Hello all, I got my CNA in 96 and my CNE4 in 97 and updated to CNE 5 in 00. I'll pass on the CNE6 (maybe). I'll also pass on the Windows/NDS argument. I designed three NW 4.x networks (including my current employer). Then I took our firm to a native ADS network. Either one will get the job done. I was pretty much a Novell dude when we decided to move to W2K ADS - and used the opportunity to learn, learn, learn and then learn more about Windows networking.
>From memory, the items that come to mind are (and these are minor IMHO): 1. The way file system rights are issued - Novell was simpler. 2. The delay when a user is added or removed from a group. 3. NW4.11 took MUCH less processor power than W2K ADS. Put you DC's on dedicated machines - don't let them serve files or printers. We are doing MUCH MUCH more with our Windows servers than we ever did with our NetWare servers - DHCP, DNS, IIS, Domain logins (and some more that I can't remember). We are looking into using GPO's for software installation. I did play around with the Novell App Launcher and ZEN works and they worked ok. I sure like the granularity of using GPO's for security purposes. I pretty much agree with what Roger Seielstad said about supporting two different networks. The original post asked for justification. You have to ask yourself what products do you see your firm using in the future - that will be a good pointer. IHMO the Windows environment has more applications available for it. You might try to find some market share figures to go along with this. Snip "Win2k's speed degradatio for file access compared to Novell . . ." With the same files / workstations / and backup software, we have show no difference in user's access times - and our across-the-network tape backup times decreased. The only difference was a new server with W2K. Details available upon request. Snip "loss of abilities to manage users and printers" Huh? What? I can manage both just fine on W2K. I always hated the fact that I had to kill the user's connections to clear a single file that was locked. I can now do that on W2K = more management abilities. No more PCONSOLE thank you. Also, Client32 always broke AutoCAD. Snip "For the time since the company started, I've been asked to provide reasons to . . . " sounds like an opportunity for you. Jump on it. Snip "The Netware folks say that Novell needs SCSI hardware, and have estimated six grand to get everything back up" Windows hard drives cost the same (sorry, couldn't resist). Sounds like a last-ditch attempt by these folks to keep NW. If your employer wants a network, get RAID SCSI... If your employer won't spring for the cost of doing it right, upgrade employers. So far as our experiences - We purchased new servers and inserted them into the network one at a time. We started with tape backup and then moved on to the network support services (DNS, DHCP). Then move your data over. Get lots of CPU and RAM for your DC's. Leave the old server intact for a while (this saved me once). HTH, Devin L. Meade, CNE, MCP Network Administrator Frankfurt-Short-Bruza www.fsb-ae.com -----Original Message----- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad@;inovis.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 8:18 AM To: NT 2000 Discussions Subject: RE: Novell You slept through the press announcement too? http://www.novell.com/products/netware/ ------------------------------------------------------ Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA > -----Original Message----- > From: Lum, David [mailto:DLum@;textronfinancial.com] > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:06 AM > To: NT 2000 Discussions > Subject: RE: Novell > > > Wow. There's a Novell 6.x? > > Dave Lum > Former CNA - Novell 4 ('96) > Hired in '96 to administrate an NT4/NW 3.11 network(�?) > Now admin NT/2K only. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad@;inovis.com] > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 05:42 AM > To: NT 2000 Discussions > Subject: RE: Novell > > > As I read his email, the current network is Novell and AD > together - I might > > - snip - > > While I'm not convinced that NDS is superior to AD[2], I'm > willing to assume > that it has its benefits. The question that needs to be > answered is do those > benefits significantly outweigh the complexity, cost, and > supportability of > running a Novell/AD mixed environment? The supportability > thing is key, IMO, > because each day there are fewer and fewer qualified Novell > admins, and at > that, I'd bet the ones that are out there are much more familiar with > NetWare 4.x than 6.x. > > Roger > ------------------------------------------------------ > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE > Sr. Systems Administrator > Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity > Atlanta, GA > > [1] Gartner, Meta, et al > [2] Nor do I wish to start that argument. I'm not gonna run > out and buy > Novell anytime soon. > > ------ > You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > ------ You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% ------ You are subscribed as [email protected] Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
