Slashdot Mirror
File Sharing Difficulties Frustrate Tiger Admins
rmallico wrote in to mention a story currently running on Eweek about technical difficulties sites running Tiger are experiencing. From the article: "A number of sites running Apple's new 'Tiger' operating system are experiencing problems with SMB file sharing and authentication with Microsoft's Active Directory, Ziff Davis Internet News has learned. Although Apple Computer Inc.'s Tiger increases support for Server Message Block file sharing and Active Directory, several sources say that the Finder fails to log on to Windows and Linux Samba file servers."
Weird, I've found with Tiger that Windows file sharing has been easier, although I don't use Active Directory. With Panther my password was never remembered by Keychain, despite clicking the option to enable it. With Tiger my password is remembered. It also finds my Windows shares automatically, whereas with Panther I had to manually connect by entering IP addresses.
I agree with you. Its super annoying that an "Gold" has these kind of errors. If it is with a super rare hardware or a super special software, okay.
but THIS? Has nobody there ever tried to connect to a SMB sever? It's kinda strange. Annoying. Every OS has this, everyone.
But I can imagine how this is, I can imagine this very good. The coders will say, we need to the test, the managers say, we need to release, and of course the managers are right, they get their bonus, because the release in time, and the coders then get the blaim for the code errors.
Perhaps IT needs a revolution.
"Freiheit ist immer auch die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1871 - 1919
I find this interesting, because at the university where I work, the security policy requires centralized AD authentication from all computers in the network. After that I've hardly seen any Linux PCs or Macs around anymore. When I asked about it from one of our IT guys, he said that you can't authenticate non-Windows computers with MS Active Directory.
The owls are not what they seem
um .. what has not being able to properly connect to a SAMBA share got to do with stability.Tiger is very very stable i have not had one OS crash (a few programs have but they were built for 10.3 and the updated version run fine)
.Then quite rightly, there would have been a hell of an uproar.
The fault here is in interoperability with a Microsoft SMB share (no such problem with NFS) and there is an easy work around (you just point to the share directly).
Had this been about microsoft products not connecting to a SAMBA share properly
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
It is useful until you find that error -36 is written up as:
-36 ioErr I/O error
It'll point you in the right direction I guess, but it's by no means a definitive description of the error.
I must admit that I'm a little baffled as to why Apple don't include better error reporting and descriptions in OSX. It is because they are still assuming these kind of errors will only be seen by techs that know what they mean, or are they still living in a world where they refuse to acknowledge that Macs do throw up the occasional message to the user?
IO error can not read or write to the directory . meaning it is not there , the reason for this is Apples implementation of samba on tiger requires the full path
On a related note: I'm seeing really bad performance when copying a file from a Linux Samba share to my OSX machine (roughly 100 kb/sec, if that). Oddly enough, file uploads are ok (megabytes per second). Odder still, if I open a terminal and copy directly to my machine from the Samba share mount point, incoming copies are fast too. This has been going on from at least 10.2, and much to my dismay it is still an issue in 10.4. This really seems like the Finder is trying to talk Sambalese by itself (and does so differently than the SMB filesystem driver). Has anyone else noticed this behavior (and, perhaps, solved it)?
I used to work with samba, having a linux fileserver and a mac osx powerbook, but recently I started working with nfs. It seems a bit faster and more stable. When I change some file on the server, it's directly visible in finder - without having to refresh it.
I also was annoyed the fact when I turned my powerbook on after it went to sleep it would give me a lot of errors about unmounting a network drive. This also was the case with tiger. With nfs, those problems are gone an nfs mount will stay active after the powerbook comes back from sleep.
If I remember correctly (and I probably don't) the Mac OS error numbers came about because Steve Jobs was fed up with how long the original Macs took to boot, and loading the table of error numbers -> error messages was one of the things that got taken out to streamline the boot process. I guess it's just stuck.
I seem to remember the slow booting thing was the cause of the infamous 'throwing the prototype Mac down the stairs' Steve incident, although it's even more likely that I'm wrong on that one.
Perhaps they need to do more automatic regression testing (daily) on each build then?
I think the car analogy is (for once : ) a good one. We have come to expect failure from Software, and that shouldn't be the case - it should be very rare, not inevitable with each new release. They did rush the release of Tiger, and certain things suffered for it. Yes they will probably fix it quickly, but it'd be nice if they had a more extensive testing program, with sufficient time alllotted to do the QA work, for catching regressions like this.
Well I don't agree with your idea of Apple's mantra 'Users are Idiots' I use to but it is more of mantra 'Don't make it needlessly difficult to do common tasks'
As a programmer I will often give me error numbers because when I need to fix it the error numbers help me find it in the code quicker. And when I give more detailed error messages. The users will try to analysis my message outside of the context of my code and try to fix it them self. So if I put an error message "Out of Allocated Memory" except for error 49112, the user will go out and buy some more ram hoping it will fix the problem except for going to me and saying hey I have an error 49112 where I will know that I will need to change my code to either be more memory efficient in an area or allocate more ram.
It is not a situation that the User is an idiot it is that they may not have the context of how things are running in the programming level. So when they see an IO error they will go trying to fix there network cards, reinstall their printers and other drivers before reporting the problem with the program.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.