[Samba] Samba vs Windows SAK

[John H Terpstra]

On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, erx wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I wasn't looking for a response to Microsoft. You're right, they could care
> less what the linux community thinks. What I was looking for was a response
> for those who might be trying to make a decision about whether to invest in a
> Microsoft SAK based product, or whether to try using a Linux+Samba based
> solution.
>
> The fact that we *could* demonstrate these things (but haven't) is not
> sufficient. Not to me, not to those who might be deciding.

Good. Will you contribute what is needed? It is welcome.

> As far as truth goes, I couldn't disagree more. Truth is relative; truth
> changes over time. It is affected by what you see, hear, read, and believe. I
> can affect your truth; you can affect mine. If it weren't true, there would be
> no point at all to marketing.

Truth is absolute. Either there is gravity or there is not. No matter what
you think when you jump off a tall building, whether you believe there is
gravity of not - you are still subject ot it. Now understand, gravity has
never killed anyone, but if you jump off a tall building the truth is that
hitting the ground might kill you! :)

Relative? Really? Please do not try jumping off a tall building, the truth
might hurt! Your perceptions of truth might change, but truth stands firm.

> So you know of nothing, then, that counters Microsoft's arguments?

Why don't you write what you would like to see on the Samba web site. We
do not disciminate you know. All good contributions are always welcome.


Since you asked about counters to the MS link, here are a few:

SSO:	Winbindd provides integrated single-sign-on for PAM enabled
	Unix/Linux systems.
Quotas:	Commercial Linux systems support Quotas - Samba implements this
	and the samba-team work with Linux vendors to keep this functional
	- thus this does NOT require an OEM to do anything else. The
	comment about risk is pure hyperbole.
ADS:	Samba (not Linux) can be an Active Directory member (true for
	samba-2-2.x). Samba-3.0.0 will be able to natively join and ADS
	domain.

	Samba-2.2.x and upwards DOES support inter-domain trusts.

Performance:
	When it comes to benchmarking - you can prove what you want.
	The real issue is: How does Samba on Linux compare with Win2K AS
	in a real workspace environment. We know for fact that it works
	better with fewer resources. There are a number of published
	reports that demonstrate this.

Journaling File Systems:
	There are reports that show how poorly NTFS performs with Win2KAS.
	The same reports show that a Linux reliable file system
	infrastructure can outperform Win2KAS with NTFS.

	With Linux administrators have a choice of journaling file systems
	- not so with Win2K/2003.

Integration:
	MS Windows 2000/2003 is just as much made up of many technologies
	that have been integrated, just as is Linux. When you buy a
	product like Red Hat Advanced Server or United Linux - the
	integration work has been done for you - just like when you buy
	a Microsoft product.

RAID and Reliability:
	Most RAID storage vendors provide driver support for Linux as they
	do for MS Windows NT/2K/2003. Red Hat and United Linux BOTH
	integrate the vendors' drivers into their products AS DO
	Mircosoft. So to say that this requires more tweaking by an OEM
	is utter nonsense!

Certification of Drivers:
	Come on! Really? Have Microsoft checked with United Linux or Red
	Hat directly. How many of the listed certified drivers on
	Microsoft's site are truely current and up to date?

And that is just a rough list. I am sure you can do a better job. I look
forward to your contribution.

- John T.

>
>
>
> ERX
>
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: John H Terpstra [mailto:jht at samba.org]
> >Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 3:11 PM
> >To: erx
> >Cc: samba at lists.samba.org
> >Subject: Re: [Samba] Samba vs Windows SAK
> >
> >
> >On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, erx wrote:
> >
> >> Has anyone seen this:
> >>
> >http://www.microsoft.com/windows/Embedded/sak/evaluation/compare/adva
> >ntage.asp
> >>
> >> And has anyone from the Samba team posted a response? It seems like some of
> >> the information presented there is contrary to what I know about Samba.
> >
> >Why reply to Microsoft? What will it achieve?
> >As things stand we can demonstrate that they are not in touch:
> >	- Not with their own customers
> >	- Not with Samba capabilities
> >
> >As to 'Truth' - customers make up their own minds on that one. No one can
> >prove 'Truth' to anyone.
> >
> >- John T.
> >--
> >John H Terpstra
> >Email: jht at samba.org
>
>

-- 
John H Terpstra
Email: jht at samba.org