RE: A fun question for a change

  • From: "Mulnick, Al" <Al.Mulnick@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "'[ExchangeList]'" <exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:44:04 -0500

So many questions, so little time... :)

Exchange 2003 would be the better choice as it has a lot of improvements and
is the more current of the two: you would not have to reengineer so soon
with 2003 in the mix.  Yes it will function in a 2000 AD.

Good luck!


-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Hermida [mailto:ghermida@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 11:22 AM
To: [ExchangeList]
Subject: [exchangelist] A fun question for a change

Ok Gurus-
We run a NT 4 single domain with a mix of win2k servers.  We have a single
Exchange 5.5 (enterprise) site running on a win2k server.  We would like to
upgrade all servers and migrate to AD.  In your opinion, should we migrate
to 2000 or 2003?  Which is a better version of Exchange, 2000 or 2003?  If
Exchange 2003 is better, will it function fully in a 2000 AD?

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This E-mail message, including any attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and privileged information.  Any unauthorized retention, review, printing,
copying, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
If you are not one of the intended recipients, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail or phone, destroy all copies of the original message and keep
the information contained here confidential.

List Archives:
Exchange Newsletters:
Exchange FAQ:
Other Internet Software Marketing Sites:
Leading Network Software Directory:
No.1 ISA Server Resource Site: Windows Security
Resource Site: Network Security Library: Windows 2000/NT Fax Solutions:

Other related posts: