[windows2000] Re: Samba or Win2K Server as Domain Controller?

  • From: "Joe Shonk" <JShonk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 10:56:27 -0700

Appletalk? What?  Let's just run NetBuei and IPX too...  It's 21st =
century... Live and let die...

Now your up to 3 OS platforms to support, Windows, Linux and Mac...  All =
of that can be consolidated to just 1 platform to support.  Windows 2000 =
with Metaframe...  Then any OS (Linux, Mac, HP UX, IBM AIX, Amiga) can =
all live happily ever after while reducing support costs.

Joe

-----Original Message-----
From: drtester@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:drtester@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 10:30 AM
To: windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [windows2000] Re: Samba or Win2K Server as Domain Controller?



> Your digging too deep... The time that it took research and compare =
=3D
> would have paid for the Windows 2000 OS...  Why is it a big deal if =
it's =3D
> Microsoft or Linux?  95% of the world uses Microsoft...

Bzzzzt!  Wrong answer.  Please try again.

One thing to think about in mixed networks is that you can run the atalk
daemon on your linux box, and authenticate them the same as you do with
the samba (windows) users.  That way, the macs don't have to run
anything special to talk with your network.

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
To Unsubscribe, set digest or vacation
mode or view archives use the below link.

http://thethin.net/win2000list.cfm

==================================
To Unsubscribe, set digest or vacation
mode or view archives use the below link.

http://thethin.net/win2000list.cfm

Other related posts: