Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 4th Jun 2010 22:20 UTC, submitted by Preston Gralla
In the News So, what to do with this. If we don't run it, we're pro-Linux. If we do run it, we're pro-Microsoft. And I'm sure that whatever we do, we're anti-Apple somehow. In any case, here we go: the latest market share figures from IDC about servers show that Windows is by far the most popular server operating system in terms of unit sales, increasing its market share even further. Linux, on the other hand, saw its market share in the server market sink a little.
Thread beginning with comment 428386
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Stuck in the 1970s
by IkeKrull on Sun 6th Jun 2010 00:26 UTC
IkeKrull
Member since:
2006-01-24

Centralised authentication, useful filesystem ACLs, a network filesystem that doesnt require total lockdown for any client accessing it,GUI tools for management of the above - all of this is missing from Linux, and present in Windows.

You can do some of those things on Linux, but only in a way that requires huge amounts of arcane knowlege to
set up and maintain. Some fundamental stuff, like filesystem permissions, will require enormous, pervasive changes to many layers of tools to work nicely.

However, When you can do the following in Linux using the native, gui, non-samba management tools supplied out-of-the-box by a distro:

Add 2 users to the system, and create 2 groups.

Add the first user to the first group, and give the group read and write access to a folder.

Add the second user to the second group, and give that group read-only access to the same folder.

Share that folder across the network

Give User B a home directory on the server.

Share a printer across the network as Printer A, and give print access to both groups created earlier.

Have User A change their password when they next login.

Allow User B to log in from their personal laptop, which uses a different set of uid/gids to the company server.

Set a print quota for Group A so they can be billed per-page from Printer A

Back up and restore the files on the system such that all file permissions are retained.

Then a lot of people who are dependent on Windows will sit up and take notice. Until then, that's why Windows server is popular.

Edited 2010-06-06 00:28 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE: Stuck in the 1970s
by IrishPenguin on Mon 7th Jun 2010 02:32 in reply to "Stuck in the 1970s"
IrishPenguin Member since:
2010-06-07

You can do some of those things on Linux, but only in a way that requires huge amounts of arcane knowlege to
set up and maintain. Some fundamental stuff, like filesystem permissions, will require enormous, pervasive changes to many layers of tools to work nicely.

However, When you can do the following in Linux using the native, gui, non-samba management tools supplied out-of-the-box by a distro:

<snip long list of things>

Then a lot of people who are dependent on Windows will sit up and take notice. Until then, that's why Windows server is popular.


All these things can be done NOW, with SLES.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Stuck in the 1970s
by IkeKrull on Mon 7th Jun 2010 05:51 in reply to "RE: Stuck in the 1970s"
IkeKrull Member since:
2006-01-24

Wow, it looks like that might actually be the case.

Its almost like Novell is dragging Linux, kicking and screaming, into the 1990s.

I'm sure its actually not quite as simple in the real world (especially where users changing POSIX permissions meet NFS4 ACLs), but SLES11/SLED11 looks like a pretty decent NFS4 server/client.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Stuck in the 1970s
by sorpigal on Mon 7th Jun 2010 12:53 in reply to "Stuck in the 1970s"
sorpigal Member since:
2005-11-02

This is all sadly true.

What Linux is missing is not capability (not technically) but this kind of integration and usefulness. Why oh why is it so difficult to set up a Linux network with integrated authentication and file exchange? Why does every single Linux box still insist on defaulting to such "what network?" configuration?

I know UNIX was designed pre-network (and it shows!) but surely there is a way, today, to make it all work nicely and *easily* in a way that requires no hand-tuning or HOWTO-reading.

Is there any distribution that lets me set up a windows-like domain (meaning kerberos+ldap) out of the box? How about one that lets me "join" such a domain with nothing more complicated than a few clicks? I don't need this myself, but it's a damn hard sell to most people that you need someone like me to make it work.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Stuck in the 1970s
by ssa2204 on Tue 8th Jun 2010 01:43 in reply to "RE: Stuck in the 1970s"
ssa2204 Member since:
2006-04-22

This is all sadly true.

What Linux is missing is not capability (not technically) but this kind of integration and usefulness. Why oh why is it so difficult to set up a Linux network with integrated authentication and file exchange? Why does every single Linux box still insist on defaulting to such "what network?" configuration?

I know UNIX was designed pre-network (and it shows!) but surely there is a way, today, to make it all work nicely and *easily* in a way that requires no hand-tuning or HOWTO-reading.

Is there any distribution that lets me set up a windows-like domain (meaning kerberos+ldap) out of the box? How about one that lets me "join" such a domain with nothing more complicated than a few clicks? I don't need this myself, but it's a damn hard sell to most people that you need someone like me to make it work.


There are distros like ClearOS that try to replicate Windows SBS, and is a quite useful OS for really small businesses in static markets. However, as I tried to point out earlier the differences between these two operating systems is night and day (at least for me).

I know that you can set up Linux to use Samba+LDAP to create a domain environment, but what environment have you exactly set up? Something akin to 1990s NT4. While that may suffice for some smaller shops, it simply does not cut it for the vast majority. Active Directory domain services in 2008 is far beyond what you can do anywhere else. Couple that with Group Policy Management and AD Rights Management and there simply is no alternatives. Through in Terminal Services and you really have no choices.

The same can be said for Windows in regards to those that wish to set up large storage networks, multi-node clusters for dB, web, virtual machines, etc.. Do many run Windows Server in large data centers of VMs? Not many (not a single one that I am aware of).

Just because you can get an OS to do something doesn't mean squat. I can get my car to drive backwards at good speeds, but I sure in the hell don't drive down the road backwards.........often that is.

Reply Parent Score: 2