[luau] Linux not an end to end Solution?

[Chris Stark]

Virgil wrote:
> Someone emailed me with this diatribe. Can someone point to me that the
> below statement is not true?
> 
> Thanks, 

Hi Virgil,

Do you need links to actual research?  I don't have it immediately 
available, but I'm sure I could dig it up for you.  Although Linux 
cannot perform the duties of a Windows Active Directory (yet), the cost 
and performance are extremely attractive to anyone who doesn't have a 
limitless IT budget.

Windows->Windows has the advantage of being able to use Active 
Directory, but the reality is that AD is very under-deployed. MS is 
somewhat concerned about this lack of adoption and is actually 
attempting to force deployment of AD with its new Win2K3 server.

Most existing Windows networks fall into the categories of 1.) already 
have an NT Domain that works and have no need to screw it up, or 2.) 
don't see the need to dive into such a huge undertaking that has little 
perceived return.  Maybe Linux replacing many NT Servers, but many 
administrators are starting to see the value in supplementing NT boxes 
with Linux+Samba boxes.

So what I'm getting at is that the only irreplaceable feature in a 
Windows->Windows scenario is Active Directory, which is not even very 
widely used outside of large corporate enterprise networks (and ask 
those admins how they feel about AD).

Samba on Linux/UNIX on the other hand, can provide all of the benefits 
of an NT Domain system for the cost of hardware and very few tech labor 
hours, with the return of better performance and zero cost for client 
access licenses.  Samba is over 10 years old, and has backing by huge 
corporations like IBM and HP -- not quite a "fly-by-night" operation.

Samba (or Linux for that matter) may not have quite as slick/polished of 
a UI as Windows (not necessarily my opinion), but with less than a day's 
work, one can have an NT Style Domain system complete with an LDAP 
backend.  Samba has also been shown multiple times to meet or surpass 
the performance of NT4 and 2000 servers (especially under heavy load).

The person that mailed you clearly has no idea what they are talking 
about.  If windows is not being threatened by Linux, how would he 
explain the MILLIONS of downloads of RedHat 9 in the first week alone -- 
i.e. downloads by paying subscribers.  Millions of people were willing 
to pay for an operating system that would be freely downloadable in one 
week's time.  Hmmm...

Nobody is claiming that Linux is overtaking MS, but the evidence that 
Linux is gaining mass favor is overwhelming.  If this yahoo doesn't 
think it's true, he's quite simply ignoring reality and religiously in 
favor of Microsoft at the expense of looking like a fool.

Kinda reminiscent of the Iraqi information minister... spooky!

Chris

> 
> 
> You're going to have a tough time showing that Linux is actually either
> taking away marketshare from current Windows-based server installations
> (because obviously clients are most likely going to be Windows in a business
> environment (again, for obvious reasons), and Windows Server and Client
> provide an end-to-end solution which cannot be matched with a Linux server
> and Windows clients) or taking away from future Windows marketshare.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LUAU mailing list
> LUAU at videl.ics.hawaii.edu
> http://videl.ics.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/luau