"Bryan J. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In other words, they want a specific ADS version set and > capability. And when an older version of ADS doesn't work, they > will upgrade, paying all those upgrade costs, etc... As any > Microsoft Gold Partner, the design is that companies _must_ > upgrade _all_ clients, servers, etc... every 2-3 years. Why? > Because companies keep deploying specific Windows technologies that > require specific Windows services that only work on specific > Windows versions with specific LDAP schema and related services. > That's not even "proprietary" anymore. "Proprietary" requires > long-term support from a vendor that "values" it's own, > "proprietary" standards. > There are better terms -- "Orphanware" and "Hostageware." > You either "Orphan" yourself or you become a "Hostage" to upgrades. > Linux will *NEVER* solve the problem of "vendor lock-in." Samba > does its best in many aspects, but at some point, you have to > *CHOOSE* not to deploy an "Orphanware/Hostageware" solution.
Microsoft is basically mirroring its '90s "Superstore" profit model of software and peripherals requiring a specific PC and OS** to the network world in the 21st century. I.e., specific software and services requiring a specific PC Server and Server OS. The upgrade model becomes every 2-3 years, and that means entire IT infrastructures have to "migrate" every 2-3 years. **NOTE: Related Blog Article on the "Superstore" profit model from a Consumer stanpoint ... "6 Things To Know About Linux" ... http://thebs413.blogspot.com/2005/10/6-things-to-know-about-linux.html > That's why enterprise, *MAJOR* enterprise, maintain a separate LDAP > tree and Kerberos realms from ADS. In fact, they often use the > LDAP tree and its Kerberos realms as the "master" for the > corporation. Why? > Because when they upgrade from ADS 2000 to 2003 to "Longhorn," they > can have *1* base tree and credential reference. In other words > they synchronize to the *NON* Microsoft, Linux-hosted > "infrastructure" instead of trying to get ADS 2000, 2003 and > "Longhorn" servers to talk to each other. ;-> 90% of the complaints I see about Linux projects have *NOTHING* to do with Linux. They have to do with the fact that Linux does not solve their Orphanware/Hostageware issues any better than Windows did. It's one thing to take Microsoft Orphanware (i.e., Microsoft solutions now over 3 years old), and migrate to Linux solutions. That works. But most companies want to use Linux to not only support working with their old, Microsoft Orphanware solutions, but they _expect_ it to support the latest Microsoft Hostageware implementations. Which is why if you either have 3 choices: - Hostageware: Keep paying every 2-3 years for the full migration - Orphan: Stick with an older version, no new capabilities - Open: Build a core, open infrastructure Open directly supports not only open systems, but often directly supports Microsoft Ophanware client systems and services. Samba's RPC services work _better_ for Windows 2000, NT and 9x than Windows Server 2003. Ziff-Davis regularly confirms this. At the same time, even Microsoft has to deal with "open standards." Which is why most enterprise _still_ maintain a separate "open infrastructure" to synchronize Microsoft Hostageware with. No, the Hostageware solution doesn't work directly, but you _can_ implement SSO, shared Kerberos Realms, partitioned DNS, etc... What you're basically asking Ford to do is build an engine _today_ for the 2008 Chevy Corvette. No -- let me rephrase that. What you're basically asking those in the community (say your _neighbors_) to do is build an engine _today_ for the 2008 Chevy Corvette. *SMACK* think things through man! ;-> > If they want to do that, they *MUST* be willing to pay for > "Hostageware" upgrades every 2-3 years. I've had this discussion > over 1,000 times, and I'll have it again 1,000+ times more. If you > want it, pay Microsoft for it and quite talking about "cost and > stability." > If you want to build a _perpetual_, _flexible_ and _open_ network > infrastructure -- you use "open" systems. They exist! They have > *BEFORE* ADS was introduced. I honestly hope my wasting time to explain this (yet again) really "gets people to understand" what I educate major corporations regularly when it comes to their enterprise networks. I really, really, *REALLY* get tired of "*FIGHTING*" Linux people who are basically providing "free marketing" to Microsoft. Linux (let alone Sun Solaris and other platforms) have _always_ had _powerful_ enterprise network infrastructure capabilities. But most people don't assume so. And they still like to think in products, making Samba analogous to ADS, which it is *NOT*. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://thebs413.blogspot.com -------------------------------------------------- Fission Power: An Inconvenient Solution _______________________________________________ lpi-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss
