|
Campus Computing NewsCITC Proposes That UNT Move to Windows Servers and Microsoft ExchangeBy Maurice Leatherbury, Associate Vice President and Chief Technology OfficerAt the October 2006 meeting of the Information Resource Council (IRC), I made a presentation proposing that UNT move off of the Novell file and print server platform to the Microsoft Windows server platform and that we move off of the Novell GroupWise e-mail system to Microsoft Exchange/Outlook. The IRC will vote on those proposals at its November 21st meeting. I gave several reasons for the proposed moves, and this article expands on that presentation. Novell/GroupWise on CampusUNT is one of Novell’s largest customers in Texas and perhaps in the country, with over 100 file and print servers utilizing Netware and with GroupWise serving over 6,500 users on the Denton campus and an additional 1,000+ at the Health Science Center. The Novell products have served UNT well and the technology is generally reliable and has competitive features with other products such as Windows servers, Microsoft Exchange (and its client Outlook) and with Lotus Notes (for e-mail.) However, Novell has been losing market share to its competitors in the file and print server/e-mail business. The extent of the decline in market share in higher education is revealed in the results of a Texas Department of Information Resources (DIR) survey conducted among the state-supported universities this year. That survey shows that UNT and some of the UT System component institutions are the only universities still using Novell:
TABLE 1. SPEND BY SERVER TYPE *
* Source: Higher Education Data Centers: Inventory and Data Analysis. Austin, Texas Department of Information Resources, 2006. That same report also made the following recommendation: Of the total server count, 94% of the systems are running on Unix or Wintel. This shows that the university environment appreciates the need to standardize the operating system environment. It is also important to note that only 12 mainframes are still in use. Universities should continue to standardize on two environments and, if applicable, develop plans to reduce the VMS, Novell, and mainframe environments in the future. The consequences of Novell’s low market share are evident in the paucity of mainstream third-party software and hardware products that interoperate with Novell. Over the past year or so, the CITC has encountered the following problems with finding products needed to support UNT’s large IT infrastructure using Novell products: § Backup software. We had to abandon one enterprise backup system software package because it no longer worked with Novell’s file and print servers. The replacement product did work (finally) but not without much difficulty in setting it up. § Network monitoring tools. Several tools that tell us whether servers are operating properly (among other reports) that we’ve looked at don’t work with Novell. When we inquire about Novell interoperability, the vendors say that because of the low market share, they won’t be developing a Novell interface. § Storage Area Networks. Enterprise-class SAN’s, of which UNT has three, increasingly won’t work with Novell. SAN’s are needed to support the 20+ TB of data in UNT’s various central systems (EIS, WebCT, etc.) as well as a number of the file and print servers that the CITC runs. § Imaging/content management software. UNT is in the process of writing specifications for a centralized imaging system and, for the future, a content management system. Those systems by-and-large don’t support Novell. In fact, the frustrations we’ve faced with finding products that work with Novell were and continue to be the primary reason that we started investigating alternatives to Novell’s products. CostUNT pays over $200,000 to Novell annually for the suite of products that the company provides to us (Netware, GroupWise, Zen, eDir, etc.) Since the Novell license is per head count, our growing student and staff population means that our costs rise every year (on the order of $10,000+ increase per year.) Comparable products from Microsoft can be purchased for less than $35,000, with no annual payments (updates to the products would have to be purchased periodically, at about the same $35,000, but those updates are only made about every four or five years now.) Both Novell and Microsoft have similar hardware requirements, so there is no significant difference in hardware costs by moving to Microsoft. There will be costs associated with making the migration to Microsoft’s products, primarily in implementation assistance from outside vendors, the effort needed to convert desktop software and files on the part of UNT’s network managers, and the costs associated with lost productivity of UNT’s employees as they learn the new software (primarily Microsoft’s Outlook.) Based on preliminary estimates we’ve gotten from several vendors, we’re estimating that the CITC’s out-of-pocket costs for making the transition will be approximately $350,000 to $400,000, meaning that the breakeven point on the Microsoft investment (i.e., the cost of the transition vs. the annual Novell costs) will be less than two years. The CITC will fund the colleges’ and departments’ Windows licenses to replace their Novell server software. In addition, the CITC has asked for additional funding from the administration for the purchase of blade servers that we’d make available to the departments migrating to Microsoft file and print servers at an annual “subscription” cost. Our goal is to provide the hardware and services needed to operate Microsoft servers at a lower cost than the departments can operate those servers. The services would include replicated servers (on the main campus and at the Research Park) for continuous operation if power fails or a server breaks, etc., backup of files on the server, and enterprise-level operation of the servers (redundant air conditioning, large uninterrupted power supply, backup generator, etc.) Departments would still be responsible for monitoring their servers and, more importantly, for continuing to provide the end-user support that they do now. If that funding is provided, we’ll develop a price list and a service level agreement for operation of the servers. Timeline for Moving to MicrosoftOne of the motivations that the CITC had for proposing the switch to Microsoft at this time is the mandate to cut our costs by 3% for fiscal year 2008 (the same as all other UNT departments.) Therefore, we need to drop (or at least reduce) our Novell license at the end of this fiscal year, August 2007. We want to start the transition to Exchange/Outlook in summer 2007, followed by the transition to Windows file and print servers in the fall of that year. We’re still developing project plans for those migrations, however, and those dates may shift. We may have some flexibility in the need to cease our Novell licenses at the end of this fiscal year since a portion of our Novell payments have been going into a “perpetual license” buyout fund from which we can purchase licenses for the Novell products we want to keep for a while. We’ve asked Novell for an accounting of the amount of money in that fund and how we can use it, but we think that we have built up a big enough balance to purchase all of the products that we will need. SummaryMany of us working at UNT remember the turmoil and anger among a significant portion of the campus community when the decision was made to adopt GroupWise as the faculty and staff e-mail system about 12 years ago. We certainly hope that similar emotions aren’t stirred up by the proposal to abandon that product at this time. Although we know that the switch to another e-mail system will be painful over the short term, we do believe that it’s in the best interests of the University over the long term. We welcome feedback on the proposal: please contact your representative to the IRC if you’d like to get your voice heard.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||