[Samba] Samba vs Windows SAK
abartlet at samba.org
Mon Mar 17 22:11:39 GMT 2003
On Tue, 2003-03-18 at 05:45, erx wrote:
> Has anyone seen this:
> 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.
When that paper was written, it was actually relatively accurate. The
thing I enjoyed most about it was the fact that we now had a very nicely
packaged 'todo' list.
As JHT points out, we are pretty well finished on getting that TODO list
Other items on the list came down to 'too much choice v MS picks it for
you', and still others picked out things that really were just plain
silly - like the different AC v LT quotas (that mess was insane!).
Finally, there is one point that they make well:
If you are a vendor, and you chose Samba, you have the costs of
integrating it into your environment - but they neglect to mention that
you also have the opportunity to integrate it into your environment -
not integrate your environment into it!
(This is what makes a Samba NAS more than a rack-mounted Windows install
Andrew Bartlett abartlet at pcug.org.au
Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team abartlet at samba.org
Student Network Administrator, Hawker College abartlet at hawkerc.net
http://samba.org http://build.samba.org http://hawkerc.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/attachments/20030318/78822919/attachment.bin
More information about the samba