How Viable is a MacOS-to-NetWare Connection?

Otto-matic asks: "I work for the State of Montana. My Art Department more than likely comprises the entire Mac userbase in the Montana State Government (3 users). The state network is run on Novell Netware using Microsoft Exchange Servers over Ethernet. I started here 1 year ago, and the first dreadful thing I noticed was that the Macs were the only machines not connected to the state network. Instead, this department has one Wintel machine we SHARE for network and internet access. I talked to our IT folks about this situation and was assured that the state was vehemently opposed to the Macs being allowed onto the state network. I asked why, and was told a number of varying stories. Some of which include Appleshare being too 'chatty' over the network; MacOS being unstable, easily hacked, etc.; problems with Macs communicating over non-Mac networks. I'm getting the feeling that the truth is that these guys have something personal against the MacOS, and are unwilling to even allow consideration of its inclusion into the network." Is there anything to the fears of the submittor's IT department? Or is this just a bunch of hot air?

"My contrary explanations in defense of the MacOS have been largely ignored. What I am attempting, now, is to accumulate a collection of corroborating evidence that proves the Macintosh functions safely, securely and relatively unnoticeably on virtually any network. Specifically Novell Netware.

Could anyone here provide technical info to support this claim, provide links to technical and non-technical articles supporting this, or point me to individuals or publications which could help?"

Comments

Coupla thoughs

[maggard]

First of all I've managed IS Depts. where we've had mixed Wintel/Mac/*nix/Netware environments, dozens of servers, thousands of clients - it can be done.

There is a bias against Macs in many IS Depts. Some of it is just leftover snobbery (no command line / 1-button mouse / easy to use = not a studly OS) and some of it's frustration. MacOS has always done things differently & often idiosyncratically. It's file-structure is tough to accommodate on other OS's and it's networking, while fine amongst Mac's has generally suffered from poor non-Mac clients (Netware a case in point.)

For one thing it's difficult to manage large numbers of Macs without investing a bit of time & effort into specialized solutions. While many enterprise-management packages include some level of Mac support it's often a separate add-on, sometimes at additional cost, and generally works differently then the other parts do.

Then there's application support. While Macs do have a full range of applications they're not always completely compatible with their Wintel counterparts. MS Office for Mac is a fine product but some of it's files are subtly different from the Wintel side. There is no Access database but instead most folks use FileMaker (a product with it's own strengths & weaknesses but nonetheless a *different* product.) WordPerfect for Mac has been dropped & while Lotus does offer Notes for the Mac the client can be, well, challenging at times. MS Exchange support via the Mac Outlook client is best left for truly masochistic - it's a truly evil bit of code & you'll be better off using Exchange's web-interface.

These issues have left Mac's the odd-child out for harried IS staffers, fairly or not. The fact that Mac users tend to require less support & be more productive isn't lost on many IS people but it does get forgotten in the daily run of problems. Where Wintel is the standard anything different is often (unfairly) considered a 'problem'. Thus Mac costs & issues stand out and are an easy target, again likely not fairly.

To your own case more specifically as you've discovered there's been erratic support from Novell for Mac clients on Netware. Originally when Netware offered Mac support it was at an extra cost for the server package. Then Novell rolled NW-for-Mac into the base Netware offerings at no additional cost.

Unfortunately the Novell MacOS/Netware clients were awkward & didn't blend in well with the MacOS environment. Eventually Novell outsourced MacOS/Netware client development to Prosoft Engineering Inc. with the rationale that a Mac-dedicated company would do a better job. The up side of this was the new clients behaved like native MacOS networking clients, the down result was one now had to pay extra to ProsSoft for the clients.

Then the agreement ran out and folks were stuck with so-so drivers on an evolving MacOS (rapidly becoming less compatible) & no options from either company. Recently (March 1st) there's been a new contract signed & ProSoft has resumed development. Needless to say customers of both companies are irked. Check for details at http://www.prosofteng.com/netware_faq.asp

In the meantime Novell has announced NW6 will support Mac's using IP natively (along with apparently every other OS) but of course that's a bit off before it's deployed widely. In the meantime it's either use ProSoft's drivers or wait for NW6.

My advice: Why do you want to be on the larger network?

Here's my take on the various services:

1. File Servers: Presumably there are files you could benefit from having direct access to; for collaborating more closely with your clients if nothing else. On the other hand you've gotten along thus far without this so something is working.

   To provide Mac support on one file server would be an administrative problem (making the server unique, requiring reevaluation of it's loads, increased filespace usage, determining if the backup systems support Mac namespaces, altering disaster-recovery plans, etc.) It might or might not be possible depending on a number of factors but its certainly not farfetched assuming there are no direct technical obstacles & the administrative will to make it happen.

   To enable Mac support on *many* servers would be a very large undertaking & thus very unlikely for only a few users. I wouldn't even bother pushing for this, the cost/benefit ratio just isn't there.

2. Email servers: This is a different set of issues. As I noted the Mac Outlook Exchange-client is a scurrilous thing deserving only of being burnt at the stake then the stake driven through it's author's heart (if any can be found - the heart that is.) (Do I sound like I don't like this application?) Here while it might be nice it's not worth the hell.

   The situation promises to change over the next year and the newer versions of Outlook for Mac are *almost* not completely foul but I wouldn't hold your breath or fight for this quite yet until the darn thing is actually out. In the meantime trust me, use the PC & be happy.

3. Application Compatibility: Here is where you might run into some issues. Eventually the State is likely to adopt some sort of widely distributed software that willl *require* Wintel. It shouldn't happen but it does, over & over again. This is a long-term strategic problem for you & your department. At that point you'll likely run into a problem with the single-PC access point.

4. Forward Migration:Apple's MacOS is undergoing fundamental changes. You'll be fine using your current OS & applications for another few years but the change is coming & it will affect you folks sooner or later. It's too soon to predict accurately but under MacOS X it appears networking will be significantly improved. The same holds true for Netware 6.0 - it promises much better Mac support. Either or both of these changes could provide opportunities to better connect your desktops to the larger network.

My suggestion would be to consider what the benefits to you & your department would be (of greater connectivity) & balance them against the costs to the overall IS architecture. If you can make a business case for certain types of services being made available do so but keep in mind you're three or so users, not a large constituency.

My solution would be to invest in Virtual PC. It performs exceedingly well considering what it's doing (running a full-PC environment in your Mac) & will allow your Macs to serve double-duty as PC desktops.

You'll be able to copy files to & from your Mac via VPC to the larger network environment & IS can treat it all as just another PC client & ignore the whole Mac-aspect of it.

Frankly it's the best of both worlds: You get your wonderful Mac desktops & all of the applications & tools you've invested in, IS gets to treat you folks as just more Wintel users and you can (within VPC) run all of the applications everyone else is without any special provisions or 'gotchas'. As you're graphics folks your Macs are likely up to snuff for running VPC reasonably already so you're 90% of the way there.

Those guys haven't touched a Mac in 5 years...

[frankie]

...or they'd know that AppleTalk has pretty much been eliminated. Yes, it's chatty, but it was an easy robust protocol for small LANs in the early 1980s. And more to the point, Macs using Netware/IP don't need AppleTalk.

Macs Netware is perfectly doable if everyone is willing to work together. (Unfortunately for my PowerBook, the local IT group wasn't willing). Some helpful links I found while trying to solve the problem unilaterally:

• Netware FTP site
• Installation guide at UMass
• FAQ at WTVI
• Troubleshooting at UMD

We use it at our school.

[The Madpostal Worker]

You have two choices

• Enabling Appletalk on Your Netware box this is ok, limited password length and cleartext authentication(ick). But its simple, and works with any mac
• Native IPX clients for MacOS This works much better, is cleaner, and faster. No real reason no to use this

We havn't had any problems with our macs speaking IPX to our netware servers.

/*
*Not a Sermon, Just a Thought
*/

clueless IT dept

[AntiNorm]

I asked why, and was told a number of varying stories. Some of which include Appleshare being too 'chatty' over the network; MacOS being unstable, easily hacked, etc.; problems with Macs communicating over non-Mac networks

"MacOS being unstable, easily hacked, etc."? And they still allow Windows XX on the network? I'm not a big fan of MacOS, but...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

---
The AOL-Time Warner-Microsoft-Intel-CBS-ABC-NBC-Fox corporation:

Some Montana Specifics.

[fwc]

Let me qualify this with that some of this information might be dated. I worked for The State of Montana, Department of Administration, ISD (Information Services Division) about 5-6 years ago. This information is based on my recollection of the perceptions I had at the time and information I've heard since.

For the non-montanan's out there, ISD is the part of our state government who has responsiblity for running the state's phone, video, and data networks, and has broad discretionary powers over what is done state-wide. Generally, they have the power to set standards for such things as Word Processing, SpreadSheet, Email, Database, Network Operating systems, etc. Agencies are generally required to follow their lead. Or, in some cases they are allowed to go off on their own but that generally requires an act of god.

The standard desktop machine for the State of Montana is a PC Compatible of some sort. When I was there you had a choice between a Dell and I think DEC, perhaps IBM also.

It sounds like you have had compelling reason in the past to use Macs for your work. Compelling enough that the purchase was permitted. However, that can't compel ISD to permit their connection to the state network.

I suspect the real reason behind this is simple. ISD isn't funded from the General Fund (at least to the largest extent). This means that almost 100% of their revenue stream comes from the agencies they serve. In the past, this has been in the form of a per-pc "tax" on each machine connected to the network. For this you (at least 5 years ago) got the network connection and everything that went with it. This included email and everything else. The figure of $40/pc/month comes to mind but I could be off by a lot, and it might have been per year, but that figure seems too low.

In any case, let's assume they permit you to connect the Mac's to the network. Let's assume there aren't any problems and you don't yelp much if at all. Then everything is great and everything is happy.

But, let's assume you can't make them work. Who is going to be responsible. Traditionally, ISD has helped with these types of issues, but I can say that I suspect that there aren't that many (if any) Mac experts on staff.

Add to that the complication of you perhaps needing to connect to the state mainframe. They will have to support a whole new set of applications on those macs.

If you want Novell services, they will have to deal with namespace issues on the servers you are on.

If you want Email, they will have to get you some sort of Outlook client for a MAC and then figure out why it doesn't work.

And so forth and so forth.

To boil this down a bit, I suspect the real reason is that the potential hassles of having 3 Macs on the network far outweight the benefits. Note that I am NOT saying that the Macs will be a problem.

There is one last thing that I'm going to add here. I would recommend you not rock the boat too much, as what might happen is that you would end up converted to the PC world. Right now, you have it good- basically you're in the driver's seat as far as hardware and software selection. Once you end up on the PC platform, ISD makes those decisions for you.