| Author | Messages | |
tvanderkooi
Posts:21
 | | 10/10/2005 11:59 AM |
| The price tag will definitely drop as soon as Microsoft
releases Exchange 12 with UM built in. But, it's not THAT expensive today, and
there are some great business pluses to it. We had no problems showing ROI
on VOIP or UM.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael B.
SmithSent: Monday, October 10, 2005 6:14 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
It's a feature with lots of "gee whiz!" appeal, but once
people see the price tag, the response is usually "ouch!"
We are still waiting for the "year of UM". I'm betting on
2007. :-)
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ed Crowley
[MVP]Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 6:49 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
I think this is definitely a case where Moore's Law hasn't
been applicable. It's funny how little this story has changed since I saw
the first unified messaging demos (then by Octel) about ten years
ago.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVPFreelance E-Mail
PhilosopherProtecting the world from PSTs and Bricked
Backups!„¢
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
joeSent: Monday, October 10, 2005 1:49 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
Entirely your option. :) Windows 3.11 and Windows NT are
really not the same product.
Note I am not saying I won't use cisco routers because they
sucked 12 years ago. As someone else pointed out, software isn't cisco's ball of
wax. There is obviously a little bit of a scary point there when you consider
though that the IOS is software...
Also as you mentioned, it wasn't created or even
modified much by cisco. So I don't expect it is much different now than what I
saw.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Vander
KooiSent: Monday, October 10, 2005 12:37 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
And I will never run Windows because 3.11 just wasn't that
great at networking. ;-)
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
joeSent: Monday, October 10, 2005 9:42 AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
Being the best available doesn't make something good and
doesn't need a lot of work. :o)
It just means it is better than the other sucky
alternatives.
I haven't seen unity in years but when I last saw it, it
had me swearing about how bad it was. I seem to recall saying something along
the lines of that will never be in any AD I ever manage.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Vander
KooiSent: Monday, October 10, 2005 10:04 AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
Not sure why you don't like Unity, it's the best unified
messaging app there is right now. Actually has been for over 5 years. I believe
that the reason it;s as good as it is, is that it was not created or even
modified much by Cisco, they simply bought a really good product and left it be
for the most part.
As for the schema updates, it didn't work. We made the
registry change and it did work. I don't see how that would be tied to the app
as no changes were made there. But who knows.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Marcus.Oh@xxxxxxxSent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 7:27
PMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir]
Schema Updates
Hmmm. I need to
think about that again. I think I only saw this behavior in the lab where
all the servers were upgraded instead of wipe and replace. In production,
we upgraded initially then did a replacement effort
later.
More to the point, UGH
Cisco Unity¦ I wish to Christ they™d stick to hardware and stop venturing into
software¦
:m:dsm:cci:mvp
marcusoh.blogspot.com
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joeSent: Friday, October 07, 2005 9:03
PMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
Was it maybe the app
itself disallowing the update? Did you try to just modify the schema to see if
it would work? Say change the rangeupper of cn or something like that and then
change it back. Something innocuous.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of
Marcus.Oh@xxxxxxxSent: Friday, October 07, 2005 5:17
PMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
Yep, same here. I
think upgraded scenarios have this.
:m:dsm:cci:mvp
marcusoh.blogspot.com
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Tim Vander
KooiSent: Friday, October 07,
2005 10:57 AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
Upgraded.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of
Marcus.Oh@xxxxxxxSent: Friday, October 07, 2005 9:38
AMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
Upgraded to 2003 or
fresh install?
:m:dsm:cci:mvp
marcusoh.blogspot.com
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Tim Vander
KooiSent: Friday, October 07,
2005 10:12 AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
I just did this last
week to install Cisco Unity and I still had to enable schema updates in Windows
2003 even though the user was in Schema Admins. I was under the same impression
as Travis, but after enabling updating in the registry it worked
fine.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joeSent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 10:03
PMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
Did you work this out
Travis?
If not, I would
recommend pulling up the sysinternal registry and file monitors as well as
tracing the AD calls.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of
travis.abrams@xxxxxxxxxSent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 2:59
PMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: [ActiveDir] Schema
Updates
Hi,
I
am having some problems updating the schema for Avaya Unified Messaging. It is
my thinking that in Windows 2003 the schema is already enabled for updates as
long as you are in the Schema Admins group. In Windows 2000 you had to enable
the Schema to be updated. Am I correct or
misguided?
Thanks!
Travis
Abrams | | | |
|
|