Response to the META Group White Paper, Messaging Total Cost of Ownership: Microsoft Exchange 2003 and Lotus Domino in Small and Medium Organizations
Two articles in a row makes me wonder has it always been this bad
(probably yes and no), are these poor excuses for analysis coming to
light because they are being looked for, or is Microsoft feeling some
kind of threat and influencing the analysts.
I'm not a big conspiracy theorist, but the third one does have some
plausibility in my mind. Of course respected groups like META
would certainly lose their credibility if word got out. To bad
for them, it is.
Response to the META Group White Paper, “Messaging Total Cost of
Ownership: Microsoft Exchange 2003 and Lotus Domino in Small and Medium
Organizations”
I was surprised to see another poorly done white paper on
Exchange vs. Domino so close to the Radicati fiasco of last week.
However, this one is from The META Group (www.metagroup.com), which has
traditionally published very good work. I%u2019m greatly surprised at
the lack of thoroughness and due diligence in preparing this paper. It
is not available on the META Group web site (so it is probably not
written by one of the META analysts, eg, Matt Cain), but is available
from Microsoft%u2019s competitive intelligence site on Exchange, at
www.microsoft.com/exchange/evaluation/compare/METAEx2k3vNotes.asp.