Migrating to a new version of Microsoft Exchange is not to be undertaken lightly. It is a complex, multifaceted operation and any mistakes are likely to be noticed immediately by end users. Proper preparation is essential.
Back in November 2011, Computing featured a hugely popular web seminar covering why a firm may want to upgrade to Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 -high availability, email archiving and improved administrative features, for example. Microsoft's discontinued support for Exchange 2003 became a hot topic for discussion as the upgrade is no simple task especially as it may require a concurrent server upgrade to 64-bit architecture and quite possibly a move to Windows 2008 too.
During this Computing web seminar, which took place on Thursday 15th March, our expert panel covered the entire migration process to Exchange 2010, from creating a migration roadmap and calculating requirements for new hardware all the way through to migrating user mailboxes and setting up OWA.
Covering all the likely pitfalls you may encounter on the way, this web seminar is essential viewing for anyone who is undertaking or planning an Exchange 2010 migration.
Stuart Sumner, Chief Reporter, Computing
Andrew Charlesworth, Consulting Editor, Computing
Dan Bowdrey, EMEA Solutions Architect - Binary Tree
Barry Gill, Enterprise Consultant, Mimecast
Click here to register now and view on demand
What are the pros and cons of using Exchange Database Availability Groups (DAGs)to manage disaster recovery and business continuity rather than Veeam? Is it worth setting up DAGs if I am already using Veeam?
Do you have to upgrade to Active Directory 2008 before you can install Exchange 2010?
E2003 clients are not optimised for E2010. Should I expect problems?
Can earlier versions of Exchange access the E2010 calendar functions?
Have the panel experienced problems interfacing Exchange with third party archives, eg cloud archiving services?
By eliminating high entry costs for big data analysis, you can convert more raw data into valuable business insight.
A discussion of the "risk perception gap", its implications and how it can be closed