On 12/31/2012 10:17 AM, Nathan England wrote:
> Excellent points. I don't entirely believe 2000 was a bomb. But in all
> reality, I don't know anyone that used it.
I've seen it used, and used it quite heavily at most environments I was
at when still doing more systems stuff. 2003 was obviously much
improved (xp+server stuff) and quickly became defacto, but for at time,
it was good for passage out of the dark ages of 16bit os's.
I saw it on a couple servers
> and replaced it with linux on a few others. It wasn't horrible, but come
> one! Windows ME on an NTOS kernel? I thought the frequent automatic
> reboots were a "feature" so I did not have to manually reboot Windows
> ME! Windows 2000 destroyed the only good "feature" Windows ME had!
Hah! Well like most I started life as a windoze guy, and my first
experience with "servers" was using win2k server beta's for adventure in
'99. I was rockin' AD before I'd ever had to futz with NT. Imagine my
horror when I had to inherit some nt4 domains later!
That said, I learned what DNS, DHCP, LDAP/Kerberos, and IIS were good
for in windoze land, then later replaced them once I got familiar enough
with linux. Learning how network services work under linux without some
prerequisite knowledge is more than a bit daunting, so I was glad to
have had exposure and understanding from windoze worlds.
All in all, AD still has numerous advantages for directory management
that simply cannot be _easily_ replaced in linux. 99% of times, I'll
still see it paired with linux if for nothing else than authentication
and user/group enumerations (likewise/centrify), and I'm fairly OK with
that.
>
> Nathan
>
-mb
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)