Exchange 2003 Service Pack 2 (SP2) is here!


We are happy to announce that Exchange 2003 Service Pack 2 is now available for download. The RTM version number is 7638.2.


The service pack and documentation are available at www.microsoft.com/exchange.  The direct download links for the different languages are:
 
English –
http://download.microsoft.com/download/2/D/A/2DA38F90-A580-46F7-8812-63DCEC999FE5/E3SP2ENG.EXE
Italian –
http://download.microsoft.com/download/D/2/3/D239E44A-C722-448D-9BA0-01354F048498/E3SP2ITA.EXE
Japanese –
http://download.microsoft.com/download/C/A/7/CA7424F0-FFBF-400F-982D-612F118E5744/E3SP2JPN.EXE
French –
http://download.microsoft.com/download/4/5/9/4593BAA1-605E-4842-BC3B-8F051E8E8B9D/E3SP2FRA.EXE
Chinese-Taiwan –
http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/6/8/96878FB8-C723-49E9-BAE0-CF33728CC93A/E3SP2CHT.EXE
German –
http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/3/6/9364B008-21AD-4C45-92D3-D6CAA7CA73D3/E3SP2DEU.EXE
Korean –
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/A/3/6A3F5207-B6AC-4D48-BF9F-E957708B8C28/E3SP2KOR.EXE
Chinese-China – http://download.microsoft.com/download/2/C/6/2C6E0453-49B5-4A03-8BD3-F8546A0F8DC7/E3SP2CHS.EXE
Spanish – http://download.microsoft.com/download/E/0/0/E0080B1B-FE8C-40DD-ACDA-099439327593/E3SP2ESP.EXE


If you wish to read many SP2 related blog posts that we had on this site, the easiest way to access them is to go here.


– The Exchange Team

Comments (36)
  1. DanITman says:

    All I can say is look out Blackberry!

    Thanks to the Exchange team for makeing this possible. Keep up the good work.

    Here are the videos for "SP2 Week"
    http://www.microsoft.com/events/series/tnexchangeserver.mspx#Exchangesp2

  2. Charlie says:

    I agree fully, good work! However, its a real turn off to have to wait for the MSFP and the separate web admin ui for remote wipe. The road to device upgrades is long and winding.

    Cheers!

  3. Vlad Mazek says:

    Here are instructions on how to deploy Exchange SP2 on SBS:

    http://www.vladville.com/articles/exchangesp2sbs2003.asp

  4. Carlos Arras says:

    I’m trying to find more detail information about this new SP2 for the Full support for GroupWise 6.

  5. patchman says:

    Looks like the release notes page hasn’t been updated since the CTP

    This meta page for exhange 2003 sp2
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=535BEF85-3096-45F8-AA43-60F1F58B3C40&displaylang=en

    Has a link to the release notes for the SP:
    http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=52072

    The release notes state specifically that this is the CTP release, and is NOT for product release.

    "These release notes apply to the Microsoft Exchange Server 2003 SP2 Community Technology Preview (CTP). The release notes and the software included in the Exchange Server 2003 SP2 CTP download are intended for evaluation and deployment planning purposes only,
    and not for production use.
    Exchange Server 2003 SP2 CTP is unsupported pre-release software distributed for feedback and testing purposes only, and is not supported by Customer Services and Support (CSS). For questions about this technical preview, see the Exchange Server Newsgroups
    <http://www.microsoft.com/technet/community/newsgroups/server/exchange.mspx&gt; or the Exchange Team Blog."

    This can be very confusing for customers. Can you please ask the exchange team to update their readme file?

    Thanks,

  6. Exchange says:

    Thanks, patchman!

    This should start resolving correctly soon, after some replication completes.

  7. Chris S says:

    Anyone have any idea where we can get the download of the Mobile Admin tool for support of remote wipe? We are trying out DataViz’s RoadSync product on the Symbian platforms and would like to see how this process works. Any help would be great! Thanks.

  8. Vlad Mazek says:

    Chris S,

    You cannot download the utilities that are needed to run on your mobile device, those need to be provided by your device vendor (or more likely your service carrier, as they are usually the ones that own nearly all HTC-manufactured WinCE devices).

    As of 10/19/2005 there is no vendor supplying Messaging and Security Feature Pack for Windows Mobile 5.0 yet.

  9. eufreka says:

    Okay, so I am confused. Does installing SP2 alone give me access to DirectPush?

    Do I receive any additional functionality for our deployed Treo 650s?

    Is DirectPush actually buried in the not-released MSFP and thus ONLY available to FUTURE(!) WM5 devices.

    At the moment, I am feeling EXTREMELY misled by Microsoft.

  10. Vlad Mazek says:

    I am not Microsoft, so please this as a third party comment with absolutely no warranty whatsoever:

    DirectPush is a 2 part mechanism. It does not actually send the message (or appointment, or task) to your device, it just sends a trigger over the air to notify the Windows Mobile 5 device to sync. Without MSFP, you do not have the mechanism to react to the news that there are new items waiting for you.

    So without MSFP you will not be able to take advantage of this functionality.

  11. Hal Michael says:

    Another 3rd party comment…

    Eufreka, how in the world can you feel misled by MS on this??? It has been publically stated for MONTHS that it will require SP2, MSFP and WM5 devices to make this a leading edge technology. It has been discussed ad nausiasm on this blog, SmarthPhoneThoughts, HowardForums and MobileGadgetNews. Don’t blame MS for your lack of attention to detail.

  12. eufreka says:

    Nice attack comment. But here is an on-point answer: Read this thread at TreoCentral, which reveals how Microsoft quietly edited the SP2 announcement from June 6th TODAY to delete the following text: "Licensees of the Exchange ActiveSync protocol (such as palmOne, Motorola, Nokia, Symbian) can take advantage of these improvements through updates to their messaging applications or devices. The roadmap for those devices is owned and managed by the licensee."

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/showpost.php?p=827469&postcount=92

    Oh yes, I was (and many others were as well) specifically misled by Microsoft. And you don’t know ANYTHING about attention to detail, my friend!

    (Of course, this comment will no doubt quickly disappear.)

  13. Michael Kohlman says:

    I’ve been looking through the SP2 documentation and have found no reference to installing it to Exchange clusters. Is there anything we should be watching out for or any additional steps needed to install SP2 to Exchange nodes running on Win Server 2003?

  14. Michael Palermiti says:

    Hi Michael, for upgrading E2K3 clusters to SP2 please follow the steps in the KB article: 328839.

    This should be the direct link to the steps section for E2K3 Clusters:
    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;328839#XSLTH4137121122120121120120

    (Note: the KB example is about 4-nodes, but the same applies for 2-nodes.)

    Hope this helps,
    Michael

  15. Yosi says:

    I installed the SP2 and made the changes in the regestry to increase the DB size.

    How can I know/check that I made the correct changes?

  16. Michael Kohlman says:

    > Hi Michael, for upgrading E2K3 clusters to SP2 please follow the steps in the KB article: 328839.

    Just what I was looking for (and I’m sure others will be curious as well)

    Thanks Much

    Michael

  17. Rudolf Simmerl says:

    Hi Yosi,

    look for 1216 MSExchangeIS Mailbox Store events in the application log.

    hth

    Rudolf

  18. Jimmy Grewal says:

    I’m still really confused. I have several Windows Mobile 5.0 devices that have been purchased for testing the new mobility features of Exchange 2003 SP2. These are all from i-mate whose headquarters are just down the road from my house. After upgrading my Exchange server to SP2, it’s still unclear to me where I get the Messaging & Security Feature Pack for these devices.

    Is the MSFP for WM5 available yet? Where would a customer get it from when it is available? I have re-read the following web page several times and it doesn’t answer any of these questions clearly:

    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/business/5/default.mspx

    Even my former co-workers at Microsoft have no idea what the status of this component is, so I’m posting to this blog as a last resort. :)

  19. Charlie O says:

    Jimmy,

    Couldn’t agree more. The MSFP will only be released through normal device upgrades. Most of us probably suspected it but didnt wanna face it. I think the "normal" chain is something like this: MS (AKU2 with MSFP) -> OEM (HTC) -> carrier/operator (iMate, o2, orange, Qtek). Each step in the chain needs to do their implementations and testing and these things takes a lot of time. I don’t think we will see it in a official device upgrade prior to January or February. It’s a killer feature and I think it should have been better synchronized (Easy for me to point fingers ;-)

    There’s allways a chance that you have been a good boy and will have it in your christmas stocking. And wish for Microsoft Update incorporates a locally connected wm5 device to their services another christmas.

    Best regards, Charlie

  20. Jimmy Grewal says:

    Thanks Charlie, for some reason what you said doesn’t surprise me at all. This is one of those times I wish us MS alums had access to some internal DLs to provide a true end-user’s point of view on things. ;-)

    What’s most frustrating isn’t that it will take time, but that both teams (Mobility & Exchange) did a poor job of setting customer expectations. I can always call friends at i-mate or MS, but it’s a shame that it has to come to that.

    Rgds,

    -Jimmy

  21. Daniel Sheehan says:

    What happens if you don’t uninstall the IMF V1 first? I deployed SP2, got no warning about it, and now I am trying to uninstall IMF V1 and then re-apply SP2. Just wanted to confirm this was ok.

    Secondly we can remap the HTTP virtudual directory from http://www.company.com/exchange/ to http://www.company.com/2003/. Is this now possible to do so for ActiveSync/OMA in 2003? It wasn’t in SP1, which required use of /exchange/ which is a problem in our current enviornment (long story).

    Thanks,

    Dan.

  22. Jimmy, I don’t think it’s fair to say that MS didn’t set customer expectations. At TechEd, when the MSFP made its debut, the presentations and demos all made it very clear that it would only be available from OEMs and carriers, and that MS had nothing to do with it. I’m sure that if it were up to the MED or Exchange teams, they’d be spamming the world with MSFP like the Windows team did with XP SP2– it’s a huge competitive advantage for them, so they have nothing to gain from slow-playing it.

  23. Richard says:

    Paul Robichaux: It is interesting that you chime in here on this. I emailed you on 6/21 seeking your help in finding out more info (due to the lack of response from MS officially). Here’s that message:

    "Paul,

    Perhaps you could give me some helpful guidance. I have read a great deal about the upcoming Exchange 2003 Service Pack 2 and related Mobile 5 Feature Pack.

    Somewhat cryptically dispersed throughout all of the official/semi-official/unofficial communication is the suggestion that 3rd Party Exchange Activesync licensees (Palm, Nokia/Symbian, DataViz, Motorola, etc.) have *some* access to new features/functionality. However, absolutely NOTHING I have found gives ANY indication of the new features (or should we call them new "limitations") available.

    Of course, it is understood that actual 3rd party implementation is subject to the Licensee’s own programming update decisions…BUT…

    Will 3rd Party devices have access to DirectPush? Contacts? Tasks? Notes?

    Thanks for any additional information you may have,

    —–

    You did not respond…which is basically the response I and others are getting from everywhere…including on this blog!

    I note also that the original MEC docs have been recently edited to delete some of the relevant information…

    Personally, I now suspect that MS is proactively preventing PalmOS Treos from having access to Direct Push in order to further the upcoming 700w. (Something I consider very anti-competitive; but as you say, sure to be a "huge competitive advantage for them.)

    What I know for sure, is that there is no Official Statement that spells everything out. So either the obfuscation is intentinoal or idiotic.

    You know, I talked to the DataViz folks for months, but then, magically, they dropped all Palm Support (basically) in their RoadSync product…I wonder why?

  24. Jimmy Grewal says:

    Paul, I wasn’t at TechEd…so it doesn’t matter what was presented there. Neither were 90% of Microsoft’s Exchange customers. The point is that to this day, none of the marketing materials on the Exchange or Windows Mobile site make it clear where or when a customer can get access to this Feature Pack…which I think is a bit silly.

  25. kclemson says:

    Hey all, sorry for the late response on this but I was looking into this editing thing, and I can tell you this was a simply an honest mistake made during an update to the web site. I spoke to the folks who are in charge of updating this site and what happened was this text was inadvertently removed during the process of updating it for the final release of SP2. Once the error was brought to their attention they updated the site to include this information. This was just a simple case of human error.

    I can tell you that our licensee program is very important to us, and we are super excited about some of the new device development that is underway with our ActiveSync licensees taking advantage of SP2. I asked the guy in charge to write up a blog post about it, we’ll post that soon.

    – KC Lemson

  26. eufreka says:

    KC,

    Your comment seems quite disingenuous.

    Strikingly, after conducting a word for word comparison of the original and modified versions, this was the ONLY material deleted!

    WORSE, the text that they "restored" is significantly different from the text they deleted! One has to wonder why they simply didn’t paste back the original wording… Here is the NEW wording:

    "Licensees of the Exchange ActiveSync protocol can take advantage of these improvements through updates to their messaging applications or devices. The roadmap for those devices is owned and managed by the licensee."

    Hmmmm, they LEFT OUT THE NAMES of the EAS licensees. That seems a little strange, doesn’t it? Especially since they were there before!

    Again, at this point, as I understand it, there are about a million Treo 650s that could utilize Direct Push tomorrow, with just a minor update to their pre-installed VersaMail application.

    Why isn’t ANYONE talking about THAT?!?!? And by anyone, I mean the numerous professional journalists busy reporting on everything BUT this….

    The possible choices:

    Microsoft won’t let Palm update the Treo 650. (newsworthy?)

    Palm "decided on its own" to not update the Treo 650. (newsworthy?)

    Either Palm or Microsoft or both of them together ARE going to update the Treo 650. (newsworthy?)

  27. Hal Michael says:

    eufreka, my apology if you took my last comment as an "attack". Not so. Sorry.

    I must not understand your concern. Are you saying that MS posted somewhere that the Treo 650 would upgraded to WM5?

  28. J-P says:

    We just started testing SP2 and getting an error at the ActiveSync sub component install. Error 0xc0070643. However, SP2 seems to have installed. At least according to System Manager…

    Any idea?

    By the way, MBSA is still not up to date and is reporting that SP2 isn’t release yet.

  29. eufreka says:

    Hal: Yes, I took your statements, "Eufreka, how in the world can you feel misled by MS on this???…. Don’t blame MS for your lack of attention to detail." as an attack.

    What I don’t understand is your kneejerk defense of them, given that you are not familiar with the facts.

    In its original announcement of Exchange 2003 SP2, Microsoft said EXPLICITLY that Palm (and Nokia, Symbian and even Motorola) COULD utilize DIRECT PUSH features of Exchange SP2. As continuing evidence of that FACT, please note that another EAS licensee, DataViz, has already developed and is previewing a working SYMBIAN UIQ client that does include Direct Push!

    But behind the scenes, some strange things have happened (as described earlier in this thread and via the included external links)…and the Conspiracy Theory interpretation is pretty simple:

    Even though Palm is an EAS licensee and Microsoft has explicitly said they could update their existing devices to utilize the Direct Push feature–there is absolutely NO DISCUSSION of this by the media!?!?!?!

    Even though DataViz is an EAS licensee and originally announced its intention to produce a PalmOS version of RoadSync with MORE features than VersaMail; after the announcement of Exchange 2003 SP2, DataViz basically dropped all development of the PalmOS client, and publicly changed their Product Matrix to indicate they would NOT produce a Direct Push enabled client for PalmOS, even though they CAN, and even though they already have produced one for Symbian!?!?!?

    What other event occurred between the original announcement of Exchange 2003 SP2 and today? Microsoft and Palm announced the WM5-based Treo 700w.

    Reductionist thinking says that these things are related, and that view is reinforced by Microsoft’s "quiet, behind-the-scenes" re-editing of historical documents to remove language that is no longer "convenient."

    After all, as I have repeatedly stressed (along with others), all evidence suggests that the Treo 650 is (and the other EAS-enabled PalmOS devices with VersaMail are) emminently suitable for upgrade to include Direct Push capability.

    So, I feel it is well past time to settle the issue, and cannot understand why the "professional journalists" that supposedly cover these issues (and companies) seem so reluctant to either understand or pursue the matter. And why, despite my own repeated inquiries, I cannot get an answer myself:

    Will Palm update the Treo 650’s software to enable Direct Push functionality? If, so, when? If not, why not?

    Why does DataViz consider a market of 2+ million (today) PalmOS devices too small for it to bother porting its Direct Push-enabled RoadSync client? (Especially if there is no competing application or update from the manufacturer.) Remember, the sofware would be fully usable on ANY wireless PalmOS PDA, as well as on both the Treo 600 and the 650…

    Hal, this is not a full explanation of the issue; only the highlights. But, really, what is NOT newsworthy in this situation?

  30. Hal Michael says:

    eufreka, clearly we drink at different water coolers and must read different blogs, forums, etc.

    "In its original announcement of Exchange 2003 SP2, Microsoft said EXPLICITLY that Palm (and Nokia, Symbian and even Motorola) COULD utilize DIRECT PUSH features of Exchange SP2." I think the key word here is COULD.

    I feel like I am missing something in this conversation. Can you give a specific example of someone from MS or Palm saying that the 650 WILL BE upgraded?

  31. eufreka says:

    Hal: You must spend more time at the water cooler than I, but I guess the good news is that you appear to now agree that Microsoft DID say that Palm could update its EAS-enabled devices to utilize Direct Push.

    Clearly, that means that (contrary to what you previously claimed) while MSFP might be needed in new WM5 devices, it is NOT required in NON-WM5 devices. (Again, I say AGAIN, that is supported by the existence of DataViz’s Symbian UIQ client that features Direct Push.)

    So, that brings me back to a simple question that apparently ONLY I (and a couple of others) are interested in:

    Since Palm *can*, WILL Palm update the Treo 650’s software to enable Direct Push functionality? If, so, when? If not, why not?

    Now, granted YOU may not be interested in the answer to that question, but I truly am. And I would think many other Treo 650 users (and LifeDrive users, too, for that matter) would be interested also.

    Sure, I have other questions, but they are related to the fundamentals of how this is all playing out. I for one am simply STUNNED that apparently NOT ONE journalist has asked Palm this question (let me repeat it):

    Since Palm *can*, WILL Palm update the Treo 650’s software to enable Direct Push functionality? If, so, when? If not, why not?

    So, really, Hal, as I asked you before (setting aside your personal prejudices about the issue), what is NOT newsworthy about that question?

  32. Hal Michael says:

    Okay, first things first: Who said the Treo 650 will be upgraded for direct push. Names, dates, places or publication, if you please.

    Second, are you aware that Direct Push is an entirely different technology from today’s AUTD? Are you also aware that not only would Palm have to rewrite the code including drivers, the carriers would have to test and certify the upgraded device for their network? And who would bear the expense of supporting said upgrade? And all of this on top of the fact that Palm did not even license the entire ActiveSync product for the 650 to start with?

    Now, before you go off half cocked, I am interested in upgrades. In particular there is a large installed base of SMT5600 and MPx220 users, of which I am one. I would love to just upgrade and have all the new stuff. But it is simply is not going to happen. Good for you if Palm elects to go the upgrade path, but it was a blinding flash of the obvious that it isn’t going to happen for me.

    As I said before, I may be missing something here. So help me out and post the names, dates, places or publications where it was said the Treo 650 would be upgraded. That will give hope to all of us wanting an upgrade path. Otherwise this is a non starter.

  33. eufreka says:

    Hal: If you don’t mind, I will wait (anxiously) for more information from someone like KC Lemson or Paul Robichaux, or perhaps even Sami Khoury.

    Or better yet, hopefully, eventually, someone in the press will actually ask a few pertinent questions, such as:

    Will Palm update the Treo 650’s software to enable Direct Push functionality? If, so, when? If not, why not?

    Why does DataViz consider a market of 2+ million (today) PalmOS devices too small for it to bother porting its Direct Push-enabled RoadSync client? (Especially if there is no competing application or update from the manufacturer.) Remember, the sofware would be fully usable on ANY wireless PalmOS PDA, as well as on both the Treo 600 and the 650…

    And finally, WHY did Microsoft delete the names of its EAS licensees from the EX2003 SP2 announcement webpage?

  34. GS says:

    other than IMF V1 the new version doesnt care at all for the ip accept list under connection filtering, which means ever mail needs to pass the IMF. Any suggestion how to implement a IP-based whitelist? I cant believe this important part has been forgotten…

  35. Eufreka: I use a Treo 650 daily, and no one would be happier than me if Palm updated the device to support Direct Push. However, given their lackluster support of EAS, I’m not holding my breath.

    As for DataViz, I’m not sure why you think they think the Palm market is too small to "bother porting" the Direct Push version of RoadSync. I use RoadSync on my Treo and love it. Don’t assume that they have the resources to do every potential product at once.

    I don’t think there’s a conspiracy here. The Exchange team only stands to gain from widespread support of Direct Push, and they are working to make that happen.

  36. Kevin Bird says:

    One thing I noted, the sp2 release seems to have somewhat uncoordinated documentation. Even the page which says it has the "most up-to-date" documentation on Exchange 2003, the technical library page at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/exchange/2003/library/default.mspx , does not have any mention of anything newer than the sp1 release notes at present.

    Anyway, the purpose of this comment is to say that using some direct examples from the custom weighting file in the release notes doesn’t seem to work in my testing. I’m not sure if it’s something in my environment or not, but I had my custom weighting file suddenly stop working (none of the entries were having any influence) and seem to have narrowed it down to whenever I have a text entry of 6 characters or less, the entire file’s custom weights are no longer used, and no event log errors are logged. As soon as I remove any 6 character or less text entries, the file works again. The file is still being read by the process (confirmed by auditing) but there are no errors generated…

Comments are closed.