In my opinion, the most useful enhancements made to vista are "under the hood".
* Much improved group policy support (Including MUCH better 802.1x and Wireless provisioning) * Improved networking support (Locations), Firewall settings based on location (XP had Domain/Not Domain, Vista has Domain/Home/Public) * UAC/Virtual Folders allow even businesses without IT support staff to run as non-admin * I18N. It sucked in XP. It sucked HARD in XP MUI. It works fine, and they have done a lot of work on it in Vista * Local Shadow Copies. I love it. Had them on servers since 2003 was out, always missed it locally * The search interface/new start menu. A good gradual improvement, no revolution * The new system control, a good gradual improvement
I've been using Vista on my Desktop machine (3Ghz PIV, 2048MB, some DirectX 9 Nvidia Card) at work since early Betas (We're a microsoft partner), and switched i switched my laptop (P-M 1.7Ghz, 1024MB, some DirectX 8 ATI Card) to RTM as soon as it hit MSDN.
It works okay on my laptop, albeit a bit slower. This was expected, and will probably buy a new laptop soon anyway (as the machine is already 2 years old).
I can't say im impressed with vista. There are several, very good enhancements. They would've been impressing 2 years ago. Now? Not so much. Vista is a good step in the right direction, especially for companies and enterprises (I18N!). For home consumers? Not so much. The forced obsolecence with DirectX 10, meh. Most people will switch their OS at home when they buy a new machine. Hardcore gamers will earlier because of DX10.
802.1x configs can be deployed trivially through group policy in windows based networks(and it doesn't make take more effort to configure a non-encrypted network rather than a 802.1x enabled network).
Also, 802.1x can be used both an 802.11 networks, as on ethernet networks.
Using mac address filters or VPN for something which already has a clean, well developed, universally supported solution is stupid.
There are 802.1x supplicants for OS X (integrated into the OS) and linux (available with most distributions.
When we installed Wireless LAN at our company, we switched all network access ports to 802.1x authentication.
It required some effort, since we had to "quarantine" non-802.1x devices to separate networks, but i think the security advantages outweigh the work needed.
We're just a small IT service company, not a bank. I really wonder why a bank wasn't using 802.1x since several years.
a) Other cars b) You, on your own, doing something wrong
Cars are still unable to compensate stupid drivers. They probably never will be. Computers with dedicated functions can be made to compensate for stupid drivers (Ever seen a 360, Wii, or PS3 getting rootkitted? Me neither). But multipurpose machines probably never will.
No, that's why you have maintenance packs on your servers.
When your controller fails, it gets replaced OnSite by service technician, no matter how old it is. We use IBM xSeries, and still have some older machines operating. We bought Out-Of-Warranty ServicePacks for them, they're now 5 years old.
A controller in one of them failed, 3 hours later an IBM technician was OnSite with a new, same controller, replaced the card, and the machine was up and running again. That was a 5 years old IBM xSeries, with dual PIII at 1.1Ghz, mind you.
Of course, you don't want to buy service packs that cost more than the machine is worth now (but less than the money involved to migrate the existing setup..) in a private environment. Thats why you do only RAID1 there. I've been able to recover RAID1s from any sort of raid controller with a bit of fiddling. Most involve no fiddling at all, because they have the Metadata at the "end" of the drive, and just appear as a plain disk on a normal scsi controller.
Active Directory isn't that expensive. It's a great tool in managing your network.
Samba has some sort of Windows Domain functionality, but last time i've worked with it (~2yrs ago), it was still en par with NT4 domains.
If you have 150 desktops, using Active Directory can reduce the managment overhead in a great deal. You can specify lots of client settings using group policies. AD also has some rudimentary software deployment support (using MSI files).
Centralised authentication, roaming user profiles, folder redirections are all very nice things in a network. Also being able to configure update deployment using WSUS can help you if MS releases broken patches.
I would suggest you to get in touch with someone knowledgeable on windows, and have several purely technical demonstrations (no marketing bullshit). If you don't know anyone, contact me directly. I live in switzerland, though.:)
Managing windows clients with non-windows servers just adds a lot of unnecessary overhead. This is about choosing the right tool for the job, not pushing someones elses agenda.
Treat SBS as a different product. It's not the same as a "real deal" windows setup.
If you learn that, you can also support it. The disadvantages of SBS are not obvious, and customers will prefer buying SBS with 10 CALs for 1000US$ than buying W2003 Standard + Exch2003 Standard with 10 CALs each for 10'000US$. You can't have a second DC with SBS (it will complain and shut down, it's also in the license agreement and everything). SBS is a product for very small shops which don't want to spend much money.
Re:Linux servers + Windows desktops = happy client
on
Will Red Hat Survive?
·
· Score: 1
It seems i was drifting a bit to the workstation focus, which wasn't really the intention of this discussion. That's my fault.
Even linux servers need care after they're setup. You know, even open source applications have security vulnerabilities. And installing updating isn't as easy as on windows (when it works).
Please don't assume that all small companies work unprofessionally with Excel and Access. At least here in switzerland, it's not really possible to be lawful with just easing excel and access (because of variety of accounting and salary reasons). So even small businesses need some kind of ERP software. And those usually use some sort of commercial database backend, like Oracle, MSSQL or DB2.
Also, when using Linux as a Server for windows, you will lack several rather important things: Centrally managed antivirus solutions (yes, they make sense in an SMB), centrally managed windows updates (yes, they make sense too!).
Also, IMAP and a Web calendering app isn't the same as a groupware. Your contacts aren't stored on the server, there's no integration between mail and calender, and you're probably missing a uniform web interface for both.
Next point, as i already mentioned: What about synchronization? How do you sync your contacts, web calender, et. al. to your mobile devices? Even when using windows on the desktop, this isn't as easy to do when all your information is spread out over three different applications (Contacts: MUA, Calender: Web-Based, Mail: IMAP).
And for your last question:
Yes, i did and do. For my parents company. It works fine so far, but all the issues mentioned here are their. Luckily, there are only three machines.
For windows, i've worked with much larger environments, the biggest being about 150 people. I've also evaluated linux a number of times for 75-150 people companies, because they wanted to save money with it. But the integration is severely lacking. And, as you seem to imply, maintenance is lacking with your linux setups, which isn't a good thing, ever. At least windows with auto update mostly works, and helps people install updates on their SBS servers. Or non-SBS windows servers.
If you are a information technology company, it might be possible and might even have lots of advantages to use linux exclusively.
However, if you are not an IT company, i don't see linux to stand a chance. There are some technical reasons here, but also social reasons:
The technical reasons:
* Software, which the company needs might not be available under linux. Using VMs or WINE might solve the problem in the short term, but what if the a new version doesn't work anymore? * Especially for low end hardware, there isn't much support for linux. But if we're honest here, low end hardware causes lot's of trouble under windows. * Integration with linux is very difficult. All kinds of mobile phones, pdas, mp3 players, etc. can be hooked up to windows with the help of a CD. With linux, it isn't as easy. While some devices might be supported, some of them won't be. Unfortunately, this also includes high end hardware (like Windows Mobile PDAs). * Groupware with Linux seems to be a problem still. I lack experience in this area, but last time i checked solutions here weren't as well integrated (for example lacking support for Direct Push, Blackberry, etc.)
The social reasons:
* There usually are no people with linux knowledge ("Power Users"). This means for every so little problem, external support is required, adding a lot to the cost of linux. A technicians hour is usually the same as a single CAL. This problem will solve itself over time, though. * People are afraid of Linux. It is new and unknown. People like to have something to blame. If they can't get their document out because they have to use Linux to write it, they will blame Linux. Irregardless of facts.
As it is now, linux can't be adopted by small companys. Larger companys have much more resources available, and might save money when deploying linux.
Re:Prices--Red Hat way more expensive
on
Will Red Hat Survive?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I work in sub-200 people environments in switzerland. So my perpspective might differ a lot from yours, but i've found microsoft to offer good value for their money.
1 CHF (Swiss Franc) = 0.80 US$
If you're a sub-15 people company, and only have one machine, Microsoft Small Business Server is a good bet. You can get the Standard Edition for 800 CHF, and the Premium Edition (includes SQL Server and ISA Server (no idea why you would want that)) for 1300 CHF. Each includes 5 User CALs, So for 15 people you need two more five packs or about 1000 each. This price doesn't include support, though. Also, i'm not much of a fan of SBS because of several restrictions (only a single domain controller, Exchange and DC on the same machine), but these are the standard practice in such small companies.
Microsoft offers their SBS server for up to 75 users. I don't think thats a good idea.
Companies in this size usually don't have any IT staff, so self help is important. With windows, the people at least feel that they can try to fix problem themselves (which they usually can't). With Linux, this isn't the case. (Just because windows server offers a GUI for 80% of it's functions doesn't mean that it's simple).
Windows is mostly the only choice if you are cooperating with other companies. Some might offer their shipping calculation program only for windows, some specialized ERP software might only be available or windows, etc. pp.
I've found windows to offer the best SMB desktop management, everything from redhat etc. seems to be geared at big companies with a standard desktop images. Group Policies are a fucking cool thing.
No, it won't. Windows doesn't run programs from USB Mass Storage, but it parses the autorun.inf file for icons and such. Now, there are some USB Sticks which can do autorun (the technology is called U3). That's because those USB Sticks tell windows that they are a CD drive, but that's a trick embedded in the USB sticks firmware.
The iPod can't cause any harm without a stupid user starting the.exe file.
I also don't think they offer dual link DVI, but honestly, i didn't find any facts regarding this (thank you for those wonderfully detailled product descriptions).
However, these products are intended for the corporate market. I've never seen a demand for Dual DVI or Dual Screen without a demand for a discrete graphic card (think CAD, etc.).
They don't lack DVI support. I've seen many IBM err Lenovo Thinkcentres shipped with DVI output (a card in the ADD slot).
Some newer models even have a direct DVI output. And for the lower end machines you could always get a card for 30 bucks which enable DVI output through the ADD slot.
Never, ever buy consumer printers / scanners / etc. They're all complete and utter crap.
I had to configure one of these for my mother, and they're unusuable.
The semiprofessional equipment they offer is, however, rather good.
We've got a new HP LaserJet color 4700 DTN, just a few weeks ago. Thats a semiprofessional 30 ppm color laser printers with 3 500 Sheet feeders.
Works like a charm. The printer driver is a normal windows driver, no software, no nothing. Just install the 2 mbyte printer driver, and everything will work fine. It even has a nice thing about defining "printer profiles" on the server which is also usuable on the client.
We also got a 7xxx Network scanner (just a scanner, not a multifunction device). Works like a charm. Lightweight client software.
Take for example directX 10 being only for Vista. This means that I will have to buy Vista to play newer video games. And of course this is not because there is something inherently better about Vista - it is simply an artificial constraint.
No it isn't.
Maintaining your software for older operating systems costs money. Why should MS support legacy operating systems? There's no money in that. But maybe charge 20us$ for a DX10 Backport. That might sell:)
$99 is a lot of money to a student with little to no income stream and will ensure that you at least have a vested interest in their program.
So.. If $99 is a lot of money, what about $399 (current of an xbox 360 on bestbuy.com)? And what about $59 (current cost of a new game, which would be a monthly or bi-monthly recurring cost, depending on how many games you buy)?
I think $99 isn't a real barrier of entry for people who can afford an xbox. They might not pay the money out of a joke, but if they're serious it won't hold them back at all.
See, Activiation is a non-issue for Corporate Customers. They have Volume Licenses, with corresponding VLP Keys.
Same goes for WGA. WGA Updates aren't even synced with WSUS (small-to-medium Business Patch Deployment Solution, Free), or SMS (medium-to-big Software Deployment / Patch Managment Solution, Costs money).
So all this stuff isn't interesting for corporate users, because it doesn't concern them.
The IBM iSeries (identical to the pSeries hardware) also have a hardware HyperVisor.
Their entry models (10k US$) are slow as shit though. Can't say anything about the more expensive machine, but anything that requires around 12 hours to upgrade it's operating system can't be trusted.
Slashdot Mirror
In my opinion, the most useful enhancements made to vista are "under the hood".
* Much improved group policy support (Including MUCH better 802.1x and Wireless provisioning)
* Improved networking support (Locations), Firewall settings based on location (XP had Domain/Not Domain, Vista has Domain/Home/Public)
* UAC/Virtual Folders allow even businesses without IT support staff to run as non-admin
* I18N. It sucked in XP. It sucked HARD in XP MUI. It works fine, and they have done a lot of work on it in Vista
* Local Shadow Copies. I love it. Had them on servers since 2003 was out, always missed it locally
* The search interface/new start menu. A good gradual improvement, no revolution
* The new system control, a good gradual improvement
I've been using Vista on my Desktop machine (3Ghz PIV, 2048MB, some DirectX 9 Nvidia Card) at work since early Betas (We're a microsoft partner), and switched i switched my laptop (P-M 1.7Ghz, 1024MB, some DirectX 8 ATI Card) to RTM as soon as it hit MSDN.
It works okay on my laptop, albeit a bit slower. This was expected, and will probably buy a new laptop soon anyway (as the machine is already 2 years old).
I can't say im impressed with vista. There are several, very good enhancements. They would've been impressing 2 years ago. Now? Not so much. Vista is a good step in the right direction, especially for companies and enterprises (I18N!). For home consumers? Not so much. The forced obsolecence with DirectX 10, meh. Most people will switch their OS at home when they buy a new machine. Hardcore gamers will earlier because of DX10.
802.1x configs can be deployed trivially through group policy in windows based networks(and it doesn't make take more effort to configure a non-encrypted network rather than a 802.1x enabled network).
Also, 802.1x can be used both an 802.11 networks, as on ethernet networks.
Using mac address filters or VPN for something which already has a clean, well developed, universally supported solution is stupid.
There are 802.1x supplicants for OS X (integrated into the OS) and linux (available with most distributions.
How is the VPN solution different from using 802.1x? Except that the VPN solution is a crude hack?
When we installed Wireless LAN at our company, we switched all network access ports to 802.1x authentication.
It required some effort, since we had to "quarantine" non-802.1x devices to separate networks, but i think the security advantages outweigh the work needed.
We're just a small IT service company, not a bank. I really wonder why a bank wasn't using 802.1x since several years.
Roads usually don't damage cars. Usually it is:
a) Other cars
b) You, on your own, doing something wrong
Cars are still unable to compensate stupid drivers. They probably never will be.
Computers with dedicated functions can be made to compensate for stupid drivers (Ever seen a 360, Wii, or PS3 getting rootkitted? Me neither).
But multipurpose machines probably never will.
There's the obvious downside to this that you will not get enough bandwidth out of this.
The real question is, what speaks against a Level 3 Switch from a reputable vendor?
Or if a L3 switch doesn't offer enough options, a rather expensive and huge real router?
No, that's why you have maintenance packs on your servers.
When your controller fails, it gets replaced OnSite by service technician, no matter how old it is. We use IBM xSeries, and still have some older machines operating. We bought Out-Of-Warranty ServicePacks for them, they're now 5 years old.
A controller in one of them failed, 3 hours later an IBM technician was OnSite with a new, same controller, replaced the card, and the machine was up and running again. That was a 5 years old IBM xSeries, with dual PIII at 1.1Ghz, mind you.
Of course, you don't want to buy service packs that cost more than the machine is worth now (but less than the money involved to migrate the existing setup..) in a private environment. Thats why you do only RAID1 there. I've been able to recover RAID1s from any sort of raid controller with a bit of fiddling. Most involve no fiddling at all, because they have the Metadata at the "end" of the drive, and just appear as a plain disk on a normal scsi controller.
Active Directory isn't that expensive. It's a great tool in managing your network.
:)
Samba has some sort of Windows Domain functionality, but last time i've worked with it (~2yrs ago), it was still en par with NT4 domains.
If you have 150 desktops, using Active Directory can reduce the managment overhead in a great deal. You can specify lots of client settings using group policies. AD also has some rudimentary software deployment support (using MSI files).
Centralised authentication, roaming user profiles, folder redirections are all very nice things in a network. Also being able to configure update deployment using WSUS can help you if MS releases broken patches.
I would suggest you to get in touch with someone knowledgeable on windows, and have several purely technical demonstrations (no marketing bullshit). If you don't know anyone, contact me directly. I live in switzerland, though.
Managing windows clients with non-windows servers just adds a lot of unnecessary overhead. This is about choosing the right tool for the job, not pushing someones elses agenda.
Treat SBS as a different product. It's not the same as a "real deal" windows setup.
If you learn that, you can also support it. The disadvantages of SBS are not obvious, and customers will prefer buying SBS with 10 CALs for 1000US$ than buying W2003 Standard + Exch2003 Standard with 10 CALs each for 10'000US$. You can't have a second DC with SBS (it will complain and shut down, it's also in the license agreement and everything). SBS is a product for very small shops which don't want to spend much money.
It seems i was drifting a bit to the workstation focus, which wasn't really the intention of this discussion. That's my fault.
Even linux servers need care after they're setup. You know, even open source applications have security vulnerabilities. And installing updating isn't as easy as on windows (when it works).
Please don't assume that all small companies work unprofessionally with Excel and Access. At least here in switzerland, it's not really possible to be lawful with just easing excel and access (because of variety of accounting and salary reasons). So even small businesses need some kind of ERP software. And those usually use some sort of commercial database backend, like Oracle, MSSQL or DB2.
Also, when using Linux as a Server for windows, you will lack several rather important things: Centrally managed antivirus solutions (yes, they make sense in an SMB), centrally managed windows updates (yes, they make sense too!).
Also, IMAP and a Web calendering app isn't the same as a groupware. Your contacts aren't stored on the server, there's no integration between mail and calender, and you're probably missing a uniform web interface for both.
Next point, as i already mentioned: What about synchronization? How do you sync your contacts, web calender, et. al. to your mobile devices? Even when using windows on the desktop, this isn't as easy to do when all your information is spread out over three different applications (Contacts: MUA, Calender: Web-Based, Mail: IMAP).
And for your last question:
Yes, i did and do. For my parents company. It works fine so far, but all the issues mentioned here are their. Luckily, there are only three machines.
For windows, i've worked with much larger environments, the biggest being about 150 people. I've also evaluated linux a number of times for 75-150 people companies, because they wanted to save money with it. But the integration is severely lacking. And, as you seem to imply, maintenance is lacking with your linux setups, which isn't a good thing, ever. At least windows with auto update mostly works, and helps people install updates on their SBS servers. Or non-SBS windows servers.
The answer is, of course, it depends.
If you are a information technology company, it might be possible and might even have lots of advantages to use linux exclusively.
However, if you are not an IT company, i don't see linux to stand a chance. There are some technical reasons here, but also social reasons:
The technical reasons:
* Software, which the company needs might not be available under linux. Using VMs or WINE might solve the problem in the short term, but what if the a new version doesn't work anymore?
* Especially for low end hardware, there isn't much support for linux. But if we're honest here, low end hardware causes lot's of trouble under windows.
* Integration with linux is very difficult. All kinds of mobile phones, pdas, mp3 players, etc. can be hooked up to windows with the help of a CD. With linux, it isn't as easy. While some devices might be supported, some of them won't be. Unfortunately, this also includes high end hardware (like Windows Mobile PDAs).
* Groupware with Linux seems to be a problem still. I lack experience in this area, but last time i checked solutions here weren't as well integrated (for example lacking support for Direct Push, Blackberry, etc.)
The social reasons:
* There usually are no people with linux knowledge ("Power Users"). This means for every so little problem, external support is required, adding a lot to the cost of linux. A technicians hour is usually the same as a single CAL. This problem will solve itself over time, though.
* People are afraid of Linux. It is new and unknown. People like to have something to blame. If they can't get their document out because they have to use Linux to write it, they will blame Linux. Irregardless of facts.
As it is now, linux can't be adopted by small companys. Larger companys have much more resources available, and might save money when deploying linux.
I work in sub-200 people environments in switzerland. So my perpspective might differ a lot from yours, but i've found microsoft to offer good value for their money.
1 CHF (Swiss Franc) = 0.80 US$
If you're a sub-15 people company, and only have one machine, Microsoft Small Business Server is a good bet. You can get the Standard Edition for 800 CHF, and the Premium Edition (includes SQL Server and ISA Server (no idea why you would want that)) for 1300 CHF. Each includes 5 User CALs, So for 15 people you need two more five packs or about 1000 each. This price doesn't include support, though. Also, i'm not much of a fan of SBS because of several restrictions (only a single domain controller, Exchange and DC on the same machine), but these are the standard practice in such small companies.
Microsoft offers their SBS server for up to 75 users. I don't think thats a good idea.
Companies in this size usually don't have any IT staff, so self help is important. With windows, the people at least feel that they can try to fix problem themselves (which they usually can't). With Linux, this isn't the case. (Just because windows server offers a GUI for 80% of it's functions doesn't mean that it's simple).
Windows is mostly the only choice if you are cooperating with other companies. Some might offer their shipping calculation program only for windows, some specialized ERP software might only be available or windows, etc. pp.
I've found windows to offer the best SMB desktop management, everything from redhat etc. seems to be geared at big companies with a standard desktop images. Group Policies are a fucking cool thing.
http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/x/rack/x3755/index.h tml
Maximum of 32 DIMMs. With 4GB each.
No, it won't. Windows doesn't run programs from USB Mass Storage, but it parses the autorun.inf file for icons and such.
.exe file.
Now, there are some USB Sticks which can do autorun (the technology is called U3). That's because those USB Sticks tell windows that they are a CD drive, but that's a trick embedded in the USB sticks firmware.
The iPod can't cause any harm without a stupid user starting the
Actually, i'm with microsoft on this one.
Symantecs OS invading suite of crappy tools just sucks.
Integrating PDF generation into applications and office suites ist also a MUST.
Microsoft is doing the right thing here. And i won't whine for symantec, they just made all the veritas products more sucky.
Dual Monitor works, but you won't have Dual DVI.
I also don't think they offer dual link DVI, but honestly, i didn't find any facts regarding this (thank you for those wonderfully detailled product descriptions).
However, these products are intended for the corporate market. I've never seen a demand for Dual DVI or Dual Screen without a demand for a discrete graphic card (think CAD, etc.).
They don't lack DVI support. I've seen many IBM err Lenovo Thinkcentres shipped with DVI output (a card in the ADD slot).
Some newer models even have a direct DVI output. And for the lower end machines you could always get a card for 30 bucks which enable DVI output through the ADD slot.
Never, ever buy consumer printers / scanners / etc. They're all complete and utter crap.
I had to configure one of these for my mother, and they're unusuable.
The semiprofessional equipment they offer is, however, rather good.
We've got a new HP LaserJet color 4700 DTN, just a few weeks ago. Thats a semiprofessional 30 ppm color laser printers with 3 500 Sheet feeders.
Works like a charm. The printer driver is a normal windows driver, no software, no nothing. Just install the 2 mbyte printer driver, and everything will work fine. It even has a nice thing about defining "printer profiles" on the server which is also usuable on the client.
We also got a 7xxx Network scanner (just a scanner, not a multifunction device). Works like a charm. Lightweight client software.
There are still people with non-multimode televisions?
My TV is 3 years old, but it does NTSC and PAL bot flawlessly.
No it isn't.
Maintaining your software for older operating systems costs money. Why should MS support legacy operating systems? There's no money in that. But maybe charge 20us$ for a DX10 Backport. That might sell
So.. If $99 is a lot of money, what about $399 (current of an xbox 360 on bestbuy.com)? And what about $59 (current cost of a new game, which would be a monthly or bi-monthly recurring cost, depending on how many games you buy)?
I think $99 isn't a real barrier of entry for people who can afford an xbox. They might not pay the money out of a joke, but if they're serious it won't hold them back at all.
"Yeah, I just googled it on MSN."
You don't talk with teenagers often, do you?
I've heard this phrase many times.
See, Activiation is a non-issue for Corporate Customers. They have Volume Licenses, with corresponding VLP Keys.
Same goes for WGA. WGA Updates aren't even synced with WSUS (small-to-medium Business Patch Deployment Solution, Free), or SMS (medium-to-big Software Deployment / Patch Managment Solution, Costs money).
So all this stuff isn't interesting for corporate users, because it doesn't concern them.
The IBM iSeries (identical to the pSeries hardware) also have a hardware HyperVisor.
Their entry models (10k US$) are slow as shit though. Can't say anything about the more expensive machine, but anything that requires around 12 hours to upgrade it's operating system can't be trusted.
You would marry in todays world without a marriance contract?