Exchange Server Public Folders as Office/Cad Manual.

[Anonymous]

why didn't I think of that before?!!
I doubt, however, that I'm the first to do this....

How many of you are using this feature as a clearing house for all
Company Standards & Procedures for all things CAD? Any pitfalls that I
should be aware of?

--
CoreyL

[Anonymous]

Musing here as to how I can do this.Surely Seems like a good idea. Anyone
figure a way to do it, please post away. Nifty thought. Nice to have it so
accessible and easy on upkeep.
Eagerly waiting a solution.

--
Princess Jamie


"Corey A. Layton" wrote in message
news:4842151@discussion.autodesk.com...
why didn't I think of that before?!!
I doubt, however, that I'm the first to do this....

How many of you are using this feature as a clearing house for all
Company Standards & Procedures for all things CAD? Any pitfalls that I
should be aware of?

--
CoreyL

[Anonymous]

Even better. Set up a blog (like movable type) and the Standards are the
blog posts. The greatest thing is that end users may be allowed to post
comments to any part of the Standards. If somebody knows of a better way to
do something, then they just post a comment and explain how. The blog
becomes a sort of knowledgebase.

Another plus is that the users can "subscribe" and receive notifications of
posts or comments...

Craig


"Corey A. Layton" wrote in message
news:4842151@discussion.autodesk.com...
why didn't I think of that before?!!
I doubt, however, that I'm the first to do this....

How many of you are using this feature as a clearing house for all
Company Standards & Procedures for all things CAD? Any pitfalls that I
should be aware of?

--
CoreyL

[Anonymous]

A Wiki would be similar to a blog, but would allow anybody to edit the
content.

[Anonymous]

>Even better. Set up a blog

would a wiki work even better?

[Anonymous]

CraigV(fs) wrote in message:
> The greatest thing is that end users may be allowed
> to post comments to any part of the Standards. If somebody knows of
> a better way to do something, then they just post a comment and
> explain how. The blog becomes a sort of knowledgebase.
Well, I feel I can acheive this via Exchange with the "view by
conversation" setting?

> Another plus is that the users can "subscribe" and receive
> notifications of posts or comments...
This also could be handled in Exchange with Rules settings on the
Folders?

I'm thinking Exchange is the way to go because:
1. We're already using it.
2. Users are familiar (comfortable) with it.

But thanks for your alternate suggestions.
What's a 'Wiki' anyway?
--
CoreyL

[Anonymous]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki

or here http://wiki.org/wiki.cgi?WhatIsWiki


"Corey A. Layton" wrote in message
news:4842617@discussion.autodesk.com...
CraigV(fs) wrote in message:
> The greatest thing is that end users may be allowed
> to post comments to any part of the Standards. If somebody knows of
> a better way to do something, then they just post a comment and
> explain how. The blog becomes a sort of knowledgebase.
Well, I feel I can acheive this via Exchange with the "view by
conversation" setting?

> Another plus is that the users can "subscribe" and receive
> notifications of posts or comments...
This also could be handled in Exchange with Rules settings on the
Folders?

I'm thinking Exchange is the way to go because:
1. We're already using it.
2. Users are familiar (comfortable) with it.

But thanks for your alternate suggestions.
What's a 'Wiki' anyway?
--
CoreyL

[Anonymous]

Blogs would work, but remember that most blog software is sequential-post based
- meaning that navigation would be severely limited.

I think you are better off creating a website with a navigation pane with
standards as individual articles.

You can use a Blog as a way of posting user comments, but it doesn't in fact
create a very useful knowledge base.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com

On Wed, 11 May 2005 22:02:22 +0000, CraigV\(fs\) wrote:

>Even better. Set up a blog (like movable type) and the Standards are the
>blog posts. The greatest thing is that end users may be allowed to post
>comments to any part of the Standards. If somebody knows of a better way to
>do something, then they just post a comment and explain how. The blog
>becomes a sort of knowledgebase.
>
>Another plus is that the users can "subscribe" and receive notifications of
>posts or comments...
>
>Craig
>
>
>"Corey A. Layton" wrote in message
>news:4842151@discussion.autodesk.com...
>why didn't I think of that before?!!
>I doubt, however, that I'm the first to do this....
>
>How many of you are using this feature as a clearing house for all
>Company Standards & Procedures for all things CAD? Any pitfalls that I
>should be aware of?

[Anonymous]

On Wed, 11 May 2005 21:29:23 +0000, Corey A. Layton
wrote:

>why didn't I think of that before?!!
>I doubt, however, that I'm the first to do this....
>
>How many of you are using this feature as a clearing house for all
>Company Standards & Procedures for all things CAD? Any pitfalls that I
>should be aware of?

Um, yeah, it's not a very good idea.

Exchange PFs hold messaging items - email, contacts, calendar, etc. They aren't
a good way of storing Word documents or Web sites.

You CAD Manual - once you get it out of Word-land and into a proper online
format - is dynamic and as such should be stored by itself on your system,
outside of project folders or the email system. Either set it up as a separate
web site or some other document system.

Then provide a simple link to it; I do this in a customized Help menu.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com

[Anonymous]

Matt Stachoni wrote in message:
> Um, yeah, it's not a very good idea.
really? whay not?...

> Exchange PFs hold messaging items - email, contacts, calendar, etc.
> They aren't a good way of storing Word documents or Web sites.
The Exchange 'Post' item seems to fit the bill quite nicely for me.
copy/patse Word docs right in. Retain formatting...

> You CAD Manual - once you get it out of Word-land and into a proper
> online format - is dynamic and as such should be stored by itself on
> your system, outside of project folders or the email system. Either
> set it up as a separate web site or some other document system.
you can even cross-link conversations via 'Insert>Item...'
not bad....

The thing is, I'm not html savvy.
I know that it's not brain surgery,
but it's just something that I've never been exposed to or gotten into.
This Exchange server method will work well for us, I contend.

Now, if you could profide me with specific examples why not to go down
this road,
other than "Exchange sucks" or "Web-based is better"; I'm certainly
listening...

--
CoreyL

[Anonymous]

On Thu, 12 May 2005 15:20:02 +0000, Corey A. Layton
wrote:

>> Exchange PFs hold messaging items - email, contacts, calendar, etc.
>> They aren't a good way of storing Word documents or Web sites.

>The Exchange 'Post' item seems to fit the bill quite nicely for me.
>copy/patse Word docs right in. Retain formatting...

In other words, you are going to create a ton of threaded messages with your CAD
Standards pasted in? And navgation is supplied by the threaded conversation
format? Good luck with that one.

Because you better get it right the first time, as you can't reorder messages
inside a thread, and you can't reorder threads, and you can't prune/graft
threads.

>This Exchange server method will work well for us, I contend.
>Now, if you could profide me with specific examples why not to go down
>this road, other than "Exchange sucks" or "Web-based is better"; I'm certainly
>listening..

Well, I'm not going to say "Exchange Sucks" because I use it everyday and it
doesn't. However, I think one should always use the best tools for the task at
hand. I believe that using Public Folders for how you are describing simply is
not it.

Web-based CAD Manuals aren't particularly hard to create. In fact, using the
right software (e.g., RoboHelp X5
(http://www.macromedia.com/software/robohelp/), Help Logic
(www.ebutterfly.com/HelpLogic), or any other Help creation application), you can
import your Word documents to create either a Web based format, a PDF, Flash
Help, or a Windows Help CHM file - or all four at the same time.

You can just use the content as managed by the software, and output any number
of various online formats. You don't need to know HTML, and you get a lovely
dynamic navigation TOC pane.

But, of course, you are free to go ahead and try it in Exchange, and report back
your success.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com

[Anonymous]

Matt Stachoni wrote in message:
> Web-based CAD Manuals aren't particularly hard to create. In fact,
> using the right software (e.g., RoboHelp X5
> (http://www.macromedia.com/software/robohelp/), Help Logic
> (www.ebutterfly.com/HelpLogic), or any other Help creation
> application), you can import your Word documents to create either a
> Web based format, a PDF, Flash Help, or a Windows Help CHM file - or
> all four at the same time.
>
> You can just use the content as managed by the software, and output
> any number of various online formats. You don't need to know HTML,
> and you get a lovely dynamic navigation TOC pane.

OK, Matt.
I've downloaded and am evaluating ebutterfly now.
(robohelp's a little pricey)
Thank you for your advice...

> But, of course, you are free to go ahead and try it in Exchange, and
> report back your success.
well,
that's why I posted this in the first place,
to try and not learn the hard way...

--
CoreyL

[Anonymous]

>Because you better get it right the first time, as you can't reorder messages
>inside a thread, and you can't reorder threads, and you can't prune/graft
>threads.

What abt using some kind of NNTP software and then
people could use Agent or Outlook Express like we do
here?

[Anonymous]

On Thu, 12 May 2005 18:24:06 +0000, me@privacy.net wrote:

>What abt using some kind of NNTP software and then
>people could use Agent or Outlook Express like we do
>here?

It's basically the same thing in Exchange, and a "normal" nntp server does't do
anything better. But you can only access the Exchange PFs using a compliant
client, like full blown Outlook, which works pretty well for that purpose.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com

[Anonymous]

You are right, Matt. But you can customize the HTML template to so it
doesn't show the dates.

Also, movable type has subcategories built in. You could probably arrange
your CAD Manual/standards so that they fall under 8 or 9 categories.

Just a thought. FWIW, I've never been a big fan of Exchange. The benefit
vs. complication ratio was never worth it to any firm I have worked for
(less than 40 employees).


"Matt Stachoni" wrote in message
news:4842857@discussion.autodesk.com...
Blogs would work, but remember that most blog software is sequential-post
based
- meaning that navigation would be severely limited.

I think you are better off creating a website with a navigation pane with
standards as individual articles.

You can use a Blog as a way of posting user comments, but it doesn't in fact
create a very useful knowledge base.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com

On Wed, 11 May 2005 22:02:22 +0000, CraigV\(fs\) wrote:

>Even better. Set up a blog (like movable type) and the Standards are the
>blog posts. The greatest thing is that end users may be allowed to post
>comments to any part of the Standards. If somebody knows of a better way
>to
>do something, then they just post a comment and explain how. The blog
>becomes a sort of knowledgebase.
>
>Another plus is that the users can "subscribe" and receive notifications of
>posts or comments...
>
>Craig
>
>
>"Corey A. Layton" wrote in message
>news:4842151@discussion.autodesk.com...
>why didn't I think of that before?!!
>I doubt, however, that I'm the first to do this....
>
>How many of you are using this feature as a clearing house for all
>Company Standards & Procedures for all things CAD? Any pitfalls that I
>should be aware of?

[Anonymous]

On Thu, 12 May 2005 19:35:40 +0000, CraigV\(fs\) wrote:

>FWIW, I've never been a big fan of Exchange. The benefit
>vs. complication ratio was never worth it to any firm I have worked for
>(less than 40 employees).

Really? I've implemented it for several companies, some with as few as 6
employees. What's great from an IT standpoint is that once it's set up, it never
breaks. Of course, you have to have adequate backup resources and a disaster
plan in place.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com

[Anonymous]

I don't hate it, it just seems like a lot of work for a little bit of gain.
I first put it in at 10-person firm on an NT Small Business Server. It
wasn't too hard to set up. The Small Business version was reasonable, but
Exchange ends up costing quite a bit. Every time you add a piece of
software for the server, you had to upgrade it to the Exchange version
(anti-virus, backup, etc.).

The biggest benefit I saw was setting up a few public contact folders for
the office rollodex.

Nowadays I'm no longer the "computer guy" so I don't know what the latest
versions of Exchange include. The firm I'm with now is about 35-40 people
and we don't use Exchange. Since I don't maintain the software, I can't say
I miss any of Exchange's features.

"Matt Stachoni" wrote in message
news:4843678@discussion.autodesk.com...
On Thu, 12 May 2005 19:35:40 +0000, CraigV\(fs\) wrote:

>FWIW, I've never been a big fan of Exchange. The benefit
>vs. complication ratio was never worth it to any firm I have worked for
>(less than 40 employees).

Really? I've implemented it for several companies, some with as few as 6
employees. What's great from an IT standpoint is that once it's set up, it
never
breaks. Of course, you have to have adequate backup resources and a disaster
plan in place.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com

[Anonymous]

On Thu, 12 May 2005 21:46:40 +0000, CraigV\(fs\) wrote:

>I don't hate it, it just seems like a lot of work for a little bit of gain.
>I first put it in at 10-person firm on an NT Small Business Server. It
>wasn't too hard to set up. The Small Business version was reasonable, but
>Exchange ends up costing quite a bit. Every time you add a piece of
>software for the server, you had to upgrade it to the Exchange version
>(anti-virus, backup, etc.).

Not really; I've been running lowly NTBackup, which "knows" about Exchange, for
over 5 years. Right now we're using SpamBayes for client-side spam catching, but
we'll move to a more enterprise worthy package once my migration to Exchange
2003 is complete.

>The biggest benefit I saw was setting up a few public contact folders for
>the office rollodex.

Yeah, we live and die by ours, and once you check the box to make it an address
book, sending emails to contacts is super easy.

I created a PF called projects, and made subfolders under that for every project
we have. Then when users get project related emails, they are instructed to move
it to the appropriate project PF.

That gets it out of their mailbox - which decreases the private information
database store - and allows all others to get the email in case the original
recipient gets sick/hit by a bus.

>Nowadays I'm no longer the "computer guy" so I don't know what the latest
>versions of Exchange include. The firm I'm with now is about 35-40 people
>and we don't use Exchange. Since I don't maintain the software, I can't say
>I miss any of Exchange's features.

Wow, I have 10 users in this particular office who want to nail me to a cross
every time I reboot the Exchange server. Luckily it's only about 3 times a year.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com

[robincapperw]

I was about to migrate our CAD std to a help authoring tool then found MindManager. I've found MM maps great for cad standards (and a lot more) as easy to use, edit, update and seamless export to other formats.

Used to export maps to HTML for intranet but about to deploy the MM viewer to CAD operators to view native map format.
Can also export to PDF, word, powerpoint, etc as required and link in contacts/tasks/meetings etc from Outlook.

See: http://rcd.typepad.com/rcd/mindmanager/index.html

Can you tell I like this software 🙂

[Anonymous]

>Wow, I have 10 users in this particular office who want to nail me to a cross
>every time I reboot the Exchange server. Luckily it's only about 3 times a year.

We "used" to use Exchange.

but corporate in their infinite wisdom decide we should
go to GroupWise instead.

HATE GROUPWISE!!

Exchange/outlook was VERY useful. Miss it a LOT