Exchange Server Forums
Forums |
Register |
Login |
My Profile |
Inbox |
RSS 
|
My Subscription |
My Forums |
Address Book |
Member List |
Search |
FAQ |
Ticket List |
Log Out
MS Exchange without citrix
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
Login  | |
|
 Limited time MSExchange.org offer! -- 1.Sep.2008 1:00:00 PM
|
|
TechGenix and SolarWinds have partnered to provide free copies of SolarWinds Exchange Monitor to all visitors who join the MSExchange.org Forums. SolarWinds Exchange Monitor is a handy desktop dashboard that continuously monitors Microsoft Exchange to deliver real-time insight into Exchange services, mail queue sizes, and host server health. Learn more about Exchange Monitor and the free offer!
|
MS Exchange without citrix - 23.Sep.2008 5:52:09 PM
|
|
|
koticphreak
Posts: 4
Joined: 23.Sep.2008
Status: offline
|
I just started working at a new company and they have a few offices, no one in any of the offices really has any idea about IT so they do whatever the IT company tells them to. Anyone not in the office running the exchange server has to run outlook through citrix (which is a real pain because we don't have our e-mails on our computer and no access to them without internet). So what I'm wondering is, what is needed in our office in order to run outlook on our computer and not through citrix? Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: MS Exchange without citrix - 23.Sep.2008 6:03:09 PM
|
|
|
mark@mvps.org
Posts: 3793
Joined: 9.Jun.2004
From: Philadelphia PA
Status: online
|
Outlook using RPC over HTTPS is the obvious choice here. Google for that phrase and you'll be able to implement it without too much bother at all.
_____________________________
Mark Arnold (Exchange MVP)
List Moderator
|
|
|
|
|
RE: MS Exchange without citrix - 23.Sep.2008 6:17:07 PM
|
|
|
koticphreak
Posts: 4
Joined: 23.Sep.2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mark@mvps.org
Outlook using RPC over HTTPS is the obvious choice here. Google for that phrase and you'll be able to implement it without too much bother at all.
I quickled skimmed through an article on how to do it and my understanding is that things need to be done on the server side as well as the client side for RPC over HTTPS, is that correct?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: MS Exchange without citrix - 23.Sep.2008 6:47:45 PM
|
|
|
mark@mvps.org
Posts: 3793
Joined: 9.Jun.2004
From: Philadelphia PA
Status: online
|
Yeah.
Couple of tick boxes and a certificate on the client side.
Couple of configurations on the client.
What's the challenge that you are presented with? Your question sounded like a leading one.....
_____________________________
Mark Arnold (Exchange MVP)
List Moderator
|
|
|
|
|
RE: MS Exchange without citrix - 23.Sep.2008 7:02:51 PM
|
|
|
koticphreak
Posts: 4
Joined: 23.Sep.2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mark@mvps.org
Yeah.
Couple of tick boxes and a certificate on the client side.
Couple of configurations on the client.
What's the challenge that you are presented with? Your question sounded like a leading one.....
Well, the partners of the firm (old fashioned of course) will believe whatever the IT firm tells them. And for whatever reason, they believe the way we do it is the most secure/safe method.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: MS Exchange without citrix - 25.Sep.2008 6:38:08 PM
|
|
|
Sembee
Posts: 3628
Joined: 17.Jan.2008
From: Somewhere near London, UK
Status: offline
|
Depends what they mean by secure/safe.
Certainly having everything stored on the server in a Citrix session means that the data is not at risk from users trying to take it away, export it, mis-configure their client etc. If Citrix is done correctly then it cane also make DR very simple. I have two or three jobs where the servers were in a data centre, the only thing in the office was thin clients and printers. The DR plan was simply "go home" as all staff had been equipped with a broadband connection and the client software.
If everything is in Citrix then it will be a major change to switch to a full client configuration, and if you are spread out over offices it may not be the best choice. Citrix isn't a cheap implementation, therefore I would spend some time looking at why it was implemented and how it benefits the company before you look at changing things.
Simon.
_____________________________
Simon Butler,
Exchange MVP
Blog: http://www.sembee.co.uk/
Web: http://www.amset.info/
In the UK? Hire me: http://www.amset.co.uk/
|
|
|
|
|
RE: MS Exchange without citrix - 27.Sep.2008 1:42:25 PM
|
|
|
koticphreak
Posts: 4
Joined: 23.Sep.2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sembee
Depends what they mean by secure/safe.
Certainly having everything stored on the server in a Citrix session means that the data is not at risk from users trying to take it away, export it, mis-configure their client etc. If Citrix is done correctly then it cane also make DR very simple. I have two or three jobs where the servers were in a data centre, the only thing in the office was thin clients and printers. The DR plan was simply "go home" as all staff had been equipped with a broadband connection and the client software.
If everything is in Citrix then it will be a major change to switch to a full client configuration, and if you are spread out over offices it may not be the best choice. Citrix isn't a cheap implementation, therefore I would spend some time looking at why it was implemented and how it benefits the company before you look at changing things.
Simon.
There's 3 offices and they're all within a 40 mile radius. The ONLY reason they got citrix (which i know is an expensive implementation) is because the IT company literally said "oh, u have 3 offices, u NEED citrix", which im sure they made a pretty penny off of. We do use Citrix for other things, but it just makes no sense to use it for outlook as its sluggish and the server that citrix is on is only a T1, and when 50 people are on, it's extremely slow to just write an email, not to mention it disconnects sometimes and you can't even continue...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: MS Exchange without citrix - 27.Sep.2008 6:33:30 PM
|
|
|
Sembee
Posts: 3628
Joined: 17.Jan.2008
From: Somewhere near London, UK
Status: offline
|
That simply sounds like a poor Citrix deployment. Considering what you have said, I probably would have suggested Citrix as well, particularly if the remote offices do not have enough users to justify it.
If it was me, I would get some Citrix specialists in to look at the setup. It would be silly to write it off. Citrix has a number of key advantages, including the low maintenance. If you have deployed thin clients everywhere then you don't have to worry about the maintenance of those machines. The TCO of the remote offices drops considerably.
Citrix is one of those things that when it is done correctly, it is very good and works wonderfully. When it is done poorly it is a pain and users come to dislike it. Regrettably it sounds like you have the latter and it sounds like someone needs to decide at a business level whether to stick with it or not. Before making that decision I would strongly recommending getting another opinion from someone who knows Citrix.
Simon.
_____________________________
Simon Butler,
Exchange MVP
Blog: http://www.sembee.co.uk/
Web: http://www.amset.info/
In the UK? Hire me: http://www.amset.co.uk/
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
Printable Version
