyting else, though they provide support for server ActiveSync and Outlook Web Access. (Actually 1and1s doco refers to this as MAPI over HTTP.)

Right now my desktop computer is running W2K Pro and Outlook 2002. I've been meaning to upgrade to XP, but haven't gotten around to it. So the push to XP and 2003 to access my Exchange account isn't all that bad. The last couple of days I installed the Office 2003 under Virtual PC on my Mac Powerbook just to go through the process, and I at least know it works.

Here is something else that I just learned. Once you configure a Pocket PC for server synchronization you cannot sync those information types with a desktop PC, no matter what partnership you originally configure it with.

My normal sync process before server sync is to sync with my work PC and my home PC. The bulk of my Calendar items come from work, so it's pretty important to be able to sync those items with my work PC.

Unfortunately, if I enable server sync for Calendar I will no longer be able to sync Calendar items with my work PC. So, it looks like I won't be syncing Calendar items if I continue with server sync. This is another synchronization design decision that Microsoft made, obviously they assume that if someone is doing server sync they would never want to sync those items with a PC.

I did try Calendar sync with my 1and1 account and ran into problems where not everything syncs. I get a SYNC_5 message on my Pocket PC that suggests there is a patch for Exchange 2003 to fix the problem. Right now I am wating on a respone from 1and1 as to whether they will apply the patch. Of course now that point is moot for me.

The upside with 1and1 is that they are cheap. $6.99 per month and you get 500 MB of storage. They also don't require me to purchase three accounts. Of course, given what I describe above it appears you get what you pay for, which appears to not be the optimal Exchange hosting set up. On the other hand, it does provide me Blackberry-like email push to my Pocket PC which is kinda a cool for this price.

[fmcpherson]

Actually I'm also curious why this RPC-over-HTTP login problem hasn't been mentioned more often in general, especially since all the security hoopla over RPC (port 135) and its blocking. I guess customers of other providers are content to just use VPN?

The point of RPC over HTTP is that the RPC information is packaged within the HTTP protocol and hence goes across port 80, not port 135. That deals with the security concerns about RPC, I think.

[jkendrick]

You are absolutely right about the server synchronization. I used it for a while but switched back to normal PC syncing for that reason. Outlook Web Access is available to connect my PPC direct to the server and I use that a lot.

[beq]

Actually I'm also curious why this RPC-over-HTTP login problem hasn't been mentioned more often in general, especially since all the security hoopla over RPC (port 135) and its blocking. I guess customers of other providers are content to just use VPN?

The point of RPC over HTTP is that the RPC information is packaged within the HTTP protocol and hence goes across port 80, not port 135. That deals with the security concerns about RPC, I think.
Thanks, yeah I get that. That's why I would think RPC over HTTP encapsulation would be a very popular access method (precisely to avoid the direct RPC security concerns). But that's also why I would think this login problem with RPC over HTTP (where Outlook isn't able to save your Exchange account login/password) would be a very big deal, but I haven't seen much mention of it?

[beq]

Actually I just wanted to make sure, can you guys or Janak confirm if VPN access works fine in terms of Outlook saving your login/password?

I could've sworn that VPN works fine because I seem to recall testing it back when I had my eOutlook account. But I can't recheck now since 1and1 does not offer VPN access.

Thing is, someone else was told by MailStreet (http://www.emailaddresses.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=264477#post264477) that this problem (Outlook not saving your login/password) occurs with both VPN and RPC-over-HTTP access methods??

[fmcpherson]

To be honest with you, I've never experienced access with an Exchange server where you could save off the password. Since Exchange is really a corporate product, and storing passwords is not the best security practice, I wouldn't expect to be able to have it save passwords. But that may just be me.

[fmcpherson]

You are absolutely right about the server synchronization. I used it for a while but switched back to normal PC syncing for that reason. Outlook Web Access is available to connect my PPC direct to the server and I use that a lot.

So, you are not using server sync at all? I would think would want to use it for at least email.

[fmcpherson]

Tonight I installed the test drive version of Entourage 2004 on my PowerBook, and I have been able to get it to work fully with the Exchange server hosted by 1and1.

This could turn into an optimal situation for me where I have access to the same Inbox, Contacts, and Calendar from any PC, Mac, or Pocket PC that I use!

[jkendrick]

You are absolutely right about the server synchronization. I used it for a while but switched back to normal PC syncing for that reason. Outlook Web Access is available to connect my PPC direct to the server and I use that a lot.

So, you are not using server sync at all? I would think would want to use it for at least email.

No, I am not syncing anything on the PPC to the server. I sync the PPC only to my PCs. I don't need all my email accessible from the PPC as I don't regularly do email from there.

[ctmagnus]

One thing I'm wondering (since I plan to do a fair bit of travelling in the near future) is, do any of these solutions work such that you can have your desktop inbox function like a regular client, pulling down mail as necessary, and when you're on the road be able to access your inbox on the server via OWA?

[jkendrick]

One thing I'm wondering (since I plan to do a fair bit of travelling in the near future) is, do any of these solutions work such that you can have your desktop inbox function like a regular client, pulling down mail as necessary, and when you're on the road be able to access your inbox on the server via OWA?

Yes, it functions exactly like that.

[Jereboam]

Just wanted to bump this and ask if anyone can add any fresh experiences of hosted Exchange solutions - I now have an OS X Powerbook, XP Pro Vaio laptop, XP Pro workstation, and a WM2003 4700 that I need to keep in sync...

Also, I have a current email service, Runbox, which gives me a gig of email storage, POP/IMAP/SMTP access and so on. How would that fit with an hosted Exchange service? Would I ditch Runbox and have to obtain a new domain to use with the Exchange account, or do they dovetail somehow?

Much appreciated...

J'bm

[beq]

I would think you can just have Runbox forward everything to the hosted Exchange account (which usually can be configured to provide you with an address on their own domain, instead of directly using an address on your own domain -- especially as in this case you're not using your own domain anyway, as Runbox has yet to support virtual domains until next year supposedly?).

My family also has Exchange hosting accounts, but I end up using mine only for the non-email PIM (Calendar, Contacts, etc), whereas my IMAP email is still handled primarily by Tuffmail -> FastMail (all set up in Outlook). With my family the mail is then further routed to Exchange (everything is passed through at least 4 server antiviruses before reaching their main Inbox) :) We also use secondary group accounts with FuseMail, MailSnare, etc, all on our own domains.

Just curious which Exchange hosting provider are you using? I've had subscriptions to 1&amp;1, eOutlook, and MailStreet (we're planning to test Intermedia, ASP-One and some others soon).

[Jereboam]

I haven't chosen a provider yet, so far not impressed with Mailstreet as I can't even get their page up!

I am still looking and will let you know what I find...I would also mainly use it for PIM syncing, as I am fed up with locally syncing all my info, especially as Entourage on the Mac doesn't support PIM containers a la .pst.

J'bm

[SamanthaBlaine]

moving to a hosted exchange server was a great call for us. we had our own exchange server for a few years but eventually it became to much to deal with. we moved to Intermedia (http://www.intermedia.net) and haven't looked back.