First, let me say, that we have only 2 production boxes switched to
10.5.2. We are moving boxes from 10.4 to 10.5.x one at a time based
upon the use of the server. We are really close to moving all of the
boxes doing web services(4 more), and after that our file services(1
more). We have test boxes running for AFP and SMB, and have had no
problems with either.
I had one problem with AFP/SMB at first. When I first set up the
test box, I used the simple set up, and then when I wanted to bind to
AD, I upgraded it to a advanced set up. That upgrade messed things
up, so no users who were in the system pre the upgrade could AFP or
SMB. When I trashed it all, and set up as advanced from the get go,
everything worked as expected. In face for us, far better than 10.4,
when it comes to using AD groups.
It is really hogwash to use this list as a litmus test for OS X
Server software. Lists are, by nature, places where people bitch and
moan, and there is no small amount of posturing on this list! Don't
get me wrong- plenty of really good info too but.
And please stop whining about being a "small user." big deployment,
small deployment.. jeez. Those terms mean absolutely nothing. I
don't think we (my school) is a very big deployment at all, and we
are having no real problem migrating to 10.5. Because I can afford a
part time person- sure wish I could afford a full time server admin!
Though we are small enough, I don't have enough work for someone full
time.
And lastly the comment about failing to see what OS X Server has to
offer over a "box running Darwin or Linux." LOL. I have many
faculty who want or think they need a server and think it has to be
Linux, and the mess it has created! It IS possible to set up a OS X
Server box, and with very little experience have a functioning server
in very little time. Having tried to set up a Linux box, I know
there is no comparison in terms of ease of set up.
This is my last post on this thread. You just want to whine. If you
put half the time into setting up your OS X Server box, it just might
meet your needs. LOL.
On Mar 10, 2008, at 8:52 AM, David Stodolsky wrote:
On 10 Mar 2008, at 12:32, Thomas C. Waters wrote:
Except- I think the Apple statement is completely true.
I got 10.5. With a few clicks I had a server set up, and was
quickly deploying new services, like the Wiki.
Now, what hasn't been easy, and what people are ranting about is
much more complex stuff than just the most basic set up and services.
This isn't what I get from reading the List. For example, from the
initial post (and it was confirmed):
AFP has dealbreaker bugs and you know it, that is just shooting
yourself but you've been doing that for a while. Hello ExtremezIP!
If you happen to have a situation where DNS is already set up for
you, or you know at lot about Server Admin and its bugs, or if you
can do DNS configuration from the command line, then you have a
chance of getting a functioning system. I went thru all of what
Apple had to offer to get a Standard Configuration running and was
finally told that the only way to proceed was a $6,000 a year
support contract. There may be hardware/software/network
configurations where Apple marketing propaganda actually holds
true, but from the responses here, it is clear that they will only
hold in general, if you have Apple Support backing you at the
$6,000/yr. level or you have your own people with equivalent
capability.
I have a server admin guy working for me a few days a week.
Sorry, this doesn't fit my budget. And it sure isn't in any of
Apple's ads. The people who have expressed satisfaction are the
ones with big deployments and the staff to support them. The small
user is the one that has expressed discouragement. This is exactly
what I said was happening: The small user, like the small dealer is
"not profitable" enough anymore as far as Apple is concerned. If
Apple wants to do this, fine, however, their ads should reflect
this reality. In terms of the overall future for the Server
product, I leave it to those with an better understanding of the
market and Apple's place in it. However, there will have to be a
pressing need for me to again invest in a server from Apple. I fail
to see what it has to offer, in general, over a box running Darwin
or even Linux.
dss
David Stodolsky email@hidden Skype: davidstodolsky
