Exchange 2003 calendar only?

[bluegreenturtle]

I know this will seem strange -

A company I work for has asked me to look into installing exchange 2003 on a server for using it's calendaring and contact sharing functions ONLY. They don't want or need the email.

Is this possible? I have to convert them to a domain first...(they're on a workgroup right now - 12 clients). Can I just install exchange and not set up mailboxes or something?

 

[MysticLlama]

How would they make use of the calendar? Do they want to intregrate it with Outlook but use a different mail server or something? Seems like an expensive way to go about it.

What's the reasoning behind not wanting to use it for mail?

A different way to go about using a calendar would be to use Sharepoint. It is a free download for Windows 2003 Server, and I think it also comes with Office 2003 Pro. Even buying Win2k3 Server if you don't have it would be cheaper than buying Exchange just for calendar functions.

We implemented Sharepoint Team Services (it's different than Sharepoint portal, that's $$$), about 2-3 weeks ago and we're already getting massive use out of it for shared calendars, document sharing, and tasks. It's got a few little setup quirks security wise with IIS, but it's not too bad once you do it a few times and get it figured out.

 

[bigshooter]

You will still have to create mailboxes for each person. Also, email is a large part of exchange. If you want to invite people to a meeting (scheduling) you invite everyone and then they receive a mail with it on there. The are lots of MUCH cheaper alternatives if they just want each person to have a calendar with no contact with each other. WHy don't they want to use email?

 

[bigshooter]

Hey, I'm a platinum member now... woot!

 

[bluegreenturtle]

We just don't really need email as sophisticated as exchange. They are a consultancy and ordered ms actionpack and so have exchange 2003 included. (Do they really qualify? I dunno. They did develop a software that makes use of access or something I think.) Anyway, I am experimenting with workgroupshare which contrary to negative reviews seems to work quite well. I am also going to look in to sharepoint. Is that easy enough to use?

 

[MysticLlama]

Yeah, Sharepoint is really pretty easy once you get the initial install to take how you want it.

Really, even if it goes bad, it shouldn't take more than a few attempts with messing with it to get it all set up, a few hours at most.

Once it's created it's a breeze to add sites, lists of tasks, calendars, shared docs, etc. It's a great app, especially for the price.

 

[bluegreenturtle]

Does sharepoint only integrate with Outlook 2003 or will it work with all outlook versions? I ask because I was reading this article and throughout it only mentions 2003. Here is the first paragraph.

Contacts and calendar sharing with SharePoint
The contacts and calendar sharing between Windows SharePoint Services 2.0 and Outlook 2003 is one-way: When you click the Link to Outlook button on a SharePoint contacts or events list, Outlook 2003 adds a Personal Folders .pst file named SharePoint Folders to your profile and creates a folder that links to the data on the SharePoint site. A note in the status bar tells you when the data was last updated and when the next update will take place. You can also right-click the folder and choose Refresh to update the folder on demand.

 

[MysticLlama]

It only integrates with Outlook 2003, but I don't use it that way anyway.

Most of the funtionality in Sharepoint is via the web interface. The Office 2k3 apps interface with it, but that's just another way to interact with it.

I've screwed with using it with shared docs in Excel and stuff, and I prefer using the web interface a lot of the time anyway.

So you could have your shared calendar and stuff, it'd just be a web app basically.

 

[Sideswipe001]

I don't understand why you wouldn't use Exchange if you had it.

I mean, even if they don't "need" it, they have it. Why not put it to use rather than buying a new product?

 

[bluegreenturtle]

Because first I have to take down one of their file servers, take NT 4 Server off of it, put Server 2003 on, then convert them to a domain (they're a workgroup now) then struggle with all the active directory stuff, then install exchange 2003, then set that all up, then migrate their existing pop email to the exchange server. Also I have to address 3 machines on the network that I believe have XP home on them so they can connect to the domain. THat might not be that hard if I just upgrade them (something I never do - usually just start over). Anyway it seems like a lot of work...especially if the exchange server goes down I have to fix it, not somebody else.

 

[WindWalker]

might want to look at share360

 

[Garion]

With XP home, you can still run Exchange client. It will just prompt for your username/password each time you connect to the mail server - No need to be joined to the domain.

- G

 

[zodder]

FYI - Some good news. If you do end up using Exchange 2003, you are allowed to legally use a copy of Outlook 2003 for each CAL you have for Exchange. It's in the Exchange 2003 EULA.