Women in Technology

Hear us Roar



Article:
  Unfinished Business Part 2: Closing the Circle
Subject:   Off-Topic
Date:   2003-07-15 09:15:49
From:   chromatic
Response to: Off-Topic

These two articles aren't really about Active Directory or eDirectory. They're about the challenges people face while migrating large business networks to Linux. That said, I've asked David to explore eDirectory in his next article. If it solves the problems he brings up in these two articles, it's well-worth an article.


As to questioning an author's research or conclusions, that's one reason we have talkbacks enabled. That goes for any author. If you have hard numbers as to deployment rates of one product versus the other, by all means please post them -- but I'm going to need something stronger than opinion.

Main Topics Oldest First

Showing messages 1 through 4 of 4.

  • Off-Topic
    2003-07-16 16:50:53  anonymous2 [View]

    "That said, I've asked David to explore eDirectory in his next article"

    His first two articles on Enterprise Directory Services contained numerous generalizations, assumptions and technical inaccuracies. How is he going to learn and then effectively evaluate something that is obviously foreign to him?

    Is the article due before or after he corrects his mistakes (or backs up his assumptions) in these first two articles? You took to task your *readers* to provide backup for their comments, but you don't hold an author with a negative track record to the same standards?

    I would suggest that you get an experienced CDE to write the article. It only seems appropriate to have someone who is already integrating Netware, Windows and Linux servers within their environment to write the article as opposed to someone who wrote an article on "Enterprise Directory Services and Linux" when they were supposed to write about the "challenges" that a company faces when integrating Linux.
  • Off-Topic
    2003-07-15 18:31:09  anonymous2 [View]

    'These two articles aren't really about Active Directory or eDirectory. They're about the challenges people face while migrating large business networks to Linux.'

    That is blatently false. The first article was nothing BUT praise for ActiveDirectory and both articles concentrated specifically on ActiveDirectory and how "Linux can't run AD". At best, it only began to scratch the surface of the Linux authentication process and a few select services that Linux offers that are requirements of an ActiveDirectory installation.

    If this was a true comparison of migrating from Microsoft Windows to Linux, then the author should have explored more than just the "directory services" component of both OS's. The author neglected to mention critical components such as automatic software updating, security protocols and services, web services, etc. As such, this was strictly an "AD vs. LDAP or Lack of AD on Linux" article.

    'That said, I've asked David to explore eDirectory in his next article. If it solves the problems he brings up in these two articles, it's well-worth an article.'

    Not attempting to be insulting, I doubt David could do it justice. There are already serious technical errors in his articles on AD and he apparently doesn't understand eDirectory. Do you honestly expect an unbiased and educated review of Novell eDirectory? I, for one, do not. I do not believe the author would write one in as much so as I do not believe he is capable of writing one.

    But, I will admit, I would enjoy watching him fall flat on his face in his attempt to write such an article.

    At that point, could we call upon his termination for lack of credible journalism?
  • Off-Topic
    2003-07-15 14:34:08  anonymous2 [View]

    Chromatic...
    "that's one reason we have talkbacks enabled."

    So then why strip out a post reflecting a precedent?

    "If you have hard numbers as to deployment rates of one product versus the other, by all means please post them -- but I'm going to need something stronger than opinion."

    Well, I guess that means that the author, the person who supposedly did research, does not have to back up his claims?

    So, let me see if I can come up with eDirectory implementations...that is, in addition to the other people who have posted...

    "BASF uses eDirectory to simplify administration of more than 40,000 users."
    http://www.novell.com/success/basf.html

    British Telecom..."The solution is powered by Novell SecureLogin and Novell eDirectory™."
    http://www.novell.com/news/press/archive/2002/05/pr02041.html

    Lufthansa...
    "As part of the contract, Novell's directory and network services will be used to consolidate user data for approximately 70,000 employees, and create a secure and structured access to the company Intranet."
    http://www.novell.com/news/press/archive/2002/01/pr02009.html
    http://www.infosecuritymag.com/2003/may/lufthansaid.shtml
    http://www.vnunet.com/News/1140320

    French Tax Authority...
    "Novell, Inc.®, a leader in eBusiness solutions and Net services software, today made public details of its largest European eGovernment project; a directory solution for the Direction Générale des Impôts (DGI), the French Tax Authority, that will be used by 35 million French taxpayers"
    http://www.novell.com/news/press/archive/2001/12/pr01117.html

    "Novell initially estimated that they would attract 40 to 50 customers over the entire life of the promotion. They guessed wrong. In the first month, they had 1,700 customers sign up."
    http://www.integratedmar.com/ECL.cfm?item=DLY121102-03

    Although they claim 1.4 billion licenses, they state they have "734 million active eDirectory user licenses"
    http://www.novell.com/products/edirectory/

    As for the adoption of (In)active Directory...

    "Following slow adoption of Active Directory after its release as part of Windows 2000 three years ago"
    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,667380,00.asp

    "the slow adoption of AD has been a frustration for Microsoft. "
    http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/0,14179,2895694,00.html

    You can't really run AD on an old platform...now can you...

    "A recent ENT survey of 800 enterprise Windows sites finds that 64 percent still run Windows NT 4.0"
    http://www.entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=5723

    "According to some industry estimates, between 35 and 45 percent of Windows server customers still run Windows NT 4.0,"
    http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/2196381

    Enough?


  • On topic...
    2003-07-15 14:03:42  anonymous2 [View]

    "These two articles aren't really about Active Directory or eDirectory. They're about the challenges people face while migrating large business networks to Linux."

    To pick up the conversation...in the first sentence of this article, David states "the first part of this discussion about Enterprise Directory Services and Linux," but the discussion only centers around AD. I guess that is a "challenge"...to try to get something that doesn't work to work. Maybe someone could follow up with "the challenges of getting a Linux box to product a BSOD"...MS *definitely* has the "de facto" monopolistic market share there? Heck, Linux doesn't even have a "screen of death," much less a *blue* one. ;-)

    On the other hand, if this is about "Enterprise Directory Services," then why wouldn't he discuss Novell or Sun products (among others) in addition to AD?