Exchange Server TechNet Library URLs updated

re: Exchange Server TechNet Library URLs updated

Microsoft — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 14:59:33 GMT

Have pity on us. We are Microsoft. Changing anything around here takes at LEAST 6 months due to our overhead and bureaucracy. Yes, we know you can't find what you are looking for and it is a royal pain in the keister, but trying to get anything at all approved through our total mess of bureaucracy is equivalent to winning the lottery ticket.

Have patience, dear admins, by the end of this year we'll be able to post another update to this thread telling you how we are continuing to look into and fix the situation. Maybe. Sometime down the road. When the next version of Exchange launches. Then we'll have everything right again.

re: Exchange Server TechNet Library URLs updated

Leave a comment — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 17:09:15 GMT

Microsoft is all talk about talking things seriously, but they appear to be just that, all talk and no action here.

This thread appears to have been abandoned, even though there are daily comments to please fix the issue.

Wonder how much those "stakeholders" make that are holding up this process of returning the links back to where they actually worked.

Maybe that's the new Microsoft Exchange methodology, to just break things and run away, rather than actually deal with the issue and solve the problem.

As others have posted here, updating the HTTP:\\ to contain the 141 version doesn't work.

It doesn't work from Google. It doesn't work from Bing. it doesn't even work from TechNet itself.

This is very poor support and is confusing people.

re: Exchange Server TechNet Library URLs updated

what is this? — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:15:50 GMT

This is a joke, right? You change the hyperlinks breaking nearly everything that references those hyperlinks. Then, you add really dorky manual processes to deal with the problem that was introduced. You then blame the stakeholders. Now, you simply don't respond to comments or updates.

Bravo, Exchange team. Well played.

re: Exchange Server TechNet Library URLs updated

IgnoredAdmin — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 07:33:48 GMT

Well, you don't have to live with it. Use NOTES, Groupwise or Fedora instead :)

re: Exchange Server TechNet Library URLs updated

Baphomet — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 22:10:38 GMT

I think the Exchange team has abandoned this topic. Anyone have any update as to when/if the HTTP links will revert back to the stable state they were 3 months ago or are we going to have to live with it the way it is now?

re: Exchange Server TechNet Library URLs updated

Angry — Sun, 27 Jan 2013 19:43:02 GMT

It is 2 months after things got "serious" around here and we were promised an update was coming "asap".

re: Exchange Server TechNet Library URLs updated

Amy Reese — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 15:12:23 GMT

Thank you to the Exchange team who posts these blog entries and always tries to provide the current and detailed information we need. That said, I am having a much more difficult time now locating the technical documents I need. Bing searches do not appear to link to the correct content anymore. Even searching TechNet directly results in a number of "article not found" errors. Following the advice above in this blog does not appear to help. Adding the (EXCHG.141).aspx onto the http does not pull up a 2010 doc and continues to display a 2013 doc. Is there a better search engine we can use that will help us find the correct information? The changes you made, although with the best of intentions I am sure, do not appear to be working.

re: Exchange Server TechNet Library URLs updated

Greg E Goodman — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 16:41:40 GMT

Bueller? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?

re: Exchange Server TechNet Library URLs updated

crickets — Wed, 23 Jan 2013 21:13:48 GMT

the silence is deafening. the stakeholders appear to be worthless management types who cannot actually do their jobs.

re: Exchange Server TechNet Library URLs updated

Aaron — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:07:44 GMT

"We’ve heard your concerns and take them seriously."

I call B.S. It's been 3 months now, you've broken all the links, and you fail to communicate. In other words, complete fail here. You really expect us to believe you are taking things seriously?