Jump to content

Is it possible to live without Active Directory?


Guest requiemnoise
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest requiemnoise

Any of you work for a company that doesn't use Active Directory? Is it even possible? Is there any similar directory service authentication and management software?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, something you have to realize. Not many people use unix in the buisness world for anything other than servers or specialized roles. For desktops most people use Office (and thus windows, and active directory) + a few bespoke apps. When I get my new place I'm going to setup roaming profiles on the network with AD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest requiemnoise

When AD breaks, you have to look for your backup tapes...

When AD breaks, you hope other admins did a good job on backing up.

When AD breaks, your job is in the line..

When AD breaks, you wonder you should fix it or look for a new job...

When AD breaks, you realized why did MS moved everything into a compiled binary for configurations.

When AD breaks, you wonder why the default partition scheme is one huge drive

When AD BREAKS! LIFE FEELS BROKEN.

When AD breaks, you wonder how many reboots are necessary for the entire network.

Anyway, that was my little poem..

By the way, have you compared FedoraDS with Open LDAP? Fedora never felt like Enterprise level to me.

How about Redhat Enterprise and Suse? I haven't touched Redhat in many years and never bothered with Suse.

I always went for Debian for web and application servers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be nice if you could replace AD with OpenLDAP. I doubt it's possible, but I'm pretty sure that given the opportunity a number of companies would go for this. In the end, it's all LDAP...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest requiemnoise
It would be nice if you could replace AD with OpenLDAP. I doubt it's possible, but I'm pretty sure that given the opportunity a number of companies would go for this. In the end, it's all LDAP...

If our government gets involved and prevents MS from making drastic changes to AD models, reverse engineering few ideas that are compatible with all clients aren't too far fetch idea. Fact that MS constantly changes the model, makes it impossible to offer a very nice integrated LDAP that all Oses can live happy in a happy family. Few old ideas of NT4 domain concept has been reverse engineered for better in Samba. However, once in a while new SP packs break everything from the rest of network to live in a harmony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of using the government to hinder innovation wouldn't it just be better to mandate that Microsoft has to open up some of its standards. But to be honest, before that happens the patent system has to be reformed. In the current climate would be impossible for MS to open up its standards and retain control of there own innovations (because lets face it, love or hate them , they did change the world of computers and make good products.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest requiemnoise
(because lets face it, love or hate them , they did change the world of computers and make good products.).

You must be kidding me...

Oh, sarcasm... LOL...

wink wink i got it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, they did change the world of computers. They helped make the PC into a commodity item, something that anyone could afford. I don't doubt for a second that had MS not existed some other company would have done the same, but MS were the ones who did it. This huge amount of cheap computing power which runs a uniform OS the world over has allowed for a shit load of amazing things to happen. True, there was profit behind it, but can you ever imagine a government making a system that is compatible the world over? And yes, trying to turn a single user system into a multi-user system meant that they fucked the internet bit up, but its semantics in the bigger picture.

And as for gaming, who remembers what it was like before DirectX?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest requiemnoise
Nope, they did change the world of computers. They helped make the PC into a commodity item, something that anyone could afford. I don't doubt for a second that had MS not existed some other company would have done the same, but MS were the ones who did it. This huge amount of cheap computing power which runs a uniform OS the world over has allowed for a shit load of amazing things to happen. True, there was profit behind it, but can you ever imagine a government making a system that is compatible the world over? And yes, trying to turn a single user system into a multi-user system meant that they fucked the internet bit up, but its semantics in the bigger picture.

And as for gaming, who remembers what it was like before DirectX?

Dos was purchased for $40k and instead of selling it to IBM for $2million, they license it... What did MS invented?

Win 3.1, 3,11, 95, 98, Word, Excel? NT was original made by the famous guy from Digital. Powerpoint, NOTES, Access, MSN, Hotmail were all purchased with tons of cash. DirectX? Have you heard of SGI system in the past? A company MS put it out of business?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They helped make the PC into a commodity item, something that anyone could afford.

Um, no, that was IBM who messed up with the BIOS thing that allowed the creation of clones which in turn allowed the price to drop.

What Microsoft did was luck out by having their OS be the default of the main machine, and thus the default of the knock-offs aswell. And they capitalised on this growing mass of computers.

You can't say Microsoft wasn't smart, but they were also lucky, not to mention the simple fact that in spite of that one still doesn't have to like them for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, like George W. Bush?

What are you on about? Microsoft is a company that produced products which were better or cheaper than there competitors, out maneuvered the older company's like IBM, made some smart business moves and made a lot of money. This isn't the 90's anymore. Yes,  they use shady tactics but these days who doesn't. I would say that was more of a business climate issue than one with Microsoft themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest requiemnoise

Dude. My experience in technology isn't based on history books or crappie youtube documentaries. I have witness so many companies disappearing, because MS's unfair practices that our government let them bypass. I saw Word Perfect, Lotus, and other software pioneers going away due to software bundling strategies that can be almost considered violating anti-trust. This isn't about anti-large corporation, This is about how our government, let them slide for this long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its just hard to seperate the engineers who just want to make cool things that solve problems from the lawyers and corporate management bullshit. Maybe its just my perspective, but I've never cared that MS bundled a email client, im client, browser or media player. I've always known that there are better alternatives out there be it Firefox, Opera or Netscape. I don't think MS should have to bundle 3rd party stuff. They were very anti-competitive in the 90's, but today they are not in the same position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest requiemnoise

Listen, I am not trying to start a heated debate or flame war. There were many great companies that got crushed not by challenging each other what customers would love to have. They went away due to nasty bundling practice. The logic of human brain doesn't like changes. We feel threaten if things do not feel stable or someone invades our areas. MS offered the fake blanket by bundling. You can argue that MS practice is integration by one company to ease the use of computing. If you believe that look at modern day Linux distros. Millions of contributers working together to provide assistances, codes, bandwidth, how to, and bundling them together. Not all Linux distros are easy to use. Choosing Linux distro is what goals a person wants to accomplish. Some Linux apps are hard to configure and use. You also have to understand these codes are open source. One programmer's idea might be passed down to GUI developer. GUI person might make something easier to use down the line.

Reason many Open Source users hate MS is they just want MS to play fair. We live in the MS world. We don't want our asses to be constantly kicked by MS. Eventually, their dirty strategies will backfire. Maybe in the future, GPL will be less hippish, so we can fight back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now this is the crux of the matter, if those millions of open source devs, many of who are in there 20's, had not had a pretty unified wintel base to start with when they were kids, would we have ubuntu? My point isn't about MS being a good or bad company, its that they unified the computer world with windows. Because there was only one major desktop OS, they forced the hardware manufactures to design a single platform that ran windows. Which basically forced the entire world to use one platform. Ie, they turned computers into a volume product and sold it to anyone. Allowing it to be pirated (along with Office etc) only made they're position stronger when they weren't facing monopoly charges, but afterwoods it wasn't worth the money they lost to get the market share. (An easy way for MS to escape its monopoly restrictions without damaging the profit line would be to remove the pirated users, who account for a lot of windows installs globally but don't produce any money. Elminate the pirates, loose market share and restrictions that imposes, produce more money from people who have to pay). 

I don't think MS are the future by a long shot, that belongs to whatever Linux evolves into. But I do think that as a direct result of there actions in the 90's they helped to harmonize the PC platform globally and allowed the growth of open source (ie people who looked at windows and knew in they're heats that they could do it better, or cheaper or differently). Without MS I think that the market would be split between smaller company's with a constant shifting turf battle over hardware design.

Personally I use Windows, Linux and FreeBSD, all seem to work nicely and do what I want. I may even get a Mac one of these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest requiemnoise

I totally disagree with you on most of everything that were stated. They unified the PC platform? Charging driver makers to get drivers certified and allowing only few hardware manufactures to the preview the future OS isn't playing fair. The concept of Office suites isn't only done by Microsoft in the past. Don't get me started on why new version of Office suites came out two months before the  few  MS OS release dates. Look at Office 95, 97, and 2000. How they constantly change frameworks, installers to prevent others to find compatibility.  Have you wonder why Office 97 installs flawlessly in wine, but 2000,XP,2003 suites require so much tweaking? Forget Office 2007 from running under wine. How about why IE 6 is 30megs expanded, but the folder says 6 megs or less. Why is the media player given away free? Why do they constantly offer Windows updates using programs such as Windows Media Player and IE? How about in the past? How they boost they are the lightest browser by pre-installing the browser library before the browser release date by issuing service packs before hand. They created the framework for PC? Did you completely forgotten OS/2,  IBM PC-DOS, and Caldera's DR-DOS? How about exclusive license deals they made in the past that they couldn't sell OS/2 pc with few Pc makers? The concept of intellectual software licensing is a lot more complicated that we can understand. Why do you think so many developers got confused and start to offer free software? I am not a lawyer, so I don't know how they can constantly get away with so many things. It is beyond my scope of understanding. I also assume you don't have a clue about this subject either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charging driver makers to get drivers certified and allowing only few hardware manufactures to the preview the future OS isn't playing fair.

This is an issue, they do charge for testing, but what about Apple? One of the reasons people think OSX is better than windows is due to it only supporting a limited amount of hardware **which is extensively tested**. A badly written driver can cause a lot of trouble.

The concept of Office suites isn't only done by Microsoft in the past. Don't get me started on why new version of Office suites came out two months before the  few  MS OS release dates. Look at Office 95, 97, and 2000. How they constantly change frameworks, installers to prevent others to find compatibility.

No, office suites have been done by quite a few people. However I've used MS office since Office NT, and I would say that MS Office is probally the best office suite on the market. Why is it a problem that its released before the OS? And why is innovation a bad thing? People change things because they think it might be a better way of doing things.

Have you wonder why Office 97 installs flawlessly in wine, but 2000,XP,2003 suites require so much tweaking? Forget Office 2007 from running under wine.

Not really, I don't use windows applications on my linux or BSD machines.

How about why IE 6 is 30megs expanded, but the folder says 6 megs or less.

Never cared.

Why is the media player given away free?

Pretty much every electrical device made since 2005 can play MP3's, why is it a problem when I download winamp & vlc anyway?

Why do they constantly offer Windows updates using programs such as Windows Media Player and IE?

Not once have I logged onto MS update with the Media Player.... But i''m guessing IE is used because thats what ActiveX is good at? What should they do instead? I'll admit that I like yum and the ports system, but its a different environment for windows.

How about in the past?

?

How they boost they are the lightest browser by pre-installing the browser library before the browser release date by issuing service packs before hand.

Its called Marketing Lies, and yes its shitty. But its also a clever idea to be honest.

They created the framework for PC? Did you completely forgotten OS/2,  IBM PC-DOS, and Caldera's DR-DOS? How about exclusive license deals they made in the past that they couldn't sell OS/2 pc with few Pc makers?

No, I haven't. What I'm talking about is the windows compatible PC being a global standard world wide. For home users, in the mid to late nineties there wasn't really an alternative. 

The concept of intellectual software licensing is a lot more complicated that we can understand.

Thats the problem with the patent system.

Why do you think so many developers got confused and start to offer free software?

Confused? I don't think thats true. I think its part of a larger global movement of people who are getting sick and tired of the old bate & hook trick that is being pulled on them every second of there lives. There are far far more people on this planet with barely any money than there are people who could afford to go out and buy vista ultimate today. The next 1 Billion people to log on to the internet will be people in the first group. And again, as MS locks down windows people find that its harder and harder to pirate windows. Is it any coincidence that just as this happens, desktop Linux becomes a serious rival?

I am not a lawyer, so I don't know how they can constantly get away with so many things.

They have more lawyers? The important thing to remember is that Against The Law and Something That Is Wrong are not the same things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest requiemnoise

I don't want to cut you off, but this discussion is pointless. I actually used to program things under windows. I have to say, it is most unstable environment. MS just means "Market Success." It is nothing to do with enhancing technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...