By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols

September 29, 2003

This Article can be viewed at :

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1304571,00.asp

---------------------------------------------------------------

Sick and tired of paying Microsoft Software Assurance/Licensing 6 
prices for Windows file/print services? If that's you, you should 
learn to do the latest Samba 3 file/print server dance from the 
Samba Team.

Samba is a well-known, open-source drop-in replacement for 
Microsoft's Server Message Block (SMB)/Common Internet File 
System (CIFS) powered file and print services. The newest version, 
Samba 3, is just out, and it works better than ever with Active 
Directory.

NT administrators who are facing expensive upgrade choices as 
Microsoft plans to stop supporting NT 4 server with its 
domain-based networking on Dec. 31, 2004, should look carefully 
at Samba.

While Microsoft now offers a far better upgrade route from NT 
Domains to AD with Windows Server 2003 and Active Directory 
Migration Tool 2.0 than Windows 2000 offers for NT users, Allison 
thinks that the high cost of upgrading will convince Windows 
administrators to try Linux/Unix-based Samba. 

John Terpstra of the Samba Team goes even farther, suggesting 
that Windows shops could migrate to Samba 3 servers alone and 
abandon the W2K/Server 2003 AD paths. His reasoning is that you 
would avoid the initial costs of buying Microsoft server operating 
systems and the continuing costs of Microsoft's Licensing 6. 

Me? I can't argue with that.

It's not as radical a step as it might sound. With a Samba-only 
solution, the Windows desktop stays in place. From end users' 
perspective, their file/print operations remain unchanged. At the 
same time, the Samba Team claims that companies will see a 
significant total-cost-of-ownership savings over a Windows server 
approach.

Technically, the most dramatic change Samba 3 has to show up over 
its predecessors is that it seamlessly integrates into a Microsoft 
AD domain in both native and mixed mode while providing a sign-on 
for Unix and Linux clients into an AD environment.

In basic functionality tests (by Yours Truly), Samba does indeed 
work easily in NT Domain in mixed or native mode. For example, XP 
and Windows 2000 clients could work with shared drives on Samba 3, 
NT, W2K and Server 2003 without a hitch. And to the user's eye, 
there aren't any differences among them.

I also found, however, that an untuned Server 2003 is faster than 
untuned Samba 3-or Samba 2, for that matter. But when you take into 
account that Samba 3 is free, can run on almost any Linux or Unix 
box, and requires almost no maintenance work whatsoever, the TCO 
makes Samba a much better price and performance deal. 

Samba 3 also fully implements Kerberos 5 authentication, SMB 
signing for tamper-proof file serving sessions and SCHANNEL 
security for secure remote procedure calls. In addition, Samba 
implements UNICODE character sets.

While American and Western European IT shops could care less about 
UNICODE versus ASCII, it's a major deal elsewhere. Indeed, 
according to David de Leeuw, head of the Medical Computing Unit at 
Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, "With the release of 
Samba 3, we are able for the first time to store our files on the 
computer servers in any language we want. Filenames in English, 
Hebrew, Arabic, Russian, and scores of other languages, used by 
our staff and students, mix without problems," thanks to Samba's 
UNICODE support. 

Within and without the English-speaking IT world, Samba 3 will be 
taken seriously by those interested in alternative ways of bringing 
file and print services to their Windows users.

As for myself, I like Samba 3 a lot. I've been running it since the 
late betas that were available this summer. It runs fast, and I never 
have to worry with it. And, since I run a mixed NT Domain/AD LAN, 
that's saying something.

Indeed, I had less trouble getting Samba 3 to work with my network 
than I did with Server 2003. While I deplore Microsoft's failure to 
include backward application compatibility, Server 2003's file/print 
is the easiest Microsoft file/print serve to manage I had ever 
seen-until now. Samba is still easier and far cheaper.

Let me put it to you this way: Even if you don't like Linux, but 
you need Windows-style file/print (and not a whole lot else from 
your servers), you really owe it to yourself and your company to 
give Samba a try. When it comes to the file/print dance, Samba's 
the best step of all.



Salam,

Wiempy



Linux & Open Source Center Editor Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols has been 
using and writing about Unix and Linux since the late '80s and thinks 
he may just have learned something about them along the way.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



-- 
www.itcenter.or.id - Komunitas Teknologi Informasi Indonesia 
Info, Gabung, Keluar, Mode Kirim : [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
::: Hapus bagian yang tidak perlu (footer, dst) saat reply! ::: 
## Jobs: itcenter.or.id/jobs ## Bursa: itcenter.or.id/bursa ##
$$ Iklan/promosi : www.itcenter.or.id/sponsorship $$


:: SPONSOR -----------------------------------------------
Web hosting 1GB space cuma Rp. 65ribu/bln
Multiple website, free domain name. http://www.rakdata.com
----------------------------------------------------------

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ITCENTER/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Kirim email ke