to samba basher

Michael Holopainen michael at
Fri Oct 6 15:51:30 GMT 2000

Normally I would not get into these things, but after reading 3. letter
similar letter from the same person.  

It really annoys me when some _______ (fill in adjective) whines about
samba shortcomings and then bash people that have made great
contribution to IT world = SAMBA.

1. SAMBA team CLEARLY states that samba is a working progress. And still
it beats heck out of ANY MS products.

2. There is samba provides list of feature NOT YET implemented on x.x.x
release and also what it can do. When have you seen micros**t
advertising their products truthfully. 

3. PRIORITIES !! I bet many Network admins would be satisfied with with
server that provides only file & print services AND ACTUALLY WORKS
!!!!!!!!!!! than server full of mickeymouse s**t like internet explorer
& mp3player + webtv_client.

4. I have set up samba servers to two different companies to act as NT
PDC (ok, maybe they do not provide all stupid gimmicks that ms has
integrated into server, BUT ), in last 2 years there has been one
problem that MIGHT have been samba related and #¤#¤%%#¤# (a bad word)
many problems with #%&#%&%& (oops, another) M$ winblows workstations. 

5. "roaming profiles" , as I understand samba_TNG supports them, I
haven't had time to try it myself, I HAVE BEEN TOO #%¤&#¤&% BUSY fixing
constantly crashing winblows workstations. 
I have been too kind to users, but now I started using image cast.
"Where are my files ? What happened to that program I installed ?"
-"They are gone, gone forever, aah, hah hah, haa. You should have read
the email, telling not to save anything on local disk."   

If I was offered a choise between getting NT Server Licence for free or
downloading samba which one would would you think I'dd choose ? 

- I'dd take the NT license AND I would sell it to some poor sucker and
continue using samba myself. 

To person calling samba team "dense" :
"Therefore Samba (current) provides NOTHING that can assist me" 
-THAT I believe, have you tried medication ? ;) 
"Hundreds of MS windows workstations..." 
-hah, you deserve that. 

To Samba Team : 
I think SAMBA team is doing great work and do not need to listen whining
of a _______.
I love samba, and I'm in great debt of gratitude to samba team, keep up
the good work. 

   Oh BTW, how much did you pay for samba ?

If you bitch this much for soft that you get for free, I wonder what you
have to say when you spend 2000-3000 usd on NT server licence plus
another 2000 for hardware that that do not choke under that that bloaded
piece of .... (I couldn't think of nothing printable)

Joe Rhett wrote:
> > > And you have over and over stated that a timeline isn't possible. Since
> > > that effective means you could quite happily deliver in Q4 2002 we can't
> > > possibly count upon having Samba function in any realistic part of our
> > > organization.
> > Yes you can - file and print. Why is PDC support essential
> > for serving files and printers ?
> Because we're not using it as a fileserver. If I just needed File & Print,
> I can do that with NFS/LPD. Are you really so dense as to believe that
> maintaining a hundred NT/98 workstations only requires file & print?
> -- Sorry, yes, sarcastic. But you're blinding yourself if you feel that
> file&print are the only things anyone needs to run a NT/98 environment.
> AND if I have to implement a superstructure of NT servers, then why don't I
> just put the disk space on them? Therefore Samba (current) provides NOTHING
> that can assist me with our current environment.
> > winbind single sign on support will be added into the 2.2.x series also
> > (for UNIXen that support nsswitch modules).
> Not being confident of what you mean by the first 3 words, will this allow
> workstations to log in and retrieve their profiles?
> > > Nobody's asking for a do-or-die date.
> >
> > But that *IS* exactly what you're asking for.
> No, it isn't. You can ignore my points and be dense all you like. I really
> don't feel that the community will offer the Samba team up as a sacrifice
> if you're a month or even a quarter late. The intention is to know when you
> _intend_ to complete it.
> > It will ship when it *WORKS*. We don't want to ship buggy software.
> Nobody's asking you to.
> > Now - does that help ? Software schedules are notoriously
> > difficult to set. It's because we're professional programmers
> > that we wont give you a date. Remember, NT5 was due to ship
> > in 1997 ! What would have happened had you based an NT5 rollout
> > strategy on that date ?
> Nobody bases their strategy on the specific date. But it gives us some
> reasonable measure to determine if we must find another strategy, if Samba
> isn't even intending to _attempt_ to be where it needs to be within our
> timelines.
> To elaborate: If you say that it'll be available in March and we know that
> our drop dead is May, we can take a chance that you'll meet your deadline.
> We'll have a backup strategy naturally.
> But if you say that you can't possibly make it before September, then we
> start implementing another strategy NOW ...
> --BTW: I saw your notes on delivery dates, you don't need to reiterate
> them. These are just examples to make the point that having a known
> timeline is helpful.
> --
> Joe Rhett                                         Chief Technology Officer
> JRhett at ISite.Net                                      ISite Services, Inc.
> PGP keys and contact information:

   --"Would you fly on airplane controlled by MS Windows ?"--
| Michael Holopainen | Valuraudantie 25 | Tel: +358-(0)9-35093825  |
|                    | 00700 Helsinki   | Fax : +358-(0)9-35093850 |
| Laserle Oy         | Finland          | email: michael at|

More information about the samba-ntdom mailing list