Solution2
asked on
GroupWise Archive Conversion
I work for a government agency and have an end user who wants to burn approximately five years worth of e-mail to a CD and make it readable to a team member who is also using GroupWise. There are some of the messages that have attachments that she would like to have read as well. Examples of the attachments are varied in format (i.e., MS Word, WordPerfect, shape files with ArcGIS).
My experience with Roxio (standard at the agency) has been that the data can be copied to CD but then is "read only" when opening it afterwards.
Questions:
1) What is the best method when burning to CD?
2) Do the archived files need to be converting before burning? If so, would ASCI II be sufficient?
3) Should I have the end user strip the attachments from the archived data?
The platform is W2K on the desktops with Novell Netware as the server OS. The standard e-mail client is GroupWise.
Best regards,
Solution2
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
There were two major flavors of v5.5 - with and without the Enhancement Pack. There are some variations in functionality, but none which affect your Question.
From my personal experience working with Grouwpise ...
===== 1) What is the best method when burning to CD? ======
There isn't any, the reason it's read only is because the CD is read only. You can't write on the CD itself. for users with more than 1200 megs of archives, we created 2-3 archives and made them fit on a 640-700 meg CD. they'll hav to pop in the proper cd to access a specific archive.
===== 2) Do the archived files need to be converting before burning? If so, would ASCI II be sufficient? =====
we didn't have to, we archive it as is ...
===== 3) Should I have the end user strip the attachments from the archived data? =====
Not needed ...
Here's my solution assuming that the original e-mail owner still needs their e-mails? the FID solution also would work perfectly for this, I think you want to do it prior to the following. no need to toggle in and out of outlook.
- Grab a machine, install Groupwise and do Hit The Road for remote
- Download (hit the road) all 5 years worth of E-mails to that machine
- important! disable any file size limitations for attachments, it might only download, you can either download only the subject, 30kbytes or less, or all attachment
- once you have all 5 years, back it up to CD (just a personal rule!)
- Copy the downloaded E-mails to CD (if it fits?) or dump in the novell network
- From the person's desk who'll need access to it create another shortuct Groupwise Icon with a Groupwise.exe switch ---> Groupwise.exe /?-@ (I think), click icon a window a popup will appear, point the remote mailbox to the path where the downloaded E-mails are located, you'll require the original person's e-mail password and login id
- this person will have to switch in and out of groupwise to access the e-mails
- we both have the same environment, w2k desktop/Novell print/file sharing.
we've migrated to outlookxp 3 months ago.
good luck!
===== 1) What is the best method when burning to CD? ======
There isn't any, the reason it's read only is because the CD is read only. You can't write on the CD itself. for users with more than 1200 megs of archives, we created 2-3 archives and made them fit on a 640-700 meg CD. they'll hav to pop in the proper cd to access a specific archive.
===== 2) Do the archived files need to be converting before burning? If so, would ASCI II be sufficient? =====
we didn't have to, we archive it as is ...
===== 3) Should I have the end user strip the attachments from the archived data? =====
Not needed ...
Here's my solution assuming that the original e-mail owner still needs their e-mails? the FID solution also would work perfectly for this, I think you want to do it prior to the following. no need to toggle in and out of outlook.
- Grab a machine, install Groupwise and do Hit The Road for remote
- Download (hit the road) all 5 years worth of E-mails to that machine
- important! disable any file size limitations for attachments, it might only download, you can either download only the subject, 30kbytes or less, or all attachment
- once you have all 5 years, back it up to CD (just a personal rule!)
- Copy the downloaded E-mails to CD (if it fits?) or dump in the novell network
- From the person's desk who'll need access to it create another shortuct Groupwise Icon with a Groupwise.exe switch ---> Groupwise.exe /?-@ (I think), click icon a window a popup will appear, point the remote mailbox to the path where the downloaded E-mails are located, you'll require the original person's e-mail password and login id
- this person will have to switch in and out of groupwise to access the e-mails
- we both have the same environment, w2k desktop/Novell print/file sharing.
we've migrated to outlookxp 3 months ago.
good luck!
Migrated to Outlook? Nothing like opening your environment to every E-Mail virus that comes down the pipe. I know I'd like to do that.
Maybe they like virii and worms
it's called $$$, we're just a small division, and our parent company has been using Exchange for a long time. Our funding would've been cut if we didn't move along with the parent company.
we're also looking at it in the long run, Novell might not be here after 6 years ...
we're also looking at it in the long run, Novell might not be here after 6 years ...
Yep, you're right, its called $$$$ and you can be sure thaty Exchange is going to cost you and your company a LOT more of them.
And the kids in Redmond have been saying "Novell won't be here in a few more years" for more than 6 years. If you believe them, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.
And the kids in Redmond have been saying "Novell won't be here in a few more years" for more than 6 years. If you believe them, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.
I have an aprtment in Brooklyn. Do you think you could sell that for m, too, without getting my landlord involved?
Sure, all I have to do is find the CTO for chrises company - clearly the guy will buy anything.
Of course, we can argue here all day who's got the best E-mail solution.
We can have somebody like PsiCorp with just 2,000 users in the greater metropolitan of Ohio, or my parent company with 15,000+ users worldwide.
it all comes down to the needs that each company requires, and who can offer the best solution to provide for the number of users.
It's not about money, we can spend all the money we want. In fact we just bought DirecTV for a couple of billion dollars.
You can have all the money you want and the support tha tyou have, but once the company that supported thousands of your websites just suddenly goes bankrupt then it doesn't do you any good.
In this stagnant field that we have, it's good to know both E-mail applications and be marketable. 3 out of 10 jobs out there in our field requires Exchange/Outlook.
We can have somebody like PsiCorp with just 2,000 users in the greater metropolitan of Ohio, or my parent company with 15,000+ users worldwide.
it all comes down to the needs that each company requires, and who can offer the best solution to provide for the number of users.
It's not about money, we can spend all the money we want. In fact we just bought DirecTV for a couple of billion dollars.
You can have all the money you want and the support tha tyou have, but once the company that supported thousands of your websites just suddenly goes bankrupt then it doesn't do you any good.
In this stagnant field that we have, it's good to know both E-mail applications and be marketable. 3 out of 10 jobs out there in our field requires Exchange/Outlook.
And the other 7 out of 10 require skills in cleaning up after Exchange/Outlook. :-)
chrises,
I have worked on installations of as few as 6 mail users and as many as 75,000. I don't see what that has to do with ANYTHING. In fact, the argument FOR Exchaneg is better at the lower end of the market than in larger enterprises. I don't know where GropWise starts showing its architectural underwear, but Exchange installations of more than 5,000 users tend to be impossibly hard to maintain. Standards-based mail tends to scale as far out as you wish. Domino will scale out to the hundreds of thousands without much of a sweat.
The core problem of Exchange is that it is no only tied to Windows, it is very closely tied to specific versions of Windows. So problems in the OS are magnified in Exchange. And the base limitations of the WIndows platform will always show through.
That's not to say I would never impleent an e-Mail system on top of WIndows. I have even worked in very large installations that uses Windows exclusively, both with Exchange and with other mail systems. It requires less expertise from administrators, but it also tends to have performance problems, and require more boxes for the same number of users (which means you end up supporting a more complex e-Mail network).
- qwaletee
I have worked on installations of as few as 6 mail users and as many as 75,000. I don't see what that has to do with ANYTHING. In fact, the argument FOR Exchaneg is better at the lower end of the market than in larger enterprises. I don't know where GropWise starts showing its architectural underwear, but Exchange installations of more than 5,000 users tend to be impossibly hard to maintain. Standards-based mail tends to scale as far out as you wish. Domino will scale out to the hundreds of thousands without much of a sweat.
The core problem of Exchange is that it is no only tied to Windows, it is very closely tied to specific versions of Windows. So problems in the OS are magnified in Exchange. And the base limitations of the WIndows platform will always show through.
That's not to say I would never impleent an e-Mail system on top of WIndows. I have even worked in very large installations that uses Windows exclusively, both with Exchange and with other mail systems. It requires less expertise from administrators, but it also tends to have performance problems, and require more boxes for the same number of users (which means you end up supporting a more complex e-Mail network).
- qwaletee
Well spoken from the days you've spent on the field and trenches of support/maintenance. But really, all your wailings falls on deaf ears when it comes to corporate decisions. My arguments are about corporate decisions moving to Exchange, and not a pissing "who's got the better E-mail system" contest.
Corporate management listens to Gartner research, rather than your day to day maintenance performance issues, 2,000 limit per box, e-mail integration, backup, restoration, spam, virus etc.
That company you have 75,000 users on Exchange, shows the fact that the company have done their research. From the dot com fiasco, corporations are looking into market share, ROI etc. that's something you want to consider when you invest on an E-mail system for 75,000 of your users.
You complain about performance problems, limitations etc. they can replace you easily with another grunt who's looking for another job, can be easily paid less than average market. They can even go to India and outsource support for half the pay and twice their headache. The corporate decision to move to Exchange will still happen, for a $20 million migration project you know better that there will be new faces, with better experience on board to make everything run smoothly. The door is wide open for you to leave.
You have your day to day issues, but somebody up there needs to make a decision for your 15,000 users on a Groupwise environment where the market share is dwindling and support for Novell is flailing. With your parent company on Exchange, your ($5 million) desktop Win2k migration is on the way, and you don't get any funding for an upgrade to Groupwise 6? add to that Server/Client Licensing for Groupwise 6? annual support from Novell for Groupwise?
With your parent company on a solid Exchange infrastructure/licensing/m
Corporate management listens to Gartner research, rather than your day to day maintenance performance issues, 2,000 limit per box, e-mail integration, backup, restoration, spam, virus etc.
That company you have 75,000 users on Exchange, shows the fact that the company have done their research. From the dot com fiasco, corporations are looking into market share, ROI etc. that's something you want to consider when you invest on an E-mail system for 75,000 of your users.
You complain about performance problems, limitations etc. they can replace you easily with another grunt who's looking for another job, can be easily paid less than average market. They can even go to India and outsource support for half the pay and twice their headache. The corporate decision to move to Exchange will still happen, for a $20 million migration project you know better that there will be new faces, with better experience on board to make everything run smoothly. The door is wide open for you to leave.
You have your day to day issues, but somebody up there needs to make a decision for your 15,000 users on a Groupwise environment where the market share is dwindling and support for Novell is flailing. With your parent company on Exchange, your ($5 million) desktop Win2k migration is on the way, and you don't get any funding for an upgrade to Groupwise 6? add to that Server/Client Licensing for Groupwise 6? annual support from Novell for Groupwise?
With your parent company on a solid Exchange infrastructure/licensing/m
Chrises, you are an idiot. Sorry, had to say that. Al you can say is "Exchange, Exchange, Exchange" ... "everyone in the world: the decision has been made for you to go Exchange" ... "every vendor is a rsik except Microsoft."
Wait, wait, sorry. I understand. You're a kid who grew up in Michigan, moved to Washington, and now get to rant and rave in front of thousands. Of course, you've made billions doing it, so I shoudln't argue with yuo if I know what's good for me.
Reality:
Yes, there are a lot of organizations that have gone Exchange, some for good reasons, some not. Novell is not in iminent danger of going under. IBM certainly is not in any danger of going under. Some corporate executives actually listen to their IT executives, and some IT executives actually listen to their technical architects, engineers, and administrators. Gartner does NOT, I repeat, does NOT push Exchange, nor does Forrester/Giga, nor does META. Anderson (whatever they are calling themselves these days) does push Exchange, but I suppose it helps that they have a contractual agreement with Microsoft, no?
I'm not saying "bad Exchange, bad Exchange." I do think it has its share of problems, the bisstes one being security, but it also has its share of good points, e.g., easiest basic administration and setup of all major platforms, no brainer integration with a wider Windows infrastructure. Yuo, on the other hand, drink from the Puget Kool-Aid.
Wait, wait, sorry. I understand. You're a kid who grew up in Michigan, moved to Washington, and now get to rant and rave in front of thousands. Of course, you've made billions doing it, so I shoudln't argue with yuo if I know what's good for me.
Reality:
Yes, there are a lot of organizations that have gone Exchange, some for good reasons, some not. Novell is not in iminent danger of going under. IBM certainly is not in any danger of going under. Some corporate executives actually listen to their IT executives, and some IT executives actually listen to their technical architects, engineers, and administrators. Gartner does NOT, I repeat, does NOT push Exchange, nor does Forrester/Giga, nor does META. Anderson (whatever they are calling themselves these days) does push Exchange, but I suppose it helps that they have a contractual agreement with Microsoft, no?
I'm not saying "bad Exchange, bad Exchange." I do think it has its share of problems, the bisstes one being security, but it also has its share of good points, e.g., easiest basic administration and setup of all major platforms, no brainer integration with a wider Windows infrastructure. Yuo, on the other hand, drink from the Puget Kool-Aid.
BTW, chrises, I think you have me mixed up with Solution2, who asked the question.
I have to echo qwalatee here. You don't think there's risks going all-Micro$oft? How about security holes out the ying-yang, rapacious licensing costs and draconian licensing terms, not to mention the odd chance they'll yank or abruptly EOL some product because it contains code they stole from someone else or used in violation of the terms under which Bill licensed it?
Or how about the risk of trusting your critical business infrastructure to a company that is a proven abusive monopoly, has consistently shown it has no regard for even the most basic of security practices in its software, and clearly has no concern for the needs of its customers once they're hooked into an all-Micro$oft environment. Redmond is a drug-pusher, sweet-talking you until you're hooked and then emptying your wallet.
But hey, I don't have stock in your company, and I'm not stuck implementing boneheaded decisions like putting in Exchange for 15k mailboxes, so its not me worrying about a forthcoming year of sleepless nights and being chained to a pager. Have fun.
Or how about the risk of trusting your critical business infrastructure to a company that is a proven abusive monopoly, has consistently shown it has no regard for even the most basic of security practices in its software, and clearly has no concern for the needs of its customers once they're hooked into an all-Micro$oft environment. Redmond is a drug-pusher, sweet-talking you until you're hooked and then emptying your wallet.
But hey, I don't have stock in your company, and I'm not stuck implementing boneheaded decisions like putting in Exchange for 15k mailboxes, so its not me worrying about a forthcoming year of sleepless nights and being chained to a pager. Have fun.
ASKER
Thanks for the prompt reply.
The GroupWise version is 5.5. I will act on the items you mentioned and let you know the results.
Have a good one.
Solution2