Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Networking Linux

Microsoft Working For Samba Interoperability 221

JP writes "Andrew Bartlett of Samba fame has written a document describing their recent collaboration with Microsoft's Active Directory team. In brief, it would seem that the sky is falling, as Microsoft's engineers seem to be really committed to making Samba fully interoperable with AD. They have organized interoperability fests and have knowledgeable engineers answering technical questions without legal or marketing drones getting in the way. However according to Andrew the Samba AD team is currently very short on manpower, so if you have network experience, now is the time to get coding."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Working For Samba Interoperability

Comments Filter:
  • What does this mean? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by GuloGulo ( 959533 ) on Thursday October 23, 2008 @10:53AM (#25482075)

    "In brief, it would seem that the sky is falling, as Microsoft's engineers seem to be really committed to making Samba fully interoperable with AD"

    The bolded part is a euphemism for "disaster in progress".

    Forgive my naivety, but isn't this a good thing (as much as MS collaboration can be)? Why is this a "sky is falling" situation?

  • Re:about time.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ritz_Just_Ritz ( 883997 ) on Thursday October 23, 2008 @10:58AM (#25482171)

    Definitely about time. I'd much rather have a viable/free exchange server to remove the last vestiges of Windows Server infestations, but a bulletproof samba certainly helps the cause too.

    A few windows clients, I can live with....


  • by desmodrone ( 1390663 ) on Thursday October 23, 2008 @11:17AM (#25482401)

    This guy asked a relevant wuestion, albeit mking a minor html mistake in the process, and some jackass mod comes in and carpet bombs him? I want to know the same thing, this seems like a good thing, but submitter makes it out to be something else with his terminology. So, is it a good thing or not? And to whomever modded this guy down, you're a jerk and you owe him an apology.

  • Re:about time.. (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 23, 2008 @11:28AM (#25482533)

    In our company we're dropping as much windows stuff as possible because of the failure to integrate and vendor lockin. If windows worked better as a client on an open network we might actually let a few people use it... Windows really never belonged on servers anyway, there's so much more you can do with samba than you could never do with a windows file server (like install without a gui) and no virii/worms/etc. Really they'll just have to learn to play well with others if they want to retain some market share on our network... and I'm guessing our network is at least like a few others now, and like several others will be.

  • Brilliant Marketing (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Ngarrang ( 1023425 ) on Thursday October 23, 2008 @11:39AM (#25482681) Journal

    This is just an extension of the MS mind set. No, not the chair-throwing, but making sure that at least THEIR technology is being used, and not some open standard. Microsoft would rather folks run pirated copies of XP than install Linux. Just extend this to AD on SAMBA. Microsoft can still lay claims to number of AD nodes and such.

  • by DragonTHC ( 208439 ) <Dragon.gamerslastwill@com> on Thursday October 23, 2008 @11:48AM (#25482827) Homepage Journal

    The samba team already made sure it was interoperable. You can use samba/ldap as an AD replacement.

    I have done it.

    MS just wants to save some customers by doing this. I say it's not going to work all that well.

    Those customers are probably not going to ditch windows desktops for linux anytime soon though.

  • Re:Old Proverb (Score:2, Interesting)

    by AvitarX ( 172628 ) <> on Thursday October 23, 2008 @11:52AM (#25482887) Journal

    I agree.

    I bet this is about a semi-fold on their server platform, to maintain desktops.

    They can give-up AD servers, and push exchange and share point and Desktops/Office.

    the AD is the weakest (least important) part of there monopoly, especially in mid-sized businesses.

    If they provide the clients, and the messaging, and the document sharing, and even the remote desktops. The actual authentication is moot.

  • by i_want_you_to_throw_ ( 559379 ) on Thursday October 23, 2008 @12:02PM (#25483025) Journal
    Remember when IBM was the Microsoft of it's day? Now it's a darling because it learned a valuable lesson....

    Ultimately companies that create standards will eventually have to transition to a company that contributes to them.

    I'm no M$ fan at all and that goes back a ways for me. On the other hand, Microsoft seems to be showing signs that they have accepted open source as something that's here to stay (although they hate it).

    Next up on the radar? Google

    Once they became a publicly traded company, responsible for only making a profit for their shareholders, it appears more and more like their motto should transition to "We do less evil than everyone else"
  • Re:about time.. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by bfizzle ( 836992 ) on Thursday October 23, 2008 @12:03PM (#25483047)

    Does it not seem odd to you that the only competitor for Windows file sharing recommended here is a open source clone of the same technology they are trying to replace?

    There is a reason why Windows servers are so popular and it is no one makes directory services, file sharing, group policy, and email/calendaring as easy as Microsoft. Microsoft has been so successful at creating these services and making them simple to administer that most open source projects try to emulate/replicate/duplicate what already has been done.

    So stay up on your soap box saying how much better the open source version is...

  • Re:about time.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ryanvm ( 247662 ) on Thursday October 23, 2008 @12:17PM (#25483247)

    Not only have they not tried to sink Mono with patent lawsuits. I can't think of ANYONE they've EVER attacked with patents.

    I'm tired of hearing this lame FUD scenario from the Slashdot crowd every time MS dabbles in open source.

  • Engineer nature (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Godji ( 957148 ) on Thursday October 23, 2008 @12:20PM (#25483299) Homepage
    Duh. Good engineers with no PHB supervision will tend to to great things. Even the ones at Microsoft.

    What makes Microsoft Microsoft is the fact that engineers are very rarely left under little or no PHB control. When they are, news like that will follow.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 23, 2008 @12:30PM (#25483423)

    With MS increasing 'interoperability' with FOSS, many Universities are standardizing on MS products...

    e.g. Oxford University, UK

    In the past, one of FOSS's heartlands was in higher-education, where linux systems do a lot of science work, producing thousands of graduates with linux experience.

    Today, academics in faculties can no-longer demand the use of open, standards-based systems from their central IT since MS is 'open enough'. Don't believe me? Look at the language in the Oxford announcement.

    Of course to get the full benefit of the 'open' MS system, you need to use MS products...

  • by Zombie Ryushu ( 803103 ) on Thursday October 23, 2008 @12:32PM (#25483445)

    Use Kerberos to authenticate. I do.

  • Re:Bill Gates (Score:3, Interesting)

    by EvilRyry ( 1025309 ) on Thursday October 23, 2008 @01:31PM (#25484355) Journal

    Uhm, that's exactly what they are doing. Samba4 can (mostly) act as a domain controller in an AD environment. This even includes replicating to Windows AD controllers.

If a 6600 used paper tape instead of core memory, it would use up tape at about 30 miles/second. -- Grishman, Assembly Language Programming