Good Lord, I can practically hear it from here: <Dean> "Bloody Americans." </Dean>
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe > Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 11:44 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT:Gone Badly so....Biggest AD Gripes > > Kennedy... Or was it Roosevelt? > > <EG> > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan > Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 11:20 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT:Gone Badly so....Biggest AD Gripes > > Given your retro appearance, maybe - but not likely. ;o) > > So, just hold old do you put me at Dean? Would you believe > me if I told you > I was born shortly after Kennedy's Inauguration (mere days)? > > Rick > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Wells > Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 9:53 AM > To: Send - AD mailing list > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > ... and as for being older than you, I've got shirts in my > closet older than > you. > > > -- > Dean Wells > MSEtechnology > * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://msetechnology.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Carlos Magalhaes > Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 10:45 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > Hah - older than me :P but doesn't the saying go - "the older > you are the > wiser..." > > Carlos > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Wells > Sent: 08 August 2005 04:11 PM > To: Send - AD mailing list > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > Not at all my young Jedi, my MCNI # is 7 (would have been 5 IIRC but I > wanted to be able to write is as 007 -- how sad :o). > > The first version of NetWare I ran was 4.7 I believe, it > supported only dumb > terminals as clients and the server ran on a Motorola proc. > ... at that time > they were known as Innovative Systems. When the Intel > product came out > (v2.0 I believe), the shell and the server-side kernel were > both monolithic > binaries; ANET2.exe and NET$OS.EXE methinks. > > Believe me, I'm old .. but still not as old as Joe :o) > > -- > > Dean Wells > MSEtechnology > * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://msetechnology.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ruston, Neil > Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 4:11 AM > To: '[email protected]' > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > You're obviously too young to remember: > > LSL > NE3200 > IPXODI > NETX > > :) > > VLMs made life a whole lot easier. > > neil > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Wells > Sent: 05 August 2005 16:59 > To: Send - AD mailing list > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > > Grin ... you're right of course, I think you're referring to > compiling an > ANET3 EXE, but don't misunderstand me, I loved some of the > older shells or > requestors like the VLMs, for nostalgic purposes - > > LSL > NE3200 > IPXODI > VLM > > C:\>F: > > F:\LOGIN> > > ... ah, even now I get a gooey comfortable feeling. :o) > > It's the Windows NT/2000 client I was referring to that used > to create a new > and different local SAM account each time you logged on as a > NetWare account > ... garbage! > > -- > > Dean Wells > MSEtechnology > * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://msetechnology.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Darren Mar-Elia > Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 11:47 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > I don't know Dean--I kinda liked the old Netware client. I > mean, what great > job security. No one who didn't know any better couldn't > possibly figure out > the right combination of ODI drivers, VLMs and client shells to bind > together to actually get access to Netware. The best was the > Netware 2.x > client, where you had to run something equivalent to a > compiler to actually > create a client. After that, VLMs seemed like going to the moon... > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Wells > Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 9:01 AM > To: Send - AD mailing list > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > All great points, lets not forget the less than > well-thought-out client they > produced (current versions are better but still remain lesser > integrated > than that of Windows' native ability) ... utterly, utterly > pathetic attempt. > Arrogance and a distinct lack of marketing (when compared to the > competition) was also a contributing factor IMO. > > > -- > > Dean Wells > MSEtechnology > * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://msetechnology.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Darren Mar-Elia > Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 7:22 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > I think there were a few very important reasons why Netware > lost the battle. > I remember when NT first shipped the mantra was, "Netware is > great for file > and print and NT is great for applications". Netware NLMs > were impossible to > develop and that meant that folks either developed apps on NT > or more likely > Unix (at the time). Apps are sticky, file and print is not. > Over time, as > Windows ruled the desktop and people realized that file and print was > commodity and that arguing about whether Netware was a better > file and print > server than NT became meaningless compared to better desktop/server > integration, Novell lost out. Novell failed to keep up, in my opinion. > The > market was theirs to lose...and they lost it. Proof once > again that great > technology coupled with bad management is just as bad as bad > technology. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ruston, Neil > Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 5:05 AM > To: '[email protected]' > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > IMHO Novell lost out to MS due to the fact that Netware 3 was > so clunky > (ultra stable but diff to manage once you deployed more than > ~100 servers). > Netware 4/NDS had issues in its first version and quickly > lost traction, > leaving MS and NT to pick up the thread. > > It was for this reason that very few orgs deployed NDS across > a large env - > NDS was more than capable of supporting 100K users and the > management/maintenance/support would have far simpler that it > was for NT. > > Once NT gained the upper hand, momentum took over and led us > to where we are > today. > > neil > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe > Sent: 05 August 2005 00:35 > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > > Yeah, ADAM scared some folks in the widget factory as well. > On the positive > side, it can register in AD so you can chase them down that > way via their > SCPs. If they don't register, well then that will be fun to > chase as it will > be like trying to find rogue AD's, network scanning but even > worse, any port > can be used... If all machines are part of a domain or > forest, you could set > up policies to block the running of the ADAM binaries I guess. > > I like AD/AM more from the standpoint that I think it can > hint as to where > AD will go. > > What is the largest Enterprise deployment of NDS that anyone > has seen? I > haven't seen anything larger than say 5000 or so users, it > seems that the > management got too difficult even at that level, but then I > never looked > really close at it, so possibly the admins and designers > involved weren't > that great. I certainly have never heard of any 100k globally > distributed > NDS implementations. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ruston, Neil > Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 11:16 AM > To: '[email protected]' > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > Re ADAM: > I am unsure about this technology. I can handle multiple > instances of an AD > database which all provide a common service, but ADAM *could* lead to > anarchy, where anyone can fire up an instance of their own home grown > directory. That thought scares me and right now I do not know > how a large > org would manage such a scenario. I'd prefer to keep control, > but have a > more elegant and modular way to patch the various components > which exist > throughout the infra. > > Re your last para: > 1. NDS was simpler to design IMHO and thus never attracted > large design > rates 2. AD has greater penetration, as you say and so demand is thus > greater. > 3. Directories themselves have a much larger scope today than > they ever did. > Compare NT and what we did with it vs AD and what we do with > that. A good > architect who can "juggle" all the necessary directory > "balls" can demand a > better rate than someone who merely installs a few NT domains and WINS > servers [no disrespect intended - I was once in the latter > category myself] > 4. I haven't supported Netware/NDS for 10 years, so cannot reap those > benefits that the admins may realise one day :) [I doubt that > day will ever > come, however.] > > neil > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe > Sent: 04 August 2005 15:01 > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > > No worries, probably the fault of my reading versus your > writing. I have > been known to have trouble reading English which is why I > tend to write more > than read. :o) > > Yes absolutely on the modular piece. I completely agree on > this direction as > well and exactly what I argued for with them. Personally, I > look at AD/AM > with great hope as to what it can eventually become, it could > be the way to > get to that without having to drag everyone there. People > just jump to some > AD/AM like system at some point when they want to and leave > legacy behind > but still have AD for some time available to anyone not ready. > > Agreed on well worth it. > > The last comment I find interesting. Is the earnings based on > the relatively > low penetration of NDS or simply NDS folks are just payed > less? I would > expect, if NDS marketshare gets to even lower points, that > NDS admins would > start to fetch bonus pay. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ruston, Neil > Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 4:41 AM > To: '[email protected]' > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > What you state in the first para is what I was trying to say, > but obviously > not eloquently enough :) I am aware that many of the ppl here > have never > used NDS so have no clue what it can offer. Hence the irony, > that we/they > ask for features that Novell offered 12 years ago in Netware 4. > > Re the second para - I guess I'm asking that AD be considered > a modular, > independent app that runs on Windows. As you say, that may "scare" MS > somewhat, but it would make AD a lot more palatable and > attractive to those > who have yet to deploy. > > Local SAM - large changes needed yes, but I think they are > *well* worth it > :) > > I have yet to find any good reasons for giving up NDS (except that AD > architects earn more than NDS equivalents :)) > > neil > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe > Sent: 04 August 2005 02:05 > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > > I am not sure it is a people wanting NDS/Netware features as > much as it is > people wanting certain features that would make their lives > easier and it > just so happens Novelle had come to some of the same > conclusions previously > on what to add or were bugged for them. A lot of the things > being asked for > would probably be asked for on other directories as well > unless they were > already there. And then on the others, people could be asking > for features > that AD already has implemented, but not necessarily because > they have used > AD. > > Yeah I also like the idea of upgrading AD outside of the OS. > I really tried > to push for that in April 2004 at Redmond. There was a mixed > response of > that will never happen and never say never, that is an > interesting idea > followed up by would I be willing to pay for AD as a separate product. > My > response to that was if the price of the OS product went down > in a similar > way. Of course it also opens up MS to more competition there. > Someone else > just may come out with an AD like product to run on Windows > if it was sold > separately and someone knew they had to buy it from someone. > Now who could > that be? > > I like the last one too... A machine becomes part of a > domain, its local SAM > no longer functions. That would be some pretty massive > changes though I > expect. > > So what reasons did you come up with to remind yourself why > you left NDS? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ruston, Neil > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 4:31 AM > To: '[email protected]' > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > I always find it quite ironic that those who have never used > NDS/Netware > always seem to want NDS/Netware features, once they've worked > with AD for a > period of time :) > > I have to remind myself why I booted NDS out in preference to > NT/AD years > ago... > > Novell have been offering the vast majority of what is being > proposed here > for many years and even started to support the equivalent of > GPO to Windows > devices around 10 years ago too! > > I would add a new gripe (which Novell do support and have > done since Netware > 4) and that is the ability to upgrade the AD (or any other > component for > that matter) across an enterprise. Naturally, this means that these > components need to be more modular, but it would be great if > I could upgrade > AD from version n to n+1 by simply deploying a file/files > across all my DCs > and then re-starting AD out of hours (not a server re-start, just a > component re-start). > > Another gripe (if I may) would be my hate for local accounts. > Why do we have > / need an AD database and another database on each member > server? Again, > NDS/eDIR has a better architecture, in that all SPs exist within the > directory and none exist on the servers themselves. TCO diminished > immediately :) > > neil > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kern, Tom > Sent: 02 August 2005 23:02 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Biggest AD Gripes > > > I think what a lot of the stuff people are asking for is to > take some of the > stuff that NDS and eDir already use. Rights and login scripts > at ou's and > divivding AD as an admin sees fit. As least that's what it > seems like to me > but I haven't worked with Novell in about 4yrs. > -------------------------- > Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > ============================================================== > ========== > ==== > == > Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic > communications disclaimer: > > http://www.csfb.com/legal_terms/disclaimer_external_email.shtml > > ============================================================== > ========== > ==== > == > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > ============================================================== > ========== > ==== > == > Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic > communications disclaimer: > > http://www.csfb.com/legal_terms/disclaimer_external_email.shtml > > ============================================================== > ========== > ==== > == > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > ============================================================== > ========== > ==== > == > Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic > communications disclaimer: > > http://www.csfb.com/legal_terms/disclaimer_external_email.shtml > > ============================================================== > ========== > ==== > == > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > ============================================================== > ========== > ====== > Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic > communications disclaimer: > > http://www.csfb.com/legal_terms/disclaimer_external_email.shtml > > ============================================================== > ========== > ====== > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > ============================================================== > ========== > ==== > == > Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic > communications disclaimer: > > http://www.csfb.com/legal_terms/disclaimer_external_email.shtml > > ============================================================== > ========== > ==== > == > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
