<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:series="http://unfoldingneurons.com/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat &#187; Windows Mobile Archives  &#8211; Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.fosketts.net/tag/windows-mobile/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.fosketts.net</link>
	<description>Understanding the accumulation of data</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:40:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
<atom:link rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com" />
	<atom:link rel="hub" href="http://superfeedr.com/hubbub" />
			<item>
		<title>Key Technical Differences Between Email Archiving Products?</title>
		<link>http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/03/31/key-technical-differences-between-email-archiving-products/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/03/31/key-technical-differences-between-email-archiving-products/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:57:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stephen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Enterprise storage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BlackBerry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Email archiving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iPhone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Outlook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Storage Magazine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Symbian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TechTarget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows Mobile]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/03/31/key-technical-differences-between-email-archiving-products/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;m working on a new feature article for Storage Magazine focused on selecting an enterprise email archiving product.  This is something I&#8217;ve done quite a bit of work around, so I decided to redirect it into a &#8220;bride magazine&#8221; type &#8220;ten things to look for&#8221; item.  If you too know about the field of email [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m working on a new feature article for <a href="http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/magazineCurrent/0,296884,sid5,00.html"  target="_blank">Storage Magazine</a> focused on selecting an enterprise email archiving product.  This is something I&#8217;ve done quite a bit of work around, so I decided to redirect it into a &#8220;bride magazine&#8221; type &#8220;ten things to look for&#8221; item.  If you too know about the field of email archiving products, how about weighing in with a comment or email with your opinion?</p>
<p>Without further ado:</p>
<p><strong>The ten technical things some email archiving products do and others do not do*<br />
</strong></p>
<ol>
<li><strong>Capture all messages</strong> &#8211; Can the archiving system really guarantee that every message is captured?  Really?  Even if a user does the old &#8220;double-delete&#8221; and gets rid of every copy on the system before the &#8220;archive sweep&#8221; happens?</li>
<li><strong>Search and e-discovery</strong> &#8211; It&#8217;s amazing to me that some archiving systems have really terrible search capabilities.  But more important is whether they can handle real e-discovery requests from the legal department.</li>
<li><strong>Record user metadata</strong> &#8211; Capturing what users <em>do</em> with a message (read, file, ignore, forward) is a tough nut to crack, and it might just be impossible with some archiving technologies!</li>
<li><strong>Archive stuff other than email</strong> &#8211; Some are general archives that can take just about any content, while others are purpose-built for email.  I am hemming and hawing on whether this is critical in an <em>email</em> archiving product, and which is preferrable&#8230;</li>
<li><strong>Security and chain of custody</strong> &#8211; How secure is the archive content?  If the answer is &#8220;kinda&#8221; then your legal department is <em>not</em> going to be happy!</li>
<li><strong>Ingest an existing mail store or PST file</strong> &#8211; It&#8217;s great when an archiving system can capture every email once it&#8217;s installed, but it&#8217;s a whole other matter to be able to pull in pre-existing content.  But beware!  You have to flag this stuff as possibly incomplete and perhaps even unreliable!</li>
<li><strong>Integrate with mail clients</strong> &#8211; What does the end user see?  Is it an unfamiliar web link or a reassuring Outlook window?  What about Outlook Web Access users?  Or the 8,000 other email clients?</li>
<li><strong>Allow off-line access</strong> &#8211; Can a user access the archive when they&#8217;re on a plane?  Can they see it on the train?  Would they, could they in the park?  Will you, will you when your data center goes dark?</li>
<li><strong>Integrate with third-party tools</strong> &#8211; How well will the archive really serve legal if it can&#8217;t export messages to their favorite search tool?  Note &#8211; some can even talk directly with these products!</li>
<li><strong>Integrate with mobile users</strong> &#8211; Ok, I am on an iPhone in the enterprise crusade, but I&#8217;ll admit that lots of folks use BlackBerries and Windows Mobile (and Symbian) too.  How can they access the archive?</li>
</ol>
<p>I&#8217;ve worked with most of the products out there, and know who can and can&#8217;t do these things.  But not all are important to everyone, so I just can&#8217;t say &#8220;this product is best.&#8221;  But I&#8217;m very interested in your opinion.  What key technical differentiators would you suggest?</p>
<p>* <em>Not</em> the actual article title!</p>
<div id="crp_related"><h3>You might also want to read these other posts...</h3><ul><li><a href="http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/07/01/10-key-considerations-for-email-archiving/"  rel="bookmark" class="crp_title">10 Key Considerations for Email Archiving</a></li><li><a href="http://blog.fosketts.net/2011/05/17/5475/"  rel="bookmark" class="crp_title"></a></li><li><a href="http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/05/20/email-archiving-just-cant-get-enough/"  rel="bookmark" class="crp_title">Email Archiving: Just Can&#8217;t Get Enough</a></li><li><a href="http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/09/05/answering-email-archiving-questions/"  rel="bookmark" class="crp_title">Answering Your Email Archiving Questions</a></li><li><a href="http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/10/20/managing-email-e-discovery/"  rel="bookmark" class="crp_title">Six Critical Steps For Managing Email E-Discovery</a></li></ul></div><script src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~s/sfoskett?i=http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/03/31/key-technical-differences-between-email-archiving-products/" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></script><hr />
<p><small>© sfoskett for <a href="http://blog.fosketts.net">Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat</a>, 2008. |
<a href="http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/03/31/key-technical-differences-between-email-archiving-products/">Key Technical Differences Between Email Archiving Products?</a>
<br/>
This post was categorized as <a href="http://blog.fosketts.net/category/everything/enterprisestorage/" title="View all posts in Enterprise storage" rel="category tag">Enterprise storage</a>, <a href="http://blog.fosketts.net/category/everything/personal/" title="View all posts in Personal" rel="category tag">Personal</a>. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.<br/>
</small></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fosketts.net/2008/03/31/key-technical-differences-between-email-archiving-products/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

