Windows Server

Scott · Guest

K, just checking out communicator now that I finally got the non-msdn SP1
version of LCS 2005 working and I find that you cannot import contacts from
a saved file in communicator? So, if you have 150 people in your company the
user is suppose to load them all manually? WTF?

Next, Windows Messenger supports using an MSN account - why doesn't
Communicator? Or does it and I can't find it?

Thanks!

Scott

Will D. Robinson · Guest

There is a tool in LCS resource kit that may work. I'm not sure how EASI
accounts will import into MOC since they are not supported at this time. The
tool is MOCImp and can be found in the resource kit:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=D21C38E5-5D8F-44C7-BA17-2CC4F85D8B51&displaylang=en

Communicator must be run with LCS implementation. You must have Public IM
connectivity licensed and configured for your LCS implementation to add MSN
accounts.
--
Will R
PointBridge Solutions
www.pointbridge.com

"Scott" wrote:

Scott · Guest

the "licensed" part is what I have a problem with...Using MSN messenger is
free and use to be free when using LCS, now if you want the nicer client for
LCS you have to pay to connect to MSN from within it - unbeleivable.

Microsoft is going to license their butts right out of business if they keep
this crap up.

"Will D. Robinson" <WillDRobinson@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:D46C8769-6820-4DD9-994C-04DC0BFF2FC9@microsoft.com...

Scott · Guest

of course it's their perogative to do...like when they pulled messenger from
Exchange from 2000 to 2003 and came out with LCS...It just seems as though
they are heading towards licensing every component of the server platform
rather than the whole package. I expect the next version of exchange will
likely have a license for the email portion, then a license for calendar
sharing then a license for global address lists etc...It just seems to be
getting stupid. When you buy a server touting it's ability to do x, y or z
it should do x, y or z natively without additional licensing cost above and
beyond the purchase of the package itself.

I mean really, whats next? CAL's for IIS?

"Will D. Robinson" <WillDRobinson@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:AA56EEFC-CB3D-40FC-A53A-A20B20A3C2E9@microsoft.com...

Will D. Robinson · Guest

You can still use windows messenger 5.1 with LCS. You will still be able to
take advantage of presence functionality. This is free.

Your perspective is somewhat common and I empathize. PIC is licensed so
that you have to pay for all 3 (AOL, Yahoo, MSN) and some of that cost is
royalties to the other 2 companies. I obviously do not know what percentage
that is.

In my humble opinion, if a company provides a richer feature set through an
alternative tool, they should be able to receive revenue for creating value
and recovering cost. I am digressing from purpose of this newsgroup so I
will stop.

--
Will R
PointBridge Solutions
www.pointbridge.com

"Scott" wrote:

Trevor Miller · Guest

Just so we get all this new functionality under SA...what? We don't?

-trevor

"Scott" <sdgmcdon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eDP760A1FHA.904@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

Scott · Guest

EXACTLY! I guess "richest man on Earth" isn't a significant enough title to
hold.

"Trevor Miller" <tmiller@iqep.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:O4fwuxB1FHA.3780@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

Anonymous · Guest

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:17:10 -0700, "Will D. Robinson"
<WillDRobinson@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

Trevor Miller · Guest

I'm trying to hold back adding into this that many functions of MOC are
really just calls to the "defunct" Netmeeting Client.

-trevor

"Anonymous" <anonymous@post.ing> wrote in message
news:3pdcl11s987l48im2g9t287harj723ig12@4ax.com...

Scott · Guest

Yea, I'm personally getting tired of Microsoft's recent trend to piece-meal
out all of the components of a given product, it's incredibly obvious now
that they are simply trying to milk every penny from every customer they
have for as long as they can; retaining customer loyalty appears to be a
foreign concept to MS these days. I noticed it first when we upgraded from
Exchange 2000 to Exchange 2003 and had to buy LCS in addition to exchange to
retain messenger functionality.

Whats next, a requirement for CAL's to access IIS?

"Trevor Miller" <tmiller@iqep.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:OFUHvwN1FHA.3524@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

Jeremy Buch · Guest

Please let me talk through some of these points. I hope that some of this
information will help provide greater insight.

Concern 1: PIC only lets you talk to some of MSN users, not all of them.
Answer: You can reach EASI passport users as well. If the user's EASI
passport is joe@fast.com, you can reach him via PIC as
joe(fast.com)@msn.com. It has taken MSN a bit of time to make these
available (mostly because the names as they were simply aren't
Internet-valid routable URIs), but this works today (as of the last week or
so).

Concern 2: Office Communicator doesn't let you login with multiple protocol
stacks like Windows Messenger lets you do - why not?
Answer: Business users wanted managed (read as local traffic stays local and
companies that can reach you are limited), authenticated and archivable (in
many cases) IM. For these users we built up a great local IM system in LCS
and built the multi-stack WM client (instead of leveraging the MSN Messenger
client with multiple stacks as we did in the Exchange IM days). Once we had
an ability to access the clouds, user confusion is huge when dealing with a
random sampling of names across MSN and the multi-stack client only lets you
have access to MSN (with all sorts of problems bridging networks as we saw
in 1999-2000 when AOL kept adapting protocols to prevent interop with MSN).
When LCS 2005 SP1 became available and would allow you to reach all public
clouds (with your enterprise name and via authenticated and manageable call
routing), the need to have a multi-stack client didn't exist anymore (in
fact most admins didn't want the multi-stack mucking with their ability to
control usage of the desktop for users). MOC was released and WM5.1 is
still available if a dual-stack option is desired. Keep in mind that no
functionality has been 'taken away' because everything and more is still
available now. The ways in which we do (and are legally able to) reach the
public clouds is limited to what we have provided, so we've offered access
to all clouds via federation and the PIC (a world-class achievement in terms
of interop and business agility - note the cost of this is really just to
give money to the providers, not MS) and WM still allows multi-stack support
for directly logging into MSN and LCS. In fact, you could have the PIC and
still be using WM5.1 to login to MSN directly as a second account (if
desired for whatever reason). The hardest thing to understand here is that
the landscape isn't simple and the technology to provide access has many
technology and business hoops to jump through (that don't really have to do
with LCS as much as they have to do with the providers themselves).

Concern 3: LCS doesn't provide full support for file transfer, audio and
video like MSN does - why not?
Answer: The support for media across arbitrary firewalls is much more
involved when you have a federated system. With MSN, as long as you can
connect to them, they can hand your traffic between you and your buddy -
regardless of traffic type. With LCS, each organization has firewalls and
there isn't a central point to simply hand traffic between buddy
connections. There are third-party solutions that provide SBCs (Session
Border Controllers) that will help you to pass media across corporate
firewalls today, however, and we have already been investigating ways to
make more of this functionality available between MSN and LCS (at least) as
well as between organizations and for outside users. The story will keep
getting better, but there is only so much ground-breaking we can do each
step of the way due to our ability to fully test and build the features.

--
Jeremy Buch (Microsoft)

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Please do not send email to this address, post a reply to this newsgroup.

"Scott" <sdgmcdon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%23QDZL7N1FHA.2132@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

Jeremy Buch · Guest

Exchange IM was a four-man dev team that was basically a purchased academic
product. LCS 2003 was a die-hard enterprise product that had a team of tens
of devs, provided security and encryption and levels of scale and
reliability that Exchange IM could only dream of. ...and the story just got
tremendously better with LCS 2005 SP1 which added federation across the
Internet, outside users and connectivity across all public clouds.

I'm just saying that Exchange IM and LCS 2005 are only as comparable as
win-pop-up/net send was to Exchange IM before it. Sure, both Exchange IM
and LCS 2003 got IM messages from one machine to the other, but the way they
did it and the functionality and robustness behind it were entirely
different things. Hotmail is free, but customers pay for Exchange and
Outlook because they are highly engineered tools and they are worth the
money - the same is true now with LCS. If Exchange IM was good enough for
customers' purposes, it can still be used today - but I haven't seen any
customers want to stick with it even in light of the costs to purchase LCS
2005.

--
Jeremy Buch (Microsoft)

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Please do not send email to this address, post a reply to this newsgroup.

"Scott" <sdgmcdon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eDP760A1FHA.904@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

Bob Christian · Guest

Just adding my $0.02, Federation, or and what Trillian does are two separate
things. Granted, Trillian is a great product and will allow you to log on
to AOL, MSN/.NET, and Yahoo! without a fuss. Word on the street is that a
SIP plug-in is being developed for Trillian.

Additionall, some companies still allow their internal Public IM clients as
well as LCS and WM/MOC. In the cases of logging, that I have seen, they use
IMLogic at the border and LCS archiving inside the border.

Cheers,

Bob

--
Bob Christian II
MVP - LCS
http://bobchristian.blogspot.com - Blog

"Trevor Miller" <tmiller@iqep.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:uYU1zeY1FHA.3896@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

Trevor Miller · Guest

LCS / MOC is great software headed in a good direction, my primary concern
is MS sells SA as assurance we'll always have the latest and greatest
functionality but there is a growing trend of product splitting where the
latest advances require purchase of a separate product.

As for federation complexity - no one said it was easy but I'd like to add
that Trillian has been doing federation with enhanced services like voice,
file transfer etc across clouds for quite some time now and it's cheaper
than PIC and is all loggable. Don't get me wrong, LCS / MOC is a much more
robust and manageable product but they have end-user functionality pretty
far ahead of PIC.

-trevor

"Jeremy Buch" <jbuch@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:eRUVC9Q1FHA.3504@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

Trevor Miller · Guest

Don't forget about the "free" Netmeeting / ILS combo and Exchange
Conferencing Services (multipoint video conferencing).

-trevor

"Jeremy Buch" <jbuch@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23jGwxCR1FHA.3660@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

	Windows Server Forum Index -> Live Communications Server	All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 1 of 3