Keep Exchange In-House and in the Cloud With Coexistence - Page 2
With Exchange coexistence, you can keep some of the advantages of a local messaging server installation while gaining the advantages of cloud computing. Find out if it's for you.
When does coexistence work?
There are several scenarios we can consider when deciding whether we might want to go fully to the cloud, fully on-premises, or try the blended approach coexistence offers.
Scenario 1: Remote work force, local IT management and staff
My sales teams are always out on the field, and they normally do not work from office. On the other hand, I have admin and management staff working in the office.
Co-existence is right for you. Your sales teams connect to Microsoft Exchange Online directly, lowering the WAN requirements for your office network. In the meantime, your office users will connect back to the on-premise Exchange Server for fast email communications within internal employees.
Scenario 2: HQ with small branch offices
Cost wise, it's best to do co-existence. Reason being is, it does not make any sense to have the branch offices connecting back to the HQ for emailing, as this will increase the WAN usage for HQ, hence internet upgrade is required. Purchasing extra Exchange Server for each branch office will push up the cost tremendously, which is totally not an option.
Scenario 3: Larger HQ, no remote users or branch offices
My organization has more than 50 users, all under one roof.
No, do not do co-existence. Either host your mail server on-premise, or deploy BPOS fully.
Co-existence has pros and cons, but in the end of the day, management's decision boils down to the dollar sign. So what I would suggest is to convert the above scenarios (or your scenario) into dollar sign and weigh whether do host it on-premise, off-premise or co-existence.
Do you have any other scenarios that you are wondering whether you should do co-existence? Or any other scenarios that you wish to share? Feel free to comment back!