ZDNet Reviews Samba 2.2 43
Jeremy Allison - Sam (of the Samba team) writes "eWeek
reviewed Samba 2.2
- they seem to like it !
It's certainly encouraging to get trade coverage like
this, I'm hoping the more people who report Samba use
in their organisation to press outlets will encourage
them to cover more Open Source/Free Software products !
"
Microsoft is done... (Score:1)
Re:Samba (Score:1)
Working as a print server is one of the things that samba has shined at for a long time.... 600 PC's not a problem
yeah Cisco uses samba for their print environment for ~48000 people. Now that is not all on one server but I am sure some of the bigger buildings server several hundred people from one box.
Re:What make Samba great--typical (Score:1)
Re:SAMBA getting close to prime time... (Score:1)
Re:Good review (Score:1)
Re:Good review (Score:1)
uses a human readable config file and you might have to *gasp* compile the code they give it a
C in comparision to NT/2000's "point and drool" style of interface (or would that be "point and pray that it works and the registry doesn't get fragged so I'm screwed and have to reinstall everything and restore from backups").
Re:What make Samba great--typical (Score:1)
Absolutely! What happens when digital rights management begins to interfere with reverse engineering? Folks don't mention that the trouble that the DeCSS folks are in is a direct assault on compatibility engineering. What happens when reverse engineering of Microsoft protocols is found illegal because of rights management intellectual property laws? After all, wasn't the DeCSS code simply about linux compatibility? Of course, the kid forgot to put in region coding support, thats probably why they ended up in court %^)
Good review (Score:3)
However, after such a positive review, it grades Samba thus:
USABILITY C
CAPABILITY B
PERFORMANCE B
INTEROPERABILITY B
MANAGEABILITY B
These grades seem unjustified and unfair. Makes me wonder, what exactly is ZDNet comparing Samba to?
Samba is a good thing (Score:3)
NT/2000, and soon XP, on the desktop is still a dominant force that might take a long time to change.
But, on the server front - that is a different story.
Linux, BSD + Samba = Diversity in the back room. Can't let MS have everything.
Samba 2.2 - New, improved, and enterprise-ready (Score:3)
Inside Samba 2.2 [ibm.com]
Introduction to Samba - Key concepts [ibm.com]
Compiling, installing, and Configuring Samba for your environment [ibm.com]
Getting Samba to samba: The configuration stage [ibm.com]
Funny... (Score:5)
ZDnet (Score:5)
2. are routinely bashed for being MS biased
3. are suddenly considered a worthwhile source when they give an item of free software a good review
meaning:
1. the glowing review is meaningless, they give glowing reviews to buffed and polished turds
2. don't pat yourselves on the back too much, in case you appear two-faced
Re:not very in depth.... (Score:1)
~^~~^~^^~~^
SAMBA-TNG addresses some of the problems (Score:4)
Also, you can use LDAP instead of smbpasswd, and if you also use LDAP for the posix accounts, you have one place to store the passwords. The passwords are still stored in different fields in the LDAP schema, but keeping them in sync should be mostly trivial.
It basically has a lot of the stuff that Samba 3.0 should have. The catch is that it is still very alpha and shaky, but is also making good progress. And there is a lot of discovery sharing between the two, meaning that both projects are moving forward at great speeds.
Wait a minute... (Score:1)
Re:Hopefully.. (Score:2)
Mac OS X and Samba (Score:3)
Lets embrace and extend SMB! : )
Re:It's Everywhere Samba-faire (Score:1)
In this biz you're always learning something new - jeez they told us that in electronics school 25 year ago.
All it needs now (Score:4)
not very in depth.... (Score:2)
It's nice to have a large neutral windows friendly site give Samba a thumbs up. I personally think Samba ranks #2 next to Apache of application that trully make linux usable. I have installed several stand alone file servers in place of NT file servers. I am still not convinced that is as fast as NT server but saving a $400 liscencing fee it isn't bad. Not to mention the flexibility of configuration with SWAT.
I am in the process of making a custom server which manages engineering and architectural files. it works in conjuction with a web based app (perl) which manages jobs, hours worked and so forth. but using samba it goes a step further to manage shares initialize new jobs, and run back ups. this is somethign I woudl never dream of attempting on a windoes system.
Re:Samba (Score:1)
Working as a print server is one of the things that samba has shined at for a long time.... 600 PC's not a problem
I am unsure... (Score:1)
I am not sure that ZDNET fully understood that this is not Microsoft software and it will only erode Microsoft's installed base
ZDNET used to be a Microsoft-centric camp... Is this a wind of change or a human error? Time will tell.
Samba for Mac OS X (Score:3)
Re:Samba for Mac OS X (Score:2)
It's Everywhere Samba-faire (Score:1)
Re:Samba for Mac OS X (Score:4)
Oh, you mean like this [versiontracker.com]?
Re:SAMBA getting close to prime time... (Score:2)
NT 4.0 CAL refers file and print service, not mere authentication... at least that was true for my old CAL agreements...
Alex
SAMBA getting close to prime time... (Score:5)
We are starting to evaluate SAMBA 2.2, it's great. Our core infrastructure here is NT4 for various reasons, but our OpenBSD machines all share out the relavent portions via SAMBA 2.0. It's terrific, if I'm not at a Unix workstation and want to work on a developing website, I connect to the share in Windows and go nuts. It's terrifically powerful.
From where SAMBA was 4 years ago when I started playing with it, it's a new world. You used to need to use separate accounts and not have reasonable NT integration. This allowed you to share out files, but not seemlessly. WinBind promises to make SAMBA servers drop and forget, just administer everything from your NT groups.
For a reasonable sized office (>10 people) running Windows, I think you'll be happiest with an NT 4.0 Domain with a PDC and BDC, but you can then do your file sharing off your SAMBA boxes. This saves a LOT on NT CALs, as you don't need NT CALs for PDC/BDC access, just file/print sharing. Let SAMBA handle that, and use NT as a domain controller. That way you have central logons without the expense. The cost of two NT servers isn't bad, the cost of NT CALs as your office grows and multiple file servers as access speed matters makes SAMBA great.
Additionally, if you do any web development, share our your site tree and you can edit files from anything. It's great, whether you are using Linux w/ smbmount, Windows with CIFS networking, MacOS Class w/ Dave, or MacOS X w/ Sharity, you have all your files accessable and can be editted locally. That sure beats SSH/Emacs.
Alex
Re:Samba for Mac OS X (Score:1)
--
Re:The Samba feature I like most... (Score:3)
If ever there was a glowing example of "Security through obscurity is no security at all", that's it.
And please, it's spelled "pr0n". We have standards here.
--
Re:Good review (Score:1)
Re:SAMBA getting close to prime time... (Score:1)
I think you'll want to reread those EULAs - unfortunately you will need a CAL for every machine that authenicates against an NT DC.
Clueless reviewers (Score:1)
I take it they've never used Samba aliases then? And the ability to sync
--
jambo
system.admin.without.a.clue
We are getting there... (Score:4)
For a long time, the Open Source community has been suffering from the lack of software which is good for customers. Luckily, it is changing these days.
For the purpose of this post, I'd like to differentiate between "plain" good software, and consumer-good software. Just "good" means well-engineered. For example, Linux kernel is very good software. It can be used as such, for instance, in embedded applications. However, customers are interested in the more advanced layers. Therefore, the Linux kernel is useless unless it is used as a base for software which is both good in its own right, and easy [enough] to use.
It seems to me that now the various Linux projects have at last reached the usability threshold. Ximian GNOME 1.4 and the emerging open-source office suites (AbiWord, KOffice etc.) are already very easy and productive. Newer distros have very easy installations that minimize the amount of [command-line] hacking that has to be done to a zero. It is a major victory for Linux, since while we do retain the flexibility of configuring it the way we want, it now much easier for newbies to join the community of Linux users.
SMB is a very major step in this direction. It is definitely good software; it is quite user-friendly, and is still developed further in that direction. It also provides something that Microsoft does not: unconditional interoperability. Linux will support everything.
It is very delightful to finally see Linux becoming ready for the millions of customers. With stuff like SMB and WINE, it is no longer a question of Microsoft vs. Non-Microsoft. It is becoming expensive vs. free, bad vs. good and slow vs. fast. We can win these battles.
good thing(tm) (Score:2)
On an interesting sidenote, while you still have a ton of idjit-rags (treekillers & bandwith thieves) out there, it's interesting to see an attitude shift within mainstream tech journalism.
For example, while no mainstream press product would have lost a bad word about the evil empire 4 years ago (they buy a lot of ad space), features like product activation receive a mighty frosty welcome nowadays.
Tells me that M$ will have a harder and harder time in the area of spincontrol...
Re:SAMBA getting close to prime time... (Score:3)
That way you can share files "natively" to the Windows PCs or Macs.
But, be forewarned, that apfd creates a lot of hidden folders for the Mac side (to handle resource forks and the Trash "folder") that show up as folders on Samba. Read the docs, though, as there is a way to hide those from the SMB clients.
The one problem I can't seem to fix is that I can't hide the "Icon\r" files. These are from the Mac side, and contain the custom icons for folders... Samba 2.0 didn't let me hide them... either the wildcard I used didn't work, or it didn't work for the character it was matching (the "return" character, '\r')
mod parent up. (Score:2)
Check Prices (Score:3)
The Samba feature I like most... (Score:3)
Hopefully.. (Score:2)
Re:ZDnet (Score:1)
Ah, but then the Samba team consider themselves to be turds, don't they?
"You could think of the Samba Team as the turds in the toilet bowl of Microsoft" - Jeremy Allison of Samba to Linus Torvalds before receiving his "IDG/Linus Torvald's Community Award".
"Well, the Samba team describe themselves as the turds in the..." - Linus later that day before presenting the "IDG/Linus Torvald's Community Award".
What make Samba great (Score:5)
1) lots of options - And not only lots of options, but lots of documentation and explanation of how to use the options to your advantage when setting up your Samba server. Out of all of the Linux meddling I've done so far (which, granted, isn't that much), I think Samba is one of the easiest packages to work with.
2) developer/customer support - Just from all of the posts that I have seen Jeremy post to slashdot, I can see that supporting his software is very important to him and his team. This attitude of serving his 'customers' in a top notch manner has largely been lost in today's 'new' economy. I can't begin to tell you how much I despise 'customer service' as it usually involves sitting on the phone or at the store, not being served. And usually crappy service when you do get it.
I, in fact, do not care if ZDNet or anyone else likes Samba. I'm sold on it merely from the human factor of the people who write it. That alone will keep me coming back for more. My advice to the Samba team - KEEP IT UP!
Re:It's Everywhere Samba-faire (Score:1)