Re: [Hampshire] Happy Happy Joy Joy

On Sun, 2007-09-23 at 12:05 +0100, John Cooper wrote:
> Again, like for like. You are talking about building an equivalent. I am
> saying if you buy a mail solution, it will come with all the tools to
> administer a running LDAP service. Open-Xchange, Kerio, SuSE etc.
> provide the support you need at equivalent costs. Even the free SME
> Server is a good alternative and easy to administer via its GUI.

True, but like for like is important. A domain controller provides a common set of functionality that most businesses need. Also integration and a central point of management is a nice-to-have that comes for free with AD+Exchange.

> This is a report in 2005. Things have moved on a lot since then and with
> samba 4 coming up will improve even further.

I agree, but it's like for like for windows domains. And they didn't
spend years working on an AD clone for no reason. Businesses want AD
functionality. Windows client integration and good management tools are
important, and Samba 4 will provide those needs. I have been following
Samba 4 development for a couple of years. I firmly think it will
change the server landscape.

> The free tools are that. Microsoft isn't free, you are paying for the
> GUIs. Look at Secure Computing's Ironmail and Webwasher's and they are
> expensive, but all the functionality is GUI managed. If you are running
> a web hosting company and want an easy to run service, you buy Ensim
> Pro. You can use free alternatives but you will not have any support and
> will need a greater knowledge.

But why are the free tools *so* bad? I know they have had to deal with
diversity of what people choose to use but it would be nice if a Linux
distrib provided a set of admin tools for a given common configuration.

> To say it just works in a few clicks may be true but how often does it
> go wrong and you don't have a clue why? We had to set up loads of
> Window's trusts using "point and click" and many just didn't work. We
> had to get a Windows "expert" in to fix it. Ended up editing lmhosts as
> they just wouldn't resolve. He couldn't telnet on port 25 or 80 either.

It's true. If your Windows setup breaks, it may very well just be
unfixable. If you break your Linux setup, it's because you broke it.
But like I said, closed solutions would never be my choice. I like to
have a firm grasp on the things I work with and I'd pick Linux every
time. But it's rarely my choice and I understand why people choose an
expensive Windows server in a Windows environment.