This documentation is archived and is not being maintained.
Letters Readers Speak Out
SharePoint Capacity Planning Tool
My company has fewer than 600 employees, and a large number of them do not actively use their PCs or our intranet. But there is a common outcry for corporate communication and collaboration. I think that Windows® SharePoint® Services (WSS) 3.0 would be perfect for our work environment, but my manager has only budgeted one server for this effort.
I tried to use the SharePoint Capacity Planning Tool, but it will not allow a single-server model to be simulated. Do you know of a simulation option for single server?
I do not think there is an option for a single server. But it's difficult to size without considering all user behaviors. I would use a quad-core CPU and start with 8GB of RAM. Basically, a mid-range server should work fine.
Joel Oleson has compiled a large number of sizing references, and these are available for you to view on his blog at blogs.msdn.com/joelo/archive/2007/07/09/capacity-planning-key-links-and-info.aspx. That may help you further in making the best decision to serve your company's needs.
—Pav Cherny, Columnist,
I know the intent of the Windows Confidential column "History Takes Up Space" (July 2008, technet.microsoft.com/magazine/cc565089) was to reveal that the Microsoft® Bob program was hidden on the Windows XP disk, but it is yet another slam at a program that my kids loved and used to learn basic computer word processing. Bob came with our first home computer, an NEC Ready with Window 95. And as they grew up, each of my children played with and used Bob for hours.
Bob was ridiculed as a bad technology product in the column, but it was actually great software that was simply presented to the wrong market . . . adults. It was geared for children, and had it been presented that way it would have been regarded in a different light and perhaps even had a different fate. Who knows, if presented as a kid's program from the get-go, it might still be around for my grandchildren to enjoy.
Print Is Dead
It was very interesting for me to read your July 2008 Editor's Note, "Print Is Dead" (at technet.microsoft.com/magazine/cc595615). In my opinion, printed specialist books about information technology will soon be dead and substituted by digital media. But according to you, 90 percent of your readers surveyed prefer the printed media. Was this survey representative? Or did only those people whom you reached by printed media answer the survey? This group would not include the younger generation, who no longer subscribe to newspapers or magazines like yours but get all their information online and never heard about your survey.
A reader of printed text is not able to start a video or webcast out of the floating text. He is not able to click with the mouse on a printed Internet link to open a home page, newsgroup, or blog. He is not able to make a click with the mouse to download an add-in or a tool that was just mentioned in the printed text.
To sum up my point: the printed book is a bad compromise. The reader will soon realize that reading in the printed book offers only a fraction of the benefits of the DVD, and he can copy the whole content of the DVD onto his notebook and then have access to this content at any time and everywhere.
Thanks for your note and your feedback! In response to your specific questions about the 90 percent of our readers who say they prefer print, the survey was conducted among both our print subscribers and Web readers (with an approximately equal mix of both) as part of our annual editorial research—presented electronically, not in print. The question was posed to those who said they have read both (print and online), and 90 percent of them said they prefer print.
While I completely agree with you about the benefits of publishing content online (rich media, global reach, clickable links, and so on), I still feel that reading an article on the printed page offers a more engaging experience. I feel more comfortable with—and more connected to—the content, and many others have shared similar feelings with us. That being said, the fact that each medium offers its own advantages is why we continue to publish TechNet Magazine using both. Thanks again!
—Joshua Hoffman, Editor-in-Chief