SLES9 vs. Windows Server 2003 In A Windows Network 21
Gsurface writes "Can SLES9 be a viable server solution as an answer to using a Windows 2003 Server? This article compares these two server products in a small to medium sized Windows network environment. The comparison covers areas such as reconfigurability, basic administration tasks, server tasks, file system performance, overall cost and user/computer management. These are basic functionalities that every network server needs to provide. Overall, makes for a good Saturday read." (That's "Suse Linux Enterprise Server," if you're not up on your acronym soup.)
Lack of decent LDAP single sign on UI is a mystery (Score:5, Insightful)
I've gone through the trouble of getting everything I needed to get LDAP sign ons working in Linux, samba and Zope, but in the end the process was ugly as sin. It turned out to be waste of time because I couldn't delegate managing this system to non-technical people without giving them a course in things like Unix UIDs, LDIF, and LDAP schema.
With all the tremendous work being done on the Linux desktop, the lack of a cross machine/cross application sign on front end, when a robust and scalable back end already exists, is utterly mystifying to me.
Novell is LDAP. (Score:3, Insightful)
Why doesn't some Linux distro ship with LDAP configured with everythign it needs including the appropriate schema and a decent front end for setting up Unix and Samba logins?
Dude, if Novell can't do Directory Services, then no one can.
Re:Not to sound like an M$FT apologist, but... (Score:1, Insightful)
You sound like an M$FT apologist.