The FAQ's for Business Contact Manager 2007 (BCM2007) say:

My company uses Exchange Server to manage our email and communications. Can
I use Outlook with Business Contact Manger with Exchange Server?
Yes.

But I cannot find any information on how to set it up.

Here is what I am use to with Outlook and what I need to happen for BCM2007:
I put something in my dairy on my desktop PC and by the magic of Exchange,
shortly afterwards it appears in my diary on my laptop. I do not have to
press any buttons to sync, I do not even have to been in the same country,
let alone the same network, Exchange just sorts it out (it even syncs to my
phone). Fabulous.

To test BCM2007 I installed on it on a third machine and connected it to my
hosted Exchange service (the host is 1and1).

And I can see that BCM2007 is passing some data through the Exchange
server, because both my desktop and laptop (using a copy of Outlook 2007
which does not have Business Contact Manager installed), now have a tab for
Business Contact Manager has appeared under contacts, without me having do
anything (although I cannot open up the tabs).

However, if I install fourth machines with BCM2007 and point it to use the
Exchange account, all other Exchange data is correctly synchronized between
the two, but not the data from BCM2007. I can add a contact in BCM2007 on one
machine and it never appears on the other.

I think the problem is that BCM2007 stores its data in a different PST files
to the Exchange mailbox. I have noticed in the folder listing a Mailbox and a
BCM entry. Obviously only the mailbox entry gets to go to the Exchange server
and thereby replicated to the other machines.

What I cannot find is a way to tell BCM2007 to store its stuff in the
exchange server.

Microsoft says it will do it, but I cannot find any documentation on how to
set it up. Do I need to change a setting on the PCs or does my host need to
change something on their servers?

Well, Ratbat, welcome to BCM!

Microsoft didn't exactly LIE, but they didn't tell you the whole truth.
Yes, BCM works with Exchange to synchronize the tasks and appointments and
email from Outlook but NO, not the BCM contacts. Those are synched
separately from Exchange. You setup a "master" PC with a "master" BCM
database and go through the process to share the BCM database and then allow
others to connect to it (documented in other posts here). So, BCM synchs
and Exchange synchs and you're then up to date.

If you're using a dedicated server at 1and1, you could use a VPN connection
and host your BCM db there. Or, setup a PC in your office and synch when
you come back to the office and connect to the LAN.

HTH,
Lon

___________________________________________________________
Lon Orenstein
pinpointtools, llc
(E-Mail Removed)
Author of Outlook 2007 Business Contact Manager For Dummies
Author of the eBook: Moving from ACT! to Business Contact Manager
800.238.0560 x6104 Toll Free (U.S. only) +1 214.905.0401 x6104
www.pinpointtools.com


"Ratbat" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:96B69767-7A8C-49FB-A2FB-(E-Mail Removed)...
> The FAQ's for Business Contact Manager 2007 (BCM2007) say:
>
> My company uses Exchange Server to manage our email and communications.
> Can
> I use Outlook with Business Contact Manger with Exchange Server?
> Yes.
>
> But I cannot find any information on how to set it up.
>
> Here is what I am use to with Outlook and what I need to happen for
> BCM2007:
> I put something in my dairy on my desktop PC and by the magic of Exchange,
> shortly afterwards it appears in my diary on my laptop. I do not have to
> press any buttons to sync, I do not even have to been in the same country,
> let alone the same network, Exchange just sorts it out (it even syncs to
> my
> phone). Fabulous.
>
> To test BCM2007 I installed on it on a third machine and connected it to
> my
> hosted Exchange service (the host is 1and1).
>
> And I can see that BCM2007 is passing some data through the Exchange
> server, because both my desktop and laptop (using a copy of Outlook 2007
> which does not have Business Contact Manager installed), now have a tab
> for
> Business Contact Manager has appeared under contacts, without me having do
> anything (although I cannot open up the tabs).
>
> However, if I install fourth machines with BCM2007 and point it to use the
> Exchange account, all other Exchange data is correctly synchronized
> between
> the two, but not the data from BCM2007. I can add a contact in BCM2007 on
> one
> machine and it never appears on the other.
>
> I think the problem is that BCM2007 stores its data in a different PST
> files
> to the Exchange mailbox. I have noticed in the folder listing a Mailbox
> and a
> BCM entry. Obviously only the mailbox entry gets to go to the Exchange
> server
> and thereby replicated to the other machines.
>
> What I cannot find is a way to tell BCM2007 to store its stuff in the
> exchange server.
>
> Microsoft says it will do it, but I cannot find any documentation on how
> to
> set it up. Do I need to change a setting on the PCs or does my host need
> to
> change something on their servers?
>

Lon,

Thanks for taking the time to reply Lon. That’s a whole big fib from
Microsoft there. There is a big difference between their “yes� in the FAQ’s
and the reality of the situation. I hope someone from Microsoft is reading
this post and feeling a little ashamed of themselves!

Without BCM all we needed to do was spend a few dollars a month on a hosted
exchange service and the job was done. We could share contacts and tasks
between different people, regardless of their location, or which PC they were
working on, or how they were connecting to the Net, it even worked with
nothing more than a web browser in an Internet Café. Now we have to buy a
server, setup the software for a BCM database, create a VPN and maintain all
of this. All just to add a second user to BCM. It is not exactly friendly for
the type of small business BCM is meant to be aimed at.

These are three Microsoft products (Outlook, BCM and Exchange) that half
work together already, the job needs to be finished off.

Enough ranting from me, the message for Microsoft is clear: Make BCM do what
your FAQ’s say it does: work with Exchange.

RatBat.

Ratbat,

Back in the bad old days of BCM v1, you could not even install BCM onto an
Outlook machine with an Exchange profile. This was neither allowed nor
supported! After 3 years MS is now so very proud of the "progress" they have
made by at least allowing what is really just a "co-existance" of BCM and
Exchange. One of the other hassles not to be overlooked by such a needlessly
complex co-existance is that you now have 2 separate (Outlook & BCM) contact
databases (folders) and the twain shall never meet. MS does not provide any
native solution to keep these 2 folders synchronized at all. BCM was created
in a vacuum without enough consideration for the reality of networking (both
work group & domain). Only with v.3 does BCM have any real workable network
features but they are separate and apart from Exchange.

Exchange is really for native Outlook users only. Because BCM is a SQL db,
it will NOT provide you with the magic and remote user convenience that
Outlook with Exchange does. I really wish that MS would just create an
Exchange based CRM tool (as either a replacement for, or an alternative to
BCM) that more gracefully fits into Outlook. An Exchange based CRM tool
could easily scale between both small business and large scale enterprises.
BCM in contrast is like an unwelcomed distance cousin who has come to squat
and take over the house with bad manners and horrible hygiene!

Check out these options: www.avidian.com or www.mxcontact.com.

-THP



Ratbat wrote:
>Lon,
>
>Thanks for taking the time to reply Lon. That’s a whole big fib from
>Microsoft there. There is a big difference between their “yes� in the FAQ’s
>and the reality of the situation. I hope someone from Microsoft is reading
>this post and feeling a little ashamed of themselves!
>
>Without BCM all we needed to do was spend a few dollars a month on a hosted
>exchange service and the job was done. We could share contacts and tasks
>between different people, regardless of their location, or which PC they were
>working on, or how they were connecting to the Net, it even worked with
>nothing more than a web browser in an Internet Café. Now we have to buy a
>server, setup the software for a BCM database, create a VPN and maintain all
>of this. All just to add a second user to BCM. It is not exactly friendly for
>the type of small business BCM is meant to be aimed at.
>
>These are three Microsoft products (Outlook, BCM and Exchange) that half
>work together already, the job needs to be finished off.
>
>Enough ranting from me, the message for Microsoft is clear: Make BCM do what
>your FAQ’s say it does: work with Exchange.
>
>RatBat.

--
Message posted via OfficeKB.com
http://www.officekb.com/Uwe/Forums.a...k-bcm/200708/1

Additional comment:

Don't even get me started about the Joke of a solution currently available
for trying to keep your BCM contacts in synch with a mobile device. I could
crash the server with such a long rant as you have never ever seen before!

-THP



mrtimpeterson wrote:
>Ratbat,
>
>Back in the bad old days of BCM v1, you could not even install BCM onto an
>Outlook machine with an Exchange profile. This was neither allowed nor
>supported! After 3 years MS is now so very proud of the "progress" they have
>made by at least allowing what is really just a "co-existance" of BCM and
>Exchange. One of the other hassles not to be overlooked by such a needlessly
>complex co-existance is that you now have 2 separate (Outlook & BCM) contact
>databases (folders) and the twain shall never meet. MS does not provide any
>native solution to keep these 2 folders synchronized at all. BCM was created
>in a vacuum without enough consideration for the reality of networking (both
>work group & domain). Only with v.3 does BCM have any real workable network
>features but they are separate and apart from Exchange.
>
>Exchange is really for native Outlook users only. Because BCM is a SQL db,
>it will NOT provide you with the magic and remote user convenience that
>Outlook with Exchange does. I really wish that MS would just create an
>Exchange based CRM tool (as either a replacement for, or an alternative to
>BCM) that more gracefully fits into Outlook. An Exchange based CRM tool
>could easily scale between both small business and large scale enterprises.
>BCM in contrast is like an unwelcomed distance cousin who has come to squat
>and take over the house with bad manners and horrible hygiene!
>
>Check out these options: www.avidian.com or www.mxcontact.com.
>
>-THP
>
>
>
>>Lon,
>>
>[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>>
>>RatBat.

--
Message posted via OfficeKB.com
http://www.officekb.com/Uwe/Forums.a...k-bcm/200708/1

On Aug 8, 1:18 pm, "mrtimpeterson via OfficeKB.com" <u8453@uwe> wrote:
> Ratbat,
>
> Back in the bad old days of BCM v1, you could not even install BCM onto an
> Outlook machine with an Exchange profile. This was neither allowed nor
> supported! After 3 years MS is now so very proud of the "progress" they have
> made by at least allowing what is really just a "co-existance" of BCM and
> Exchange. One of the other hassles not to be overlooked by such a needlessly
> complex co-existance is that you now have 2 separate (Outlook & BCM) contact
> databases (folders) and the twain shall never meet. MS does not provide any
> native solution to keep these 2 folders synchronized at all. BCM was created
> in a vacuum without enough consideration for the reality of networking (both
> work group & domain). Only with v.3 does BCM have any real workable network
> features but they are separate and apart from Exchange.
>
> Exchange is really for native Outlook users only. Because BCM is a SQL db,
> it will NOT provide you with the magic and remote user convenience that
> Outlook with Exchange does. I really wish that MS would just create an
> Exchange based CRM tool (as either a replacement for, or an alternative to
> BCM) that more gracefully fits into Outlook. An Exchange based CRM tool
> could easily scale between both small business and large scale enterprises.
> BCM in contrast is like an unwelcomed distance cousin who has come to squat
> and take over the house with bad manners and horrible hygiene!
>
> Check out these options: www.avidian.comorwww.mxcontact.com.
>
> -THP
>
>
>
>
>
> Ratbat wrote:
> >Lon,
>
> >Thanks for taking the time to reply Lon. That's a whole big fib from
> >Microsoft there. There is a big difference between their "yes" in the FAQ's
> >and the reality of the situation. I hope someone from Microsoft is reading
> >this post and feeling a little ashamed of themselves!
>
> >Without BCM all we needed to do was spend a few dollars a month on a hosted
> >exchange service and the job was done. We could share contacts and tasks
> >between different people, regardless of their location, or which PC theywere
> >working on, or how they were connecting to the Net, it even worked with
> >nothing more than a web browser in an Internet Café. Now we have to buy a
> >server, setup the software for a BCM database, create a VPN and maintainall
> >of this. All just to add a second user to BCM. It is not exactly friendly for
> >the type of small business BCM is meant to be aimed at.
>
> >These are three Microsoft products (Outlook, BCM and Exchange) that half
> >work together already, the job needs to be finished off.
>
> >Enough ranting from me, the message for Microsoft is clear: Make BCM do what
> >your FAQ's say it does: work with Exchange.
>
> >RatBat.
>
> --
> Message posted via OfficeKB.comhttp://www.officekb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/outlook-bcm/200708/1- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

When they started BCM v1, they went out and surveyed their target
audience (small busninesses with one to three PCs) and found that an
insignificant number of them used Exchange, so they didn't do the work
to include support for Outlook with Exchange in the mail profiles.

After they shipped V1, they discovered that a significant number of
users in large companies wanted to use BCM. Small departments were
tired of waiting for the enterrpise wide CRM solution, and wanted
something to track the department's communications with their
customers. BCM looked like it fit the bill, but it didn't work with
Exchange, which most large companies use.

So they got BCM to work with Exchange in their first service pack.

However, five tears later, BCM's target audience still doesn't use
Exchange, so BCM must work without depending on Exchange to provide
storage and so on, which is why everything is stored in Sql Server,
which BCM Setup installs if not already present.

I expect that as they work there way down the list of most requested
features, they will one day use Exchange to manage data if Outlook is
connected to it. But for now, the roadmap appears to be that if your
company uses Exchange, then you are in the market for MSCRM.

I would really love to know who "THEY" are that went out and surveyed "WHO!"
Based upon the number of confused and disappointed users who post even just
here in this forum - excluding myself of course , I have almost zero
confidence in such an apologist rationale. I may seem harsh and negative but
the continuous bewildering array of confusion known as BCM displays a strong
disconnect from reality between those who design BCM and those who attempt
use it in the real world of business.

Hosted Exchange among small business is a very fast growing segment for MS.
Push email among other mobile features was a high priority to meet the
Blackberry server threat to market share. I believe that Exchange is the
platform of the future and further believe that the SQL and Exchange
platforms should be TRULY integrated vs. merely coexisting.

-THP

Luther wrote:
>> Ratbat,
>>
>[quoted text clipped - 51 lines]
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>When they started BCM v1, they went out and surveyed their target
>audience (small busninesses with one to three PCs) and found that an
>insignificant number of them used Exchange, so they didn't do the work
>to include support for Outlook with Exchange in the mail profiles.
>
>After they shipped V1, they discovered that a significant number of
>users in large companies wanted to use BCM. Small departments were
>tired of waiting for the enterrpise wide CRM solution, and wanted
>something to track the department's communications with their
>customers. BCM looked like it fit the bill, but it didn't work with
>Exchange, which most large companies use.
>
>So they got BCM to work with Exchange in their first service pack.
>
>However, five tears later, BCM's target audience still doesn't use
>Exchange, so BCM must work without depending on Exchange to provide
>storage and so on, which is why everything is stored in Sql Server,
>which BCM Setup installs if not already present.
>
>I expect that as they work there way down the list of most requested
>features, they will one day use Exchange to manage data if Outlook is
>connected to it. But for now, the roadmap appears to be that if your
>company uses Exchange, then you are in the market for MSCRM.

--
Message posted via http://www.officekb.com

A more brief way to put it:

If MS has an intended "target" audience for BCM ... they have sorely missed
the target!

-THP


mrtimpeterson wrote:
>I would really love to know who "THEY" are that went out and surveyed "WHO!"
>Based upon the number of confused and disappointed users who post even just
>here in this forum - excluding myself of course , I have almost zero
>confidence in such an apologist rationale. I may seem harsh and negative but
>the continuous bewildering array of confusion known as BCM displays a strong
>disconnect from reality between those who design BCM and those who attempt
>use it in the real world of business.
>
>Hosted Exchange among small business is a very fast growing segment for MS.
>Push email among other mobile features was a high priority to meet the
>Blackberry server threat to market share. I believe that Exchange is the
>platform of the future and further believe that the SQL and Exchange
>platforms should be TRULY integrated vs. merely coexisting.
>
>-THP
>
>>> Ratbat,
>>>
>[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>>connected to it. But for now, the roadmap appears to be that if your
>>company uses Exchange, then you are in the market for MSCRM.

--
Message posted via OfficeKB.com
http://www.officekb.com/Uwe/Forums.a...k-bcm/200708/1

Sounds like I might have touched a bit of a nerve with this one!

I do hope someone from the BCM in Microsoft gets to read this, even if
protocol forbids them to comment.

The key issue appears that Microsoft assumes small business do not use
Exchange. Which is true, they do not implement their own Exchange server, but
a huge and expanding number of them use hosted Exchange. BCM will die on the
vine if Microsoft do not wake up to that.

On Aug 10, 12:04 am, Ratbat <Rat...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Sounds like I might have touched a bit of a nerve with this one!
>
> I do hope someone from the BCM in Microsoft gets to read this, even if
> protocol forbids them to comment.
>
> The key issue appears that Microsoft assumes small business do not use
> Exchange. Which is true, they do not implement their own Exchange server, but
> a huge and expanding number of them use hosted Exchange. BCM will die on the
> vine if Microsoft do not wake up to that.

I first came in contact with what would become the BCM team when they
were out interviewing thousands of small businesses to try to figure
what product would motivate businesses to buy their first PC or
upgrade their existing software. The notion that they should build an
Outlook add-in with a certain list of features started there. I
believe Office Accounting is a later spin-off from the same original
study--some of the original BCM people moved to the OA team.

Although reading a newsgroup for any product would indicate that the
product has problems, it worth noting that typically people only visit
a newsgroup when they have a problem. As an alternative metric, I
heard that the number of V3 users passed the total number of V1 and V2
users in its first six months. At the current adoption rate, more
small businesses will use BCM than use all its competitors before the
end of the year.

Exchange and Sql are getting more integrated with each release, but I
don't expect BCM to integrate with Exchange any time soon. I wish they
would, and hosted Exchange is a neat product, but hosted Exchange will
need to double its installed base with small businesses several times
before the potential additional BCM users would pay for the
development costs. I understand there's more payback in features like
making BCM more useful for all users (better reporting, support for
vendor contacts, integration with online services, inventory
applications, more accounting integration), and moving into new
markets overseas.