Topic: Domain-controller

[Stefano]

and seeing as though Windows XP is 2002 technology, it would be great if SME Server supported a more modern version of Windows.  Since XP there's already been two more versions of Windows. 

what's wrong with vista and SME? AFAIK it works

btw, ATM XP is reliable and is a fact that M$ took the decision to keep it live for a longer time than expected.. many big (HP, IBM etc) keep giving you the possibility of downgrading from vista to XP.. we don't need to move to windows 7..

another fact is that anytime M$ make a new OS, it breaks something, so it's not a SME/linux issue.

all, naturally, IMVHO
Stefano

[MSmith]

Yes, it would be great if SME 8 were out of beta and had incorporated CentOS changes that allowed full Active Directory participation ... but it isn't, and it hasn't.  Have *all* of you who say "It'd be great if SME did X, Y and Z that I want" *donated* to the project, or filed an actual bug report in Bugzilla, or done extensive testing of SME 8 Beta?  (Personally, I have done the first two, but to my shame, not the latter.)

[Stefano]

Yes, it would be great if SME 8 were out of beta and had incorporated CentOS changes that allowed full Active Directory participation ... but it isn't, and it hasn't.  Have *all* of you who say "It'd be great if SME did X, Y and Z that I want" *donated* to the project, or filed an actual bug report in Bugzilla, or done extensive testing of SME 8 Beta?  (Personally, I have done the first two, but to my shame, not the latter.)

forgive me, but I don't understand who you are answering to

Stefano

[MSmith]

I directed that post to everyone who's posted on the forums lately about how it'd be great if SME did this, and it'd be great if SME did that, and it should be easy to implement this or that feature.  Everything's easy if you're not the one who has to do it!  I don't have the programming skills to improve SME and my one and only HOWTO is now 5 years in the past.  SME will get the features it gets when the (few and busy) developers manage to set aside the time to make it happen.

My personal wish is for a server manager panel in SME 8 final to control shadow copy creation.  How much would a fair bounty be, I wonder?  $100?  $500?  Somewhere in between?

[Stefano]

I directed that post to everyone who's posted on the forums lately about how it'd be great if SME did this, and it'd be great if SME did that, and it should be easy to implement this or that feature.  Everything's easy if you're not the one who has to do it!  I don't have the programming skills to improve SME and my one and only HOWTO is now 5 years in the past.  SME will get the features it gets when the (few and busy) developers manage to set aside the time to make it happen.

ok.. that's clear and I totally agree with you

My personal wish is for a server manager panel in SME 8 final to control shadow copy creation.  How much would a fair bounty be, I wonder?  $100?  $500?  Somewhere in between?

you should subscribe the dev's ML and ask there.. you should also create a NFR in bugzilla

Ciao
Stefano

[erroneus]

Is there another OS that connects up to SME in the way that Windows XP does?  What I'd like to see is a SME Desktop (a linux distro especially designed to hook up to an SME Server).  Until then advice to "move to another OS" is counter-productive.

Steve

Edit ... and seeing as though Windows XP is 2002 technology, it would be great if SME Server supported a more modern version of Windows.  Since XP there's already been two more versions of Windows.

Agreed.  For the same reasons that SME would be less usable if it only worked with Windows 3.11 for workgroups, it is less usable when limited to Windows XP.

And left be frank.  Vista is barely getting any use in the enterprise.  Windows 7, on the other hand is noticably better than Vista and only a little slower than Windows XP on the same hardware.  And since Samba 3.3.x will work with Windows 7, there should be some development and testing to adapt and adopt Samba 3.3.x or 3.4.x prior to RedHat>CentOS doing so.  There is good incentive to do so.

Non-technical users and management will see SME as "broken" if it doesn't work with the stuff they want it to work with even if the truth is quite a bit more complicated.

[Stefano]

And since Samba 3.3.x will work with Windows 7, there should be some development and testing to adapt and adopt Samba 3.3.x or 3.4.x prior to RedHat>CentOS doing so.  There is good incentive to do so.

well.. a good incentive, IMHO, is a BIG money amount to the developers or, if you prefer, your time to test the migration to samba 3.3/3.4.. naturally you should then mantain all the samba packages for SME because many, many (thousands) users would rely on them..

SME will never compile/rebuild any package because:
- there are no human resources to do
- it's designed with stability in mind, exactly as CentOS/RH.. RH will never be a bleeding edge distro

you/we just have to wait that upstream source gives us the right rpms

so, I repeat, if you wish samba 3.3/3.4 on your server to use windows 7
- do it yourself and share the results
- or pay someone to do it for you
- or change Server/Client OS

windows XP is pretty stable now, about 8 years from its release.. what make you think that windows 7 will be stable since its release?

another question: do you use SME in a enterprise or just at home? in the first case, do you really think to move in a short time your client pc to windows 7? for what? what's the pro?

finally, as broken compatibility is for sure a windows 7 issue and not a samba one, I suggest you to write to M$ to ask the reason why it doesn't work.. does windows 7 join a windows 2k domain? maybe not, I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if you need at least windows 2003 server to use windows 7

Stefano

[MSmith]

windows XP is pretty stable now, about 8 years from its release.. what make you think that windows 7 will be stable since its release?

another question: do you use SME in a enterprise or just at home? in the first case, do you really think to move in a short time your client pc to windows 7? for what? what's the pro?
Stefano

THREAD DRIFT ALERT!  Oh well, let's roll with it.  As much as we've all grown accustomed to XP, its crummy security and thus vulnerability to many, many varieties of malware signal that it's time for it to be retired.  Yes, Vista and 7 will have their own problems, but the vast majority of botnets are composed of XP machines and I, for one, won't be sorry to see the last of Windows XP.

[Stefano]

THREAD DRIFT ALERT!  Oh well, let's roll with it.  As much as we've all grown accustomed to XP, its crummy security and thus vulnerability to many, many varieties of malware signal that it's time for it to be retired.  Yes, Vista and 7 will have their own problems, but the vast majority of botnets are composed of XP machines and I, for one, won't be sorry to see the last of Windows XP.

the solution is pretty simple:
- use user privileges, not administrator ones
- change default browser to mozilla
- when/where possible, change email client to thunderbird
- when/where possible, use web/mail proxy
- monitor users' activities and teach them what they can do and what they can't do
- check machines' logs (with a service like ntsyslog logging to SME)


in the last 5 years I haven't seen a single virus/malware infection in my customers' lans

anyway, this 3ad is OT.. I will ask it to be moved to General Discussions

Stefano

[chris burnat]

Moving to General discussion where it is more appropriate.

[MSmith]

- monitor users' activities and teach them what they can do and what they can't do
Stefano

Must ... contain ... laughter ...

Yes, my customers on company LANs have very few malware problems as they are monitored and locked down -- except the managers and executives, of course, who do as they please.  And it's much more difficult to get home users to stay out of trouble, at least until they've paid once or twice to have nastiness removed from their machines.