As a windows and exchange admin I welcome the powershell capabilities for
cli management and scripting, but am puzzled at the fact that it is not an
either / or management paradigm. The fact that so much is deliberately
omitted from the Exchange GUI that must be done from the shell seems
somewhat perverse and I can only think this is a marketing sop to pander to
the growing influence of linux admins who demand cli and eschew any form of
gui as a point of principle.
As an example I have just had to construct a PS command of over 100 chars to
configure address re-writing on an edge server, which took a while to
research the correct params and syntax and then accurately type it in. In
the sane world a right click and quick filling in of 2 fields in a form
would suffice.
Most admins I know dont have the luxury of working full-time on 1 BO product
to become that familiar with the large no of cmdlets and complex syntax,
(and also dont need to prove how good they are by exhibitingthe faculty of
memorizing 100 char commands to fulfil simple tasks).
If there is a rationale behind this strategy I would welcome being better
informed.

Thanks,

Geejay

Re: Exchange Shell - Not a technical question as such by Ed

Ed
Fri Mar 14 16:36:29 CDT 2008

My understanding is that things weren't purposely omitted from the GUI as
much as that the developers ran out of time to add them in before launch.
SP1 adds back some of the omitted settings, and I think it's safe to assume
that more will be added back as the product progresses. I don't know that
"everything" will ever be in the GUI, since no version of Exchange has ever
had "everything" in the GUI.
--
Ed Crowley
MVP - Exchange
"Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"

"gjb" <gjb@ntl.com> wrote in message
news:O698kPhhIHA.3780@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> As a windows and exchange admin I welcome the powershell capabilities for
> cli management and scripting, but am puzzled at the fact that it is not an
> either / or management paradigm. The fact that so much is deliberately
> omitted from the Exchange GUI that must be done from the shell seems
> somewhat perverse and I can only think this is a marketing sop to pander
> to the growing influence of linux admins who demand cli and eschew any
> form of gui as a point of principle.
> As an example I have just had to construct a PS command of over 100 chars
> to configure address re-writing on an edge server, which took a while to
> research the correct params and syntax and then accurately type it in. In
> the sane world a right click and quick filling in of 2 fields in a form
> would suffice.
> Most admins I know dont have the luxury of working full-time on 1 BO
> product to become that familiar with the large no of cmdlets and complex
> syntax, (and also dont need to prove how good they are by exhibitingthe
> faculty of memorizing 100 char commands to fulfil simple tasks).
> If there is a rationale behind this strategy I would welcome being better
> informed.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Geejay
>



Re: Exchange Shell - Not a technical question as such by gjb

gjb
Sat Mar 15 05:28:53 CDT 2008

Ed,

Thank you, that seems a very rational explanation.
Regards,

G.
"Ed Crowley [MVP]" <curspice@mvpsnospam.org> wrote in message
news:ug6T3thhIHA.5260@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> My understanding is that things weren't purposely omitted from the GUI as
> much as that the developers ran out of time to add them in before launch.
> SP1 adds back some of the omitted settings, and I think it's safe to
> assume that more will be added back as the product progresses. I don't
> know that "everything" will ever be in the GUI, since no version of
> Exchange has ever had "everything" in the GUI.
> --
> Ed Crowley
> MVP - Exchange
> "Protecting the world from PSTs and brick backups!"
>
> "gjb" <gjb@ntl.com> wrote in message
> news:O698kPhhIHA.3780@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> As a windows and exchange admin I welcome the powershell capabilities
>> for cli management and scripting, but am puzzled at the fact that it is
>> not an either / or management paradigm. The fact that so much is
>> deliberately omitted from the Exchange GUI that must be done from the
>> shell seems somewhat perverse and I can only think this is a marketing
>> sop to pander to the growing influence of linux admins who demand cli and
>> eschew any form of gui as a point of principle.
>> As an example I have just had to construct a PS command of over 100 chars
>> to configure address re-writing on an edge server, which took a while to
>> research the correct params and syntax and then accurately type it in. In
>> the sane world a right click and quick filling in of 2 fields in a form
>> would suffice.
>> Most admins I know dont have the luxury of working full-time on 1 BO
>> product to become that familiar with the large no of cmdlets and complex
>> syntax, (and also dont need to prove how good they are by exhibitingthe
>> faculty of memorizing 100 char commands to fulfil simple tasks).
>> If there is a rationale behind this strategy I would welcome being better
>> informed.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Geejay
>>
>
>



Re: Exchange Shell - Not a technical question as such by Rich

Rich
Sat Mar 15 13:29:58 CDT 2008

"gjb" <gjb@ntl.com> wrote:

>Ed,
>
>Thank you, that seems a very rational explanation.

I think you'll find that "frequently used" tasks will find their way
into the UI. The less frequently used tasks will remain doable only
with Powershell.

--
Rich Matheisen
MCSE+I, Exchange MVP
MS Exchange FAQ at http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Don't send mail to this address mailto:h.pott@getronics.com
Or to these, either: mailto:h.pott@pinkroccade.com mailto:melvin.mcphucknuckle@getronics.com mailto:melvin.mcphucknuckle@pinkroccade.com