What is the proper way to Uninstall Exchange 2007 from Server 2008 SBS?

I think it is fine to leave on C:\  How big is the partition though?

Leave the Exchange binaries on C:, but move the DATA off of C:.  This can be done using powershell and doesn't require and drastic steps such as uninstalling and reinstalling.  Almost all data can be moved in such a manner.

See:
http://www.exchangeninjas.com/MoveLogs

I'm going to assume i dont need to follow steps 1 + 2 since i will be re-installing, correct? Just want to make sure signing up isn't required prior to un-installation.
                 
1-Sign up for an account on Microsoft Online Services.
2-Add the domain for your organization to Microsoft Online Services.

I have a 1TB logical drive. I was going to partition it as C:-60GB, Exchange- 250GB, Data - remainder. I'm aware i can move the IS's to another partition, but i dont like having Exchange installed on C:. I wont be back on this server until Monday (8/3/09) so i'll respond then.
Thanks for the help.

Why?  What's wrong with BINARIES being on C:  This doesn't make sense to me.

Same for me. I don't understand why you want to move the Exchange and SQL binaries from the C partition/drive. As long as the data is hosted on a different drive, that's fine.
This was an MS recommendation for SBS 2003 at least.

afoot is taking you completely down the wrong path in my opinion.  You paid for Exchange Server with SBS, why would you want to move it to the clouds
Leaving all the binaries on the C drive is just fine...its the way it was intended
On the SBS console are wizards for moving all your DATA to other locations on the Server...you DO want to do that.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc527609(WS.10).aspx is the link you want for moving all your SBS data.
 

Cris,

I wasn't suggesting that the author signs up for Microsoft's hosted solution.  I was giving him a solution to assist with properly uninstalling Exchange 2007.  As he has already worked out, he doesn't need to follow steps 1 and 2.  I didn't mention this explicitly because I thought it was pretty obvious.

MHD - if you follow the steps given in the link I gave you (except obviously to register for a new service) you will successfully remove Exchange 2007 from the system.  You can then re-install it on the new drive as you wish.

I look forward to hearing how you get on!

Regards,

Ady

Thank nyou for answering my question. The procedures on the link (minus 1+2) worked flawlessly.

To everyone stating there is no problem leaving the 'binaries' on the C:
Everyone has their own opinion. I work for an outsourced IT company, and have worked on hundreds of different servers, in dozens of different configurations/environments over the last couple years. One thing that has stayed consistent is server performance with servers that have Exchange installed on the C:. The Exchange services are running off whichever drive Exchange is installed on, therefor degrading performance for system functions (assuming its installed on the system drive). Since i mainly deal with small businesses, they do not have higher end servers, making it noticeable when anything is killing performance. I have noticed after moving Exchange off the system drive to another partition, system startup and shutdown speeds increased. Could this be coincidence? Yes. But i will stick with statistics, and mine tell me to take it off the C:.
Thank you to everyone that helped.

To the author:
For the standard versions of the server products, I would likely agree with you.  But it strikes me that this may be your first, or you have limited experience with SBS and especially SBS 2008.   While SBS uses essentially the standard versions of the products, they are wrapped together in a suite in a very unique way.   The number one reason why people wind up coming to public forums for assistance is because they try to apply the practices that they have used with standard versions to SBS and frequently ends up breaking things.    In SBS 2003 we were given the option during the install process to select where we wanted to install Exchange and other components.   The Microsoft SBS Product team opted to remove that ability with SBS 2008 for what I'm sure are good reasons.   They gave us excellent wizards for moving exchange and all other data files.  I'm one of the original SBS MVPs and if you continue going down the path of doing things the way you did them with standard products, you'll have more issues.   While possible, removing and reinstalling core SBS components frequently results in other issues.
Cris Hanna, Microsoft Small Business Server MVP since 1997
 

Thank you for your comment ChrisHanna.
You are correct, i have limited experience with SBS, especially SBS 2008 (first one). I understand your point of view, but find it difficult to believe Microsoft designed SBS 2008 to function with Exchange on the contrary to all previous versions (NT, 2000, 2003). While that is still a possibility, i have a feeling they will soon realize a potential problem with the way SBS 2008 is implemented, and future releases will give the option to install SBS components on separate partitions. Looking at Microsoft's history of releasing OS's + Software prior to fully testing them ( 98, ME, XP, 2003, Vista, Office 2007) raises much concern since the server(s) i am deploying are for a new environment, and will be 100% production servers. If they (Microsoft) finally realize, if ever, there is a problem, i would prefer to have taken action prior to deployment instead of 'trustin'g Microsoft's build, and just 'going with it'.
As we can all see with Vista, they jumped the gun on releasing an unstable product (This is, of course, based on opinion) and as the result have spent a few years to perfect it, thus resulting in Windows 7 (which i enjoy more than XP).
I ran the SBS 2008 diagnostic wizard on the server prior to uninstalling/reinstalling Exchange 2007, and there are no errors. Exchange is fully functioning, with no issues at the moment.I will be deploying these servers this week, and hope to have minimal issues, if any.
If i am wrong for moving Exchange, i will take it as a lesson learned, but feel i made the right decision in the long run.

I can tell you with almost guaranteed certainty that if this changes it will not happen for at least 5 years, and perhaps on site servers will be a thing of the past by then.  Microsoft certainly seems to be wanting to move things "to the cloud" at which point you and I will have very little options when it comes to configuration.
If you are going to be working with SBS on a regular basis, I can't encourage you to pickup either SBS 2008 Unleashed or the SBS 2008 Administrator's companion (or both).  They are available through Amazon.   SBS does behave in very different ways than the regular products

Let us hope it does not come to that, ChrisHanna. But then again, it would give me plenty of time to persue my dream of motorcycle circuit racing.
I will pick those books up, thanks for the advice. Working with Std + Ent. edition of Windows Server for the last several years has made me 'narrow minded' if you will.

Today, I work almost exclusively with small businesses - well under the 75 user limit of SBS.  In the past (not with Exchange 2007), I've worked in a much larger environment with hundreds of users.  The servers we had in the larger environment are essentially the same that the small businesses get in terms of performance.  the difference was in expandability - the larger company purchased servers capable of having more RAM or More CPU - CAPABLE - NOT WITH AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE.  And we RARELY upgraded them.  I cannot imagine any significant (noticeable) increase in performance with exchange off the C: drive.  Further, it goes against logic that moving the binaries to a separate PARTITION makes any difference at all - they still live on the SAME SPINDLES.  Moving them to a separate disk CAN make a difference, but again, I would be surprised if that difference was noticeable.

Consider the other major mistake you're making - you're going against best practices here.  You're setting up a configuration that is non-standard.  I know the tricks of the consulting world - frankly, they disgust me.  Consultants should never make significant changes to best practices for MINOR (at best improvements) as that does nothing but complicate systems in the event you/your company is replaced.  The new consultant looks things over and the more complicated nature of your install creates concerns and complications for him, which in turn increases costs of your client.  

I would be interested in seeing your statistics and the manner in which you compiled them.

Attacking me because i do not agree with you, leew, is very unprofessional. I have made no 'significant' changes that are not 'supported' by microsoft (if it weren't "supported" they would not have a KB article on how to do it). Had this been SBS 2003, i would have done the same thing, but Microsoft did not give me a choice in SBS 2008.
ALL of my work is well documented in case my customer(s) is unhappy, the next IT company will have NO questions where/why/how something is installed/configured. If the IT company that takes over cannot follow my documentation, then they are in need of some formal training themselves.
Second, i do not work for a consulting company, i work for an IT Support company. We manage entire networks across the US. Do we 'consult', sure. So does everyone else in our field; we make suggestions (consult with the higher-up), and they in-tern make the final decision. How something is configured/installed is of course up to me. We do not keep our clients by 'misleading' them.
I find it offensive that you would be so rude as to call what i do "disgusting" on a public forum, and will ask that your comment, as well as this one, be removed.

I'm sorry you took that as an attack... I never accused you of going with your plan out of malicious intent - indeed, my words were "Consider... the mistake you're making".  I was not intending to attack you, just point out how some people work CONSCIOUSLY.  Years ago, I would have not thought twice about doing things how I wanted to do them because I thought I knew best.  After joining user groups and spending a lot more time here in recent years, I realized that, in some cases, I didn't know best, and in others, things shouldn't be done X way just because you can.  

The simple fact is, what you are doing is NOT STANDARD.  The link posted has NOTHING TO DO with endorsing the moving of Exchange to another partition - it's a document on REMOVING exchange from SBS SPECIFICALLY with the purpose of using hosted exchange.  And just because there isn't a KB article on it does NOT mean that it's supported and accepted.  And just because there's a KB article on it doesn't mean it's a good idea.  It's not a good idea to run Exchange on a DC (outside of SBS) and it's not a good idea install Exchange into an existing domain (you can have issues getting all the functionality working) but there ARE KBs on both.  On my first SBS install (2003, YEARS ago), I setup the system the way you would a server in a large network.  I renamed the default OUs and did various other things because I preferred to manage a server the way I managed it in a large enterprise.  But in so doing, I BROKE SBS, and I caused logon delays for the clients.  On a call to Microsoft, it was determined that the reason for the logon delays was that the default OUs were missing.  I have a personal policy with Microsoft that they don't seem to mind following - it states: "If Microsoft cannot show me publicly available documentation on how to do something/when NOT to do something, then I expect the call to be refunded".  They couldn't - and they refunded my call.  And when I suggested they create a KB article on this to warn people, the response I got was something to the effect of "Few people do that so we're not going to bother".  

I am curious - you said: "If more than 2 people say it's ok to leave it on the C:\, ill do it." - well, no one here recommended it and 3 people said leave it.  Yes, one provided instructions, but is that really an endorsement, or someone just trying to provide an answer to the technical side of the question?