When Microsoft announced that Exchange 2013 CU1 and Exchange 2016 CU12 would implement a “mailbox anchoring”, a new way of connecting Exchange Management Shell (EMS – or PowerShell if you like) sessions to Exchange servers, I weighed in with some thoughts on the topic and basically said that the new approach was a good idea.
In January, I spoke with Javier Soltero, the new General Manager of the Outlook development group, about his plans, hopes, and aspirations for revitalizing the Outlook client family, including Outlook desktop.
A recent Microsoft blog lauded the wonders of online archives, specifically of the type made available in on-premises Exchange and Exchange Online (just in case you thought otherwise). Interestingly, the post says that “studies suggest that three-fourths of an organization’s intellectual property is contained within email and messaging systems.”
Following my post on “The story of Exchange IOPS” outlining the journey of Exchange from being an I/O hog to something far less demanding on storage systems, a recent request from Josh Odgers from Nutanix to consider his post “Peak performance vs Real World – Exchange on Nutanix Acropolis Hypervisor (AHV)” seemed to be opportune.
The history of software is littered with examples of grand strategic changes that never amounted to much when implemented. The crusade to reduce the number of disk I/O operations generated per user per second (IOPS) is an example of how a big bet paid off.