[ngw] next release of GW

Wed Apr 14 15:44:45 UTC 2010

Seems to me they are doing their best to maintain their product with diminishing resources.  Cut the 32-bit by reducing the programming/testing/support burden to 64-bit.  Cut the Linux and Mac client to focus on the core (ever shrinking) Windows customers while trying to keep the others around with the Web client as alternative.  Seems reasonable, except it shows no vision to expand the client base.  Playing catch-up to Outlook/Exchange is flawed strategy because the end users are using Mail systems/client with so many other features even Outlook doesn't provide.  So you're catching up to the product in second to last place (not really true, but my point is stronger when worded this way).

I would think adding a few Mac/Linux programmers to get that client up to par with the GW Windows client would pay off in short order with happier Mac/Linux users.  They would certainly stop arguing to switch to something "better", and might even start evangelizing about how nicely it works (we Mac users LOVE to do that sort of thing--we do it without even thinking about it).

Invest in your product, sell it, grow your base, get the return on your investment.  Alternatively, tighten your belt, reduce the product burden, shrink your customer base as a result, repeat until the customer base is gone.  Two choices, unless you don't believe in your product.

EZ

On Apr 14, 2010, at 10:30 AM, Joseph Marton wrote:

> Personally I'm not thrilled with the 64-bit requirement in Ascot, I feel it should be left in Windermere so that customers have more time to get 64-bit-ready.  But I don't make the decisions. :-)
> 
> I guess the alternative that always crops up... Exchange... already requires 64-bit, and so far with each new version M$ doesn't support in-place upgrades.  Ever.  They always require migrating to new hardware.  So if Novell just has this 32- to 64-bit switch one time that's still better than the alternative.  Plus now with virtualization it's often a simple matter of just building a new VM that's 64-bit instead of 32-bit.  So purchasing new hardware is hopefully slowly becoming a think of the past.
> 
> Joe
> 
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Simon Shilton <Simon.Shilton at acustica.co.uk> wrote:
> Matt, Joe
>  
> indeed, I have also done it with general Linux boxes, but not with OES services on top, and not with NSS volumes to be re-mounted
>  
> I think it will need a solution if the GW admins (or more importantly there bosses) are to be kept onside, otherwise it becomes something of a "you need new hardware for the upgrade" approach, which sounds more akin to another email suite whose name keeps cropping up around here :-)
>  
> Simon
> 
> 
> >>> On 14 April 2010 at 15:58, in message <s2q859ece291004140758xa563d28am5b58a2306b12c71c at mail.gmail.com>, Joseph Marton <jmmarton at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, but rebuilding plain SLES is different from rebuilding OES2...
> you wouldn't just wipe out a NetWare server and rebuild, would you,
> even though the data volumes were untouched?  Of course not.
> 
> Joe
> 
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Matt Weisberg <matt at weisberg.net> wrote:
> >
> > This is actually a common practice in the Linux world.  Put all the data on a separate volume so you can scratch the OS and rebuild it.  I've always build my Linux hosts this way. I actually just did this on one of my boxes where the OS got screwed up beyond repair.  I just wiped it, reloaded SLES, and mounted my data volumes, not a thing lost.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >
> > On Apr 14, 2010, at 10:31 AM, Simon Shilton wrote:
> >
> >> I am no expert on NSS on OES2, but my understanding is that NSS partitions/volumes are to be on separate partitions/LUNS/disks from the Linux system, and that it is possible to mount NW NSS volumes on a Linux server.....
> >>
> >> so, would it be possible to hose the 32bit OES2 Linux system, install the 64bit OES in the same space, and mount the NSS volumes?
> >> or is this just a disaster waiting to happen?
> >>
> >> Simon
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >>> On 14 April 2010 at 15:26, in message <j2x859ece291004140726t4126ac6ap6a07b13119f34560 at mail.gmail.com>, Joseph Marton <jmmarton at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> In-place from 32- to 64-bit?  Probably not going to happen.
> >>
> >> Joe
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Mary Matthews <mlm23 at calvin.edu> wrote:
> >> > I need an in-place upgrade method for going from 32-bit to 64-bit SLES and OES2
> >> > using NSS.  We won't be buying new hardware and my downtime window for GW is
> >> > limited to the day after Christmas.  Not enough time for a wipe, reinstall, and
> >> > restore process for 5 servers.
> >> >
> >> >>>> Danita Zanre <dzanre.ngwlist at gmail.com> 4/13/2010 8:39 AM >>>
> >> > Personally my only annoyance in this is that I rebuilt my own GW system VM
> >> > in January and left it at 32 bit SLES 11.  So now I'll have to redo it again
> >> > <g>.
> >> >
> >> > Danita
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 4:25 AM, Neil Stansbury <
> >> > neil.stansbury at redbacksystems.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> > Ascot will be 64-bit ONLY. We are talking about servers/agents.
> >> >> This is also great and IMO shows Novell's long term commitment to GW.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> > Danita Zanrè
> >> > Keep in touch!
> >> > http://www.twitter.com/GWGoddess
> >> > http://www.facebook.com/Caledonia.net
> >> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/danitazanre
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > ngw mailing list
> >> > ngw at ngwlist.com
> >> > http://ngwlist.com/mailman/listinfo/ngw
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ngw mailing list
> >> ngw at ngwlist.com
> >> http://ngwlist.com/mailman/listinfo/ngw
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ngw mailing list
> >> ngw at ngwlist.com
> >> http://ngwlist.com/mailman/listinfo/ngw
> >
> > --------
> > Matt Weisberg
> > Weisberg Consulting, Inc.
> > matt at weisberg.net
> > www.weisberg.net
> > ofc. 248.685.1970
> > cell 248.705.1950
> > fax 248.769.5963
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ngw mailing list
> > ngw at ngwlist.com
> > http://ngwlist.com/mailman/listinfo/ngw
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ngw mailing list
> ngw at ngwlist.com
> http://ngwlist.com/mailman/listinfo/ngw
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ngw mailing list
> ngw at ngwlist.com
> http://ngwlist.com/mailman/listinfo/ngw
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ngw mailing list
> ngw at ngwlist.com
> http://ngwlist.com/mailman/listinfo/ngw

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ngwlist.com/pipermail/ngw/attachments/20100414/5d32d6f9/attachment.html 