Before we begin discussing public folders, some readers asked about the Exchange version numbers. Exchange 2003 is version 6.5, but because Exchange (and SharePoint) are part of the Office family of applications and servers and on the same development schedule as Office, they use the same version name as Office, at least until an official name is assigned the product. So, for now, Exchange 12 is the last version that will have public folders, Exchange 13 will be the first version without public folders.

In early June I asked you for your feelings on the removal of Public folders from Exchange 13. As expected, responses to the loss of public folders fall into three general areas, surprisingly, the comments were somewhat evenly split between in favor, not sure, and keeping public folders.

Wendy:
It's a good idea, but will be a nightmare for admins to clean up. Fortunately Microsoft's public folders are a complete mess also, so they will need to come up with a good solution for themselves first. . . .
Of course, replacing it with SharePoint is not the solution - that just moves the problem, so. . . of course I don't administer SharePoint so maybe I shouldn't worry. . . :-)

You can't help but love Wendy's logical thinking but I suspect her SharePoint admin might not agree. Unfortunately, Microsoft's solution to their public folder problem is removing them from Exchange and using SharePoint instead.

Mary:
Public Folders should be removed from an Exchange Server. Anything that needs to be shared in that respect should not be on an Exchange System rather it should be on a SharePoint Server or a Document Management System.

Bernadette:
I anticipate with great pleasure the demise of public folders. They've always been something of a thorn in my side, difficult to manage consistently, difficult to deal with in terms of replication across multiple Exchange sites, in terms of migrating to new hardware, new versions of Exchange, etc. With SharePoint so much better targeted at managing the types of data that end up in public folders, I think it's a natural to do away with this particular feature.

Gray:
I tell you what... with the onset of apps like share point... I hope they DO go away... they are nothing but a big storage place for ATTACHMENTS... and an administrative NIGHTMARE... I am not the only one that feels this way. I have tried and tried to be public folder friendly... but... the maintenance of them isn't saving anything.

Tim:
We make extensive use of Public Folders in our company. We direct any list servers we subscribe to, to Public Folders so that we only receive and store one copy. Correspondence relating to customers, suppliers and projects is file both manually and automatically (e.g. weekly price lists) to Public Folders. However most of our customers with Exchange don't use Public Folders nearly as much as we do, so we may be in the minority.

The current integration between Outlook and SharePoint doesn't go far enough for me. Not being able to save contacts to SharePoint from Outlook seems silly. For the future, from my point of view ideally I would like to have a single store with multiple methods of storing and viewing e.g. Outlook, Browser and Windows Explorer. Although search tools such as Lookout and MSN help, it can be frustrating if you can't remember whether the document you are looking for is stored in a public folder, or in a directory.

Ron:
I'm all for it -- as long as there is a way to provide an alternative to a "mail-enabled public folder". The public folders are slow performers and difficult to support. Managing permissions (especially for mail-enabled folders) is very tricky.

I'm not sure SharePoint will improve on access speed or managing permissions, it's as slow and clunky as Exchange is, but at least it won't get worse. Public folders work so well for generic support or sales addresses and mailing lists that an alternative to mail-enabled public folders is a necessity. I believe ease of use and Outlook integration will be a non-issue. The only complaint might be with the local store - Outlook will download SharePoint items, which is great for offline use, but administrators may not want large SharePoint personal folders on each workstation.

On the plus side, SharePoint moves us closer to the single store Tim and others feel is important.

Jane:
It will be a minor PITA in our organization. Line of business users store correspondence in deep folder trees, and I subscribe several Public folders to news groups.
PFs are used heavily at our University, not only for course delivery, but for communication and document storage across the campus. We will miss PFs because of their ease of use and integration into Outlook. We can only hope the migration tools and the final solution we are offered are adequate to the task.

David:
It all depends upon the details of what new functionality they provide as replacement. They do have replacement technology in mind (or in beta), right? Right? ...right?
I've built a CRM system on public folders with associated objects therein. Use Outlook Exchange Client via rdc/http which is great. I hope they don't mess up my future or triple it's cost!

Brent:
We use Emailed enabled Public Folders a lot. If this new architecture will nicely migrate these (i.e.. no manual intervention, or script writing on my part needed), fine. If not, I hate it! I'd probably be happy if it would create Mailboxes out of these PFs where the sharing/permissions was set to what the PF had, and it sent an EMail to all those users explaining how to access this new Mailbox. Or, if SharePoint can handle this better, fine.
Just don't break what is currently working well for us.

Tom:
I have no problem with the move to SharePoint, as long as the integration is there. They [MS] are using SharePoint with Project Server now, and the additional features for sharing documents, tasks, etc. is great; once you get it working and are able to maintain it. If the integration is lacking, or is too difficult to install/maintain, then they'll be doing themselves and their customers a great disservice.

Scott:
SharePoint calendars do not offer the equivalent user friendly features that Exchange public folder calendars do, therefore I am disappointed to see Microsoft move their user community to less feature rich application. Hopefully, SharePoint Calendars will make marked improvement between now and the cut-off.

I think Scott and the others will be pleasantly surprised when the next version of Outlook and SharePoint are released in the next year or so, with seamless integration and two-way sync and I'll be very disappointed if it doesn't meet my expectations.

If you aren't familiar with SharePoint at all, http://www.xsolive.com has a demo site running on the current version of SharePoint. Keep in mind that this version lacks a lot of features, like two-way sync, that will be necessary if SharePoint is to come close to replacing the most common public folder usage. We need to wait for SharePoint 12 to see if SharePoint has a chance. How well SharePoint 12 works with Outlook 12 will give us an idea of what to expect in the 13 time frame. If there are too many problems in the next version, it'll be a hard sell to convince people it's going to work one more version out.

Kevin:
We are a technology consulting firm and we have found Exchange with Public folders to be the best Microsoft platform for custom collaboration development. We have had serious difficulties with SharePoint (supposedly the replacement for Public folders) and we can't make CRM 1.2 do anything. Our customers are happiest when we put them on a public folder-based solution. Microsoft should be working on adding public folder journaling natively to Exchange instead.

Chad:
Public Folders - Our company can't run without them... If Microsoft dumps this feature, it will be the last version of Exchange we buy.

Joyce:
Moving to SharePoint is a major cost issue - unless they make the integration with Exchange available in SharePoint Services rather than requiring Portal. Even at that it requires Exchange administrators to have to learn a whole new environment that crosses almost every technical area in the enterprise. This comment is from someone who is implementing SharePoint (both Portal and Services) and has no intention of migrating Public Folders into that environment other than to index some of them from the Portal.

Brian, working for a water utility system:
We actually *use* public folders. A lot. Every day. Without public folders, we wouldn't be able to share calendars and that would just suck now that we're all used to doing it.

What they don't know is that water utilities are a closely knit group of professionals. I'm sure the good people in Redmond would be distraught to find that there was no water to flush toilets or wash Porsches. Not that our fair industry would stoop to such barbarian tactics. That would be like offering cool stuff in Exchange and then snatching it away, ostensibly to resell it as a convenient add-on replete with annual maintenance fees and too-frequent security patches. Nay, our industry is above all of that.

While boycotts of large corporations rarely work, cutting off the water in the Northwest would definitely get your point across that offering a cool feature and then taking it away isn't a pleasant experience and causes undue suffering to many people. However, in your specific case, the next version of SharePoint should handle calendaring and Outlook integration much better, so much better that you may not want to use public folders.

The cost for SharePoint over Exchange with the "free" public folders included has the potential to affect your organization more than the loss of public folders. We won't know how much since pricing decisions are made closer to the release date. As long as SharePoint services remains free and fully support Exchange server, the impact on the bottom line will be minimal.

Steven:
Public Folders was a great idea that was never fully developed. Back in the days of Ex5.5 I started to dabble with a bit of development (Thanks to Tony Rizzo's book) but then it all changed in Ex2K (especially OWA) and I had to start again (or give up - which is what I did). Now the move to SharePoint means another learning curve, steep or otherwise.
I know MS needs to drive its revenue stream, but I don't have their resources to learn another skill set/technology every 2-3 years.
I mourn the premature passing of Public Folders......

The cost of SharePoint and retraining is definitely going to affect many more sites than the loss of public folders. Rewriting public folder applications isn't going to be cheap and neither will migrating existing data to SharePoint, but only a very small percentage make full use of public folders and have public folder applications. A larger number use mail enabled public folders and the majority use public folders in a way that works well in SharePoint.

Michael:
As a Microsoft partner organization we have installed Exchange at many customers - and at most of those customers we implement at least a company or department shared contact folder which resides in Public Folders. Implementing a public contact folder is extremely efficient, as it can be updated online or offline, and when used in conjunction with Outlook as an address book makes those thousands of contacts available to everyone in the organization, simply by typing a name on the TO: line.
In our own organization we have hundreds of public folders. Many of which we use with mail aliases. As an example, web feedback mail which gets delivered to a public folder can be handled by several people at the same time - we also use public folders for incoming faxes and other document workflow processes.

Myrko:
We work with the public folders (sharing information, share contacts etc.) and I think this is not a good idea to remove them.

Paul:
We use Exchange 2000 Public folders for contacts and notes. How will this sharing occur without Public Folders?

Vivienne:
We use public folders for shared services such as meeting rooms, projectors, projects that are over multiple sites, employee listings, etc. The loss of public folders will mean an entire rethink of the way we share information between these sites. I think it would be a great loss.

Steve:
This would I presume force some people to stop using public folders for shared contacts and force them to use Microsoft CRM. I have used public folders successfully now for many years and this would be a big blow if removed.

SharePoint contacts, when synced with Outlook 2003, can be used as an Outlook Address book. Outlook 12 and SharePoint 12 are expected to provide two-way sync with calendar and contacts and may include two-way sync for other lists. How well this will handle resource scheduling is a huge unknown. If the features work well, SharePoint 12 will easily replace the most common use of public folders, shared calendars and contacts long before public folders are removed from Exchange 13.

Peter:
I think public folders should still be supported as it's a good file sharing system especially when people need access to files, other than file servers which are inaccessible outside an organization.

Mark:
We use public folders for custom built applications and archiving of team emails for quick retrieval. I can't believe that this under-appreciated technology will be removed from Exchange unless the links with SharePoint are significantly improved. This will have a bit cost for re-writing complex applications - and will SharePoint be available offline - which is the main reason we developed using public folders.
Actually Lotus Quickplace did have an offline feature!

SharePoint's document libraries are great for file sharing and document workspaces bring the contents of the libraries into Word and Excel. Public folders and OWA make an easy way to share documents without using VPN, but as long as the SharePoint site is exposed to the Internet, the libraries are as accessible as public folders and if properly configured, just as secure. If the SharePoint site is not accessible from the Internet, then you'll need to use VPN to access the site. Even with VPN, SharePoint is still better than a simple file server as it adds document management features.

When SharePoint lists are pulled into Outlook, they are stored in a personal folder (pst) and you'll have them for offline use. The more list and library types that can be synchronized with Outlook, the better and two-way sync of these folders is a must!

This leaves three areas of concern: migration, mail enabled public folders and public folder applications. These will cause the most grief and are expected to be the hardest problems for sites to overcome, especially migrating and public folder applications. It's not going to be easy or pretty.

Andrea:
What does this mean for existing public folder application solutions currently built?
For those of us that build Outlook custom form solutions for public folders, what happens now? I certainly don't want to continue building these if they will not be usable for clients who upgrade to Exchange 13. Am I missing something?

While I would seriously start looking into SharePoint and web applications, not new public folder applications, Exchange 13 is at least 4 years away from RTM and 5 years (or more) before many companies will upgrade.

Darryl:
I am little dubious of it. I have clients with mail-enabled public folders, some with very customized forms, and some that use it as a public store for email folders. I haven't played with SharePoint enough to know this definitively, but I don't think SharePoint as a replacement is going to be as seamless.
How about synching my public contacts with my handheld?
Drop & drag an email to a public folder?
Can I create/use custom forms?
Will the custom forms and all of the data convert?

Lisa:
The loss of public folders in Exchange is going to be "tragic" to say the least. We here at Baylor University have about 500 PF's (maybe more...). Some are indeed mail enabled, and some are not, yet support our University's various departments. We have been using them for about 4 years now, and what an impact (good and bad, but mostly good) they have had on us here in IT whom support Exchange and Outlook.

Patrick:
I don't think it is a good idea to leave the public folder path. We use it quite intensively within our organization and haven't found a real easy alternative. We use it as shared calendars and shared contacts, and also as a place where incoming mail is accepted within our newsletter publishing environment. We use PF as an email inbox for general email addresses we publish in our newsletters. Currently we have about 1390 PF in use.

Michael:
Let's face it - many customers have made investments in custom forms for public folders - how can they easily migrate that work - and where would they migrate it to?

Jon:
We are a technical consulting company. Our entire business - Sales tracking, Applicant tracking, Engagement tracking is run on a complex public folder system. Loss of public folders would force us to have to migrate to a platform like Notes. I'd like to know more specifics on the capabilities of SharePoint in this regard.

Well Jon, I'm not sure you'll need to migrate to Notes, but you will need to migrate. Custom forms and public folder applications will need to be rewritten as web-based applications. Even with two-way sync between Outlook and SharePoint and the support of custom forms in both applications, an Outlook custom form is not the same as SharePoint's web forms. Many companies make heavy use of public folders and I can't imagine trying to migrate 100 folders, let alone 500 or 1500 to a SharePoint site. A migration application will definitely help with this.

I honestly don't know what's going to happen to mail-enabled public folders. Will SharePoint be able to accept SMTP or will we need to use lame hacks, like sending all mail to a mailbox, collect it with Outlook and use rules to move it to a folder that syncs with SharePoint? Unless SharePoint has the capability built in, I expect an enterprising developer will release an application that collects email and posts it in the SharePoint database then sniffs for new posts to email out. Syncing data with a PDA should work as well as it does now, provided the sync application supports personal folders since Outlook 2003 stores SharePoint calendar and contact data in a pst. As long as all SharePoint lists can be synced with Outlook in future versions, dragging email to SharePoint should work. We should have a better feel for this capability by early next year, once the betas for Outlook and SharePoint are available. If this version doesn't live up to their expectations, it will be difficult to believe that SharePoint 13 will be capable of replacing public folders.

Michael:
My initial reaction: Oh no! My company relies heavily on Public Folders! But then, I haven't really looked at SharePoint Services as an alternative so it's possible they may be better suited to some of the things the public folders are used for anyway. Still, I know how hard it is to move people onto new systems around here... will probably put me off upgrading for a while. But then, I'm still only running Exchange 2000, so I can still upgrade to 2003 without losing the folders!

The good news is Exchange 13 is 4 years away from RTM. Exchange 12 is a year or so away and you can use it for several years. You'll also be able to keep an older server online if you have critical public folder applications.

In fact, you don't need to upgrade at all. Just look at the number of sites still using Exchange 5.5. Sure they are missing some great functionality, but it does what they need it to do, so why upgrade?

Philipp:
If this is going to be the case, I hope the guys from Teamscope, etc. etc. find a way to carry on and further develop their products.

We all hope all developers will find a way to further develop their products. I expect migration application developers will do very well. If SharePoint can't handle email (to replace mail enabled public folders) a developer or two will take care of that oversight.

Finally, BJ has this to say: "I support many die-hard users who resist change - some have resisted so strongly they are still using cardfile to house their contacts! So, I may go bald, trying to explain why Microsoft no longer supports OR offers Public folders and is forcing everyone to SharePoint. Am I happy about it? No. Do I understand that it may be the only way people will change? Yes."

Moving to new technologies is never easy, and moving from public folders to SharePoint will require changes. For the typical end user, it won't be a big change. They'll use a personal folder instead of public folders and have the option of using a web interface which is a bit nicer than a typical public folder view in OWA.

Do you have any comments to add to this discussion? Post your comments to the new forums at slipstick.com.

 http://www.slipstick.com/CS/forums/22/ShowForum.aspx  (Forum registration required to post.)