Go Novell!!

Download Novell's SUSE Linux 10 and see for yourself.

http://www.novell.com/pr...s/suse_linux/index.html

Of course, there are comparisons, including a what Linux programs can be used instead of Windows-based programs at www.iwantnetware.com.

Try it for yourself and see what you think. It would be much more valuable to you than a second-hand account by a self-serving Microsoft-paid for "study".

I have downloaded it and tried it, I started moving a compnay over to it awhile ago, until we ran into problems performance and reliability problems. We then moved over to windwos 2003 server, and never looked back

Did you or anyone in charge of the "move" have any real Linux expertise? If you've only been in Windows for years, how can you expect to have Linux expertise in a few days or weeks?

What "performance and reliability problems" did you run into? What version and distribution of Linux did you use?

Unlike Windows, Linux has several "flavors" and different implementations.

There have been many successful implementation of companies moving off Windows onto a more secure, reliable, and higher-performance Linux. Check them out at www.iwantnetware.com for more info.

We had no Windows Server experience nor Linux. A few of us at Novel training.

Windows, whether server or desktop, is very similar. If you are good enough to support the desktop, it isn't too difficult how to support the server. This has been the appeal of using a Windows server. Unfortunately, the server side is just as insecure, prone to viruses and exploits, and unstable as the client side.

Linux has different ways of doing things, and if you don't have Linux desktop experience, it is difficult to manage the Linux server side of things.

So saying that Linux Server is difficult or was to hard to figure out in comparison to Windows Server is virtually without merit, as you don't have a common foundation from which to compare.

"performance and reliability problems"

Not likely - Can you be more specific?

{Edit}
I read a little further down and it seems your problem was more related to the newness of the Linux OS.

Try again - it's worth it - What you gain in performance and reliability will blow you away.

Personally I like debian but it not the easiest (at first) - maybe try Mepis or Ubuntu. Take a look at http://www.distrowatch.com.

A Windows advantage (sort of) is if it breaks you can blame MS - If your linux server breaks the powers that be are going to blame you - nobody gets fired for recommending MS..... yet :)

It is worth merit since I have asked several security experts to try and hack our Windows Box and they failed. It cost us alot less to use windows and we are secure, the tests have already been done and has proven the Windows Server are better.

Then I suggest that you didn't have very good "security experts".

What have you actually done to test the security of Linux to give you the conclusion that "Windows Server are better" in terms of security?

I had a security group test my server. I did not change my router(all hardware was the same on both test except the server).

Well any study carried out by Microsoft that says their product is better than the opposition's should not be regarded as gospel anyway!

Netware uptime champs:

http://www.novell.com/co...utions/feature/103.html
http://www.novell.com/co...lutions/trench/241.html

Cheers, Roman

Somedays it seems like no matter what the subject matter, geeks will get in a pissing match about who's OS is better. *BSD beats them all anway. LOL

"Barney says Linux compatibility problems will soon be a thing of the past.."

Soon a thing of the past? Well, in the real world this doesn't mean s***. Sorry.

"The lack of modularity [in Windows] means all developers have to be concerned with all dependencies in each part of the system."

Me and the companies I work for are doing just fine, and yes, we reboot the servers every morning as scary as that sounds.

Edit: All of you are wrong, BeOS forever! :)

"Barney says Linux compatibility problems will soon be a thing of the past.."

Really?

What does Fred say?

Either one has much credibility with that statement.

No, he was refering to Barney and Baby-Bop :)

The Netware kernel is outdated. That's why Novell is working to replace it with a Linux kernel.

Linux distributions for the desktop and server are true microkernel architectures. If one service fails it can be restarted just like any software application that crashes. This also means security patches don't require a complete reboot of the computer. You just have to restart the updated service.

klingon379 -- you are wrong. Linux kernel is not microkernel. But windows > winNT is. Linux uses single monolite kernel. Kernel modules are not the same, as in microkernel architecture -- once they are loaded, they became the part of linux kernel. For example you can't run some of the kernel modules in user space and other in kernel space. Actualy, if you want to try some true microkernel implementation, you should go for Debian GNU/Hurd... Or maybe MacOS/X.. Linux is still on the way...

Considering FreeBSD does not use a true microkernel implementation, I'm surprised Mac OS X does. After all, Mac OS X is based on BSD Unix and the FreeBSD kernel is way behind the Linux 2.6 kernel currently in practically every area including performance, security, reliability and hardware support. Even though it's been awhile, the last I checked GNU Hurd was still at version 0.1. I seriously doubt Hurd has as good of hardware support as Linux.

As for the Windows NT kernel, Microsoft has stated that it is not a true microkernel architecture. In Linux if a service crashes you can just restart that individual service but in Windows NT thru XP if a service crashes in most cases you end up restarting the computer. If Windows were a true microkernel architecture you would be able to restart individual services without rebooting the computer.

You're all wrong... Atari rules ok?

Novell has been "attacking" MS for at least a decade.

That's why they don't have any more market share.

Somehow I doubt that would be the single cause of their destruction...

Novell was the leader and has always been superior but paid a price when MS took their desktop operating system and called it NT server 3.51 - all of a sudden every kid that played with win 3.11 was a network guru.

Novell makes a superior product and always has. MS took the lead by making it easier for the less knowledable tech to create a 'network'.

Novell and Apple looked at the best solutions available and based their soulution on the best technology - Unix, BSD, and Linux.

MS is better at marking - any kid can set up a MS server - it all seems the same - until it breaks or worse.

"Novell was the leader and has always been superior but paid a price when MS took their desktop operating system and called it NT server 3.51 - all of a sudden every kid that played with win 3.11 was a network guru."

Spoken like a typical myopic true believer Novellian.

It *was* the leader in market share - because it was there in PC LANs first. then the market grew up and Novell didn't.

I guess you forgot that the OS didn't even know what virtual memory was for the first three quarters of its timeline long after MS and especially UNIX employed it. What made it even funnier was that the OS was claiming to be an app server as well but I'll get to that mess in a bit. Back to reality, I guess you also forgot how SMP didn't work woth a damn on the OS forever and a day. Finally, I guess you forgot the laughable debacle that was NLMs (see, I told you I'd get back to the app server mess).

Wonderful thin, this selective memory of yours.

eDirectory is a good product but this is a clear cut case of too little too late. The market share ship has long since sailed and there are other directories available, both on Windows and *Nix. So Novell bought a decent Linux distro and tried to jump on the bandwagon. Pity, that - SuSe is a decdent system and it will be a shame to see it meet the same fate as every other product Novell has ever touched (DRDOS, Wordperfect, etc.).

Funny thing how Novell has its largest customer base in Canada - which it achieved by essentially giving the product away to the school systems here. No enterprise buys it - they're too busy converting away from it.

- MS is better at marking - any kid can set up a MS server - it all seems the same - until it breaks or worse.

Hey bonehead, that's the point! Ease of use.

If it breaks, that's where we separate the little boys from the knowledgable techs. Let them play, that's how we learn. I suppose your were born with a Novell implant in your brain?

We all have to start somewhere.. too bad the best part of you, rolled down your mama's chin...

Amen brother!

Go Novell!

...and take Linux with you!

Yes, Go Novell and take Linux (And assorted companies) with you to the TOP! ^_^

capOne, I don't get how "Novell is dated".

Security, stability, platform-independence with eDirectory, GroupWise, ZENworks, etc., is "dated"?

I don't get it.

I do understand that these so-called "independent" reports "sponsored by Microsoft" will do nothing to show anything negative with regards to the Beast. If they did, they'd never be commissioned for another report again.

Again, I suggest checking out www.iwantnetware.com for some better comparisons.

And you think "www.iwantnetware" will have better comparison? it yells "this is biased towards Netware!!!"

Get a better place where to look for comparisons, that won't convince me...

LOL...really :)

Well, the name of the website *is* "I Want NetWare". What did you expect? Microsoft's Talking Points?

;)

I have used Windows, Novell-Novell and Linux.. My take is Windows blows, Novell-Novell is dated and Linux is the cats meow.Ok, so I am biased..
The problem with the study is they were using two "Imaginary IT Departments" both of which were M$ engineers. You put M$ anything in charge of a linux network of course you will get distorted results. "Imaginary" or not.

The big difference is that in this case, the "11 year olds" are billion-dollar corporations whose very existence is predicated upon consumers believing who is better, thus purchasing their products and services.

That is of course, if they are truthful and not full of FUD.

I'm better than you.

No, I'M better than you!

NO, ME!

ME!

ME!

WE ARE!

YOU WISH, WE ARE!

Funny how even large companies act like they are 11 year olds again.

no I am definitely better than you

U r 100% right. I can't believe that even such corporations can act like this.

No he isn't!

YOU'RE WRONG!!1! I AM BETTER THAN THEM ALL!

Yes he is.

Companies strive to be better then eachother and as a result, consumers suffer.

Yeah, that was my point. :P

Wouldn't that put Novell on the defensive side, not the offensive?

Grammatical semantics... Defensive means they are just saying, "No, actually, what Microsoft says is wrong," and eaving it at that. Offensive is saying, "No, actually Microsoft is wrong, and oh yeah, btw, they suck and here's why..."

Irregardless, they changed it.

(and yes I know irregardless isn't a word.) ;)

"Is anyone even using NetWare anymore?" Pretty close-minded, don't you think? If you don't get out of your Windows World, you just don't see anything else, therefore nothing else exists.

Check out www.iwantnetware.com - user-created, user-developed, and user-friendly.

I have used Novel and Windows, a little linux but I also don't find many people using Novell anymore, or very few. Most poeple are using Windows 2003 and are very happy, and impressed with it.

"Most poeple are using Windows 2003"

Riight, in your bubble maybe. Actually, many companies are just now considering moving off of NT4, and many others are quite happy on 2K. W2K3 is only just now being looked at, and still far from being deployed in most locations.

No. He was correct, that information is about 1 year behind. NT 4.0 has finally disappeared from 99% of the market...don't remember where I read that at the moment...but Win2k server is still being used by quite a few companies.

My business deals with about 200 companies and 195 of them have Windows 2003 servers, most upgraded from Novel. The rest are either running Windows 2000 of Novel.

You are correct. MS stopped normal support for NT4 earlier this year and a 1 year extended support... basically it's your last chance to get off NT4 before MS ends patches and all forms of support.

That's why many are switching to Samba

The State of Texas is a pretty big enterprise and the State agencies are Novell users and have been for 10 years. We don't care about reports and who does them. We look at what works on go with that. At one time we had a vendor come and try to sell Microsoft to us and in the meantime sell us a server for each app they were selling. We kept telling them, we get that from Novell and it's part of the original package and we don't need extra hardware to run it. Reports are fine for the general public, but the technical world knows what works. I have personally gotten 7 Dell servers in the last 8 years that came with Windows OS on it, and the first thing I do is format and install Novell. The reports will say that MS sold 7 servers, but reality says different. Just my 2 Cents

"Novell says Microsoft the report simply 'aims to confuse the market.'"

What? This statement immediately shows that his own comments (referring to Kevin Barney) can't be trusted. Microsoft does not 'aim to confuse' the market--they aim to get more market share. Confusing the market would drive people away from Windows, not towards it. Even the most hard-headed of MS bashers know this.

"The number of patches to fix security vulnerabilities and other bugs can't reliably be compared between [Linux and Windows],"

Right, it's a two-way street. MS releases hundreds of patches and workarounds to fix issues with third party applications. Hell, they even SUPPLY A PATCH TO SUPPORT A SPYWARE COMPANY: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/885523 Could give more examples, but no need...

"Novell is continually adding to its list of more than 700 ISVs with more than 1,800 products certified and ready."

Compare that to Microsoft. They got you beat there. Dumb argument, you're proving MS's point by giving those numbers!

"Windows will continue to face major security problems (and customers will suffer the financial consequences) as long as Windows is not re-architected and made more modular."

And more people would move from Microsoft to Linux if your OS had more backwards compatability like MS, but NO, you want security. Truth is--Linux is probably more secure, because there's less flexability, therefore less headroom for hackers to play with. Microsoft tries to get along with tens of thousands of software programs, drivers, etc., while you limit what you will even allow. Hence, virus makers have to "play by your rules", but software vendors do too. I think I've made my point here.

Linux has more flexibility. Just examine all the different distros. I hardly see how you could call something like Gentoo "unflexible".

Backward compatability though?....I have no experience with that. Many new programs don't work on MS OS's 5+ years old now.

Progman.exe, moricons.dll, WoWexec.exe (for running 16 bit windows apps, Windows on Windows)--they don't support it all, but it's all there.

WOW...even I didn't know edlin.exe was still in the system32 folder...LOLOLOLOL ;)

"Linux has more flexibility. Just examine all the different distros. I hardly see how you could call something like Gentoo 'unflexible'."

Four words: Third party vendor support.

progman, what a classic. :-)

Winfile, now THAT was good stuff (haha). :-P

Progman? What is that, a shortcut creator?

When I first got Win98SE, I tried to install a program from 97 on it, but it wouldn't work. Same story for 2 or 3 other programs built for 95(and then I stopped trying). XP may have backward compatability, but do the other windows OS's?

I'll consider it something they added recently, and compare the age of a distro to the age of windows.

"And more people would move from Microsoft to Linux if your OS had more backwards compatability like MS,"

what planet did you just wake up from your coma on? backward compatibility? - do you even know what that means? it means that your latest os release will work with everything or a great number of things that your os did years and/or a decade ago.
Lets look at this....
I have windows xp... a lot of kewl stuff I used to run wont work in it no more.. software and hardware alike... I have to pay money to upgrade my system because my stuff isnt compatible (laymans babylike terms so it's easily understood)
I just upgraded my system with all the latest kicka** hardware. I gots me a new super duper 64 bit processor now. I gots me a 512 meg video card. I gots me a kewl printer, I have the best sound card (IMO) ever made, the sound blaster live (this card works in every os... BeOS, OS/2, Linux, and past versions of windows). I got me a brand new dvd-wr drive the fastestest one there is.... I have me the fastest CD-rw as well. I have a gig of ram. I am top dollar dude :). I install xp 64 bit.. my new printer isnt supported by the new os. My sound card isnt either... my cd and dvd drives are working as readers but I have yet to get a good burn out of either, I have 2 choices for AV protection, neither which I care for, most of my programs wont even install no matter which version I choose under the program compatibility wizard....
*throws up hands in frustration... wipes hdd and installs latest SUSE Linux... everything works! amazing! My old Gravis game pad even works! so do my 2 digital cameras!!!!

can you name the programs you tried on win98se? Anyone can say they've tried a program and make their comments look legit, but unless you specify the name of the program, you are leaving yourself open to being called a liar.

- even I didn't know edlin.exe was still in the system32 folder. -

Haha.. are you serious? I didn't know that either.. interesting.

- Four words: Third party vendor support -

We know the difference, other people can't count :) There is NO support for Linux.

I have one more to add, games. Show me 1, just 1, any ONE game that is support (not merely a contrived derivation of a game via VMWare that pretends Linux support) on Linux, and is a gaming success.. Show me 1.

I don't see *ANY* games written Exclusively or even shared for Linux, therefore, we must conclude Linux doesn't even have the ear of the largest sector in the computer world, games. Its a HUGE industry. Why is there not even 1 game written for it?

I agree with your assessment.

- Progman? What is that, a shortcut creator? -

Nope. Progman was the Win 3.x predecessor to Explorer. It was the central shell.

And no XP and 2000 are the only OS with backward's compatibility. Actually its not even that, its a utility that attempts to trick the program into running in a 98/Me/95 environment.. it hides many of the functions in a command.com basically. So there really isn't backward's compatibility, and you have to do program by program.

If you run a program, and its designed for Win95, and it happens to work, great. If it doesn't you are on your own. Backward's compatibility would ASSUME ALL programs would work flawlessly, which just isn't the case.

Take Norton for instance, get Norton 95 or whatever, anything pre-2000 and try to install in WinXP. It doesn't work.. You would have to do some creative shortcuts to get Norton to "be tricked" into running on Win95. There are many games that were also written for 98/me that dont' work in XP either..

Don't believe the hype, XP does a good job of trying to make programs work from other pre-OS but its not 100%.

He isn't lying simply because you need proof. 98/Me/95 were NOT 32 bit environments, they use a system called a mutex which converts 32-bit apps into running on a 16-bit model. ONLY XP/2000/NT are true 32-bit environments.

I don't need an example, you go find a program from 97-00 and get it run on any of those 16-bit OS, and they simply don't work. But a larger percentage of them will run on XP...

Like the Geico commercial says, "Maybe you should do a little research next time".

Here's a few sites that have plenty of Linux games:
http://www.linuxgames.com
http://www.linuxgamepublishing.com
http://www.tuxgames.com
http://www.linux-games.com
http://www.icculus.org/lgfaq/gamelist.php

Try Google once in a while before going off and looking the fool.

Your assertion that "There is NO support for Linux." is asinine. Novell completely supports SUSE Linux.

Apparently you've either had bad experiences with earlier versions of Linux, or you just can't keep your Redmond-Colored Sunglasses off long enough to know that there are indeed software companies that are not wholly owned by Bill Gates.

Good companies.

Companies that make good software that does not require your computer to reboot or have the OS reinstalled.

One more thing.

"Jurassic Park" would not have been possible without Linux running the servers for the special effects.

ILM (George Lucas' company) is almost entirely dependent upon Linux to create Star Wars and other movies. Same with Pixar Animation.

Just because you are in a hermit shell and have no idea just how widespread Linux is, do not automatically assume the rest of the world resides in your small snow-globe of Microsoft-only.

Check out the "Comparisons" section of www.iwantnetware.com and see how things stack up.

And another thing.

Want to know of a company that uses Linux almost exclusively? Try Google, the company.

This is from a job posting in their Chicago office:

=====

Responsibilities include:

* Install new servers as our Linux cluster grows.
* Help test and troubleshoot new server hardware components and designs.
* Install switches, routers, and other networking gear.
* Fix broken servers (replace hard drives, replace bad sticks of RAM, etc.).
* Configure and troubleshoot Linux OS related issues on our servers.

Your last few posts gained a lot respect from me.

I think UT 2004 had linux, mac, and windows native versions? The Linux version used SDL, the Windows version a custom built engine, and the Mac version....no idea.

Its obvious you have never installed Linux.

Barney's point is when you install Windows off a DVD, you get the OS, some administrative apps and thats it. Everything else is extra.

When you install the enterprise version of SUSE or Red Hat Linux, thousands of applications come bundled, most of them free. Want to set up an email system, fine, several are bundled. Want to set up a PABX with VoIP capabilities? Fine, it comes bundled. Need a relational database server? Several come bundled. For SUSE, there are over 3000 bundled applications, including lots of server apps and full development environments.

When you run the equivalent of Windows update on SUSE or Red Hat Linux, you'll get patched for not only the OS but the bundled applications as well.

That's why the number of patches available is much larger. However, most administrators only install the minimum required applications when they set up a production system, so the real number of patches actually required is less.

The study should have compared the patches for a SUSE distro with all the patches for all MS Backoffice servers (SQL Server, BizTalk, SharePoint etc), Visual Studio, and MS Office applications. Because the equivalent of all those servers come bundled with SUSE Linux.

PS:
Just to be clear, Novell does not bundle any of its commercial applications like eDirectory, GroupWise or ZENworks with SUSE.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. I guess they have to discredit it, otherwise it would look like they are basically allowing them to look bad.

Novell is a dead company anyway, between Linux, Windows, Unix and Apple, is there anyone even using Netware anymore? I think its a moot point.

I have worked for some major corporations, every one I have been in contact with so far, is migrating OFF Novell and moving to Windows. Coke is about 20% novell, but they are migrating users monthly eventually they will be totally Windows also.

Agreed. I have used Novell servers and windows servers. Both for websites and internat business work. I find Windows servers out beat Novel in performance and reliability.

"Yeah, I was thinking the same thing."

I missed something. The same thing as what?

actually Novell is the 2nd biggest name in Linux(and 1st in quality) after Red Hat. They have acquired SUSE linux and they are the Head behind MONO project, the most abitious project behind linux.

And my experiences are exactly the opposite. NetWare servers just run and run. Uptime measured in years. Windows servers need constant patching and rebooting to work.

And then comes the administrative part. ZEN, eDirectory, NDPS/iPrint... I assume there will be another 10 years before MS catches up..

Read from bottom to top on the same column, then go right a column and repeat, reading from bottom to top until you read through the entire tree.

Yeah...why couldn't they make the comment system standard? :P

Where have you used both?

How did they perform?

What tools did you use to benchmark them?

Were they intra, extra, or internet facing servers?

What software was hosted?

How did you manage security?

Did you keep logs of uptime / patch outages, etc?

We would love to see your data.

"Where have you used both?"

He probably doesn't have the time to waste arguing with you on a BN thread when even if he had reliable data you wouldn't change your mind about it, fewt.

"How did they perform?"

He probably doesn't have the time to waste arguing with you on a BN thread when even if he had reliable data you wouldn't change your mind about it, fewt.

"What tools did you use to benchmark them?"

He probably doesn't have the time to waste arguing with you on a BN thread when even if he had reliable data you wouldn't change your mind about it, fewt.

"Were they intra, extra, or internet facing servers?"

He probably doesn't have the time to waste arguing with you on a BN thread when even if he had reliable data you wouldn't change your mind about it, fewt.

"What software was hosted?"

He probably doesn't have the time to waste arguing with you on a BN thread when even if he had reliable data you wouldn't change your mind about it, fewt.

"How did you manage security?"

He probably doesn't have the time to waste arguing with you on a BN thread when even if he had reliable data you wouldn't change your mind about it, fewt.

"Did you keep logs of uptime / patch outages, etc?"

He probably doesn't have the time to waste arguing with you on a BN thread when even if he had reliable data you wouldn't change your mind about it, fewt. :)

WOW, how weak was that?

:-P

Geez, I could have done much better.

Next time, maybe you could use *NDA* as a way out. haha

It would absolutely change my mind if there were any hard facts to support it, however in the years that I've been here not a single person has been able to provide anything but a bunch of hot air to support the wild "Windows is my god" claims coming out of mouths here.

The usual "unanswered" put up or shutup remark would go here, but I'M ON VACATION!

Adios people!

I was only kidding...I don't know what his experience was. He can respond to your post if he wants to.

- Wow, didn't see this one coming... I'm just surprised it took so long. -

Sorry what heatfan said.. I hit post instead of reply..

- Where have you used both?

Who Cares

- How did they perform?

Anyone that uses them can plainly see, Windows performs better.

- What tools did you use to benchmark them?

Umm... simple use would show you this. I don't need a tool to tell me the picture on the wall is crooked, its obvious. If its off center, then maybe I need a tool to prove is not equal distant from either side. Novel has major shortcomings, otherwise why would companies quit using it? Some of the companies I worked for, still had support contracts for Novel, some hundreds of thousands of dollars, and they basically wrote it off, and switched to Microsoft Windows Servers anyway.

Maybe you should direct this question to ANY IT manager.. they can explain it to you.

- Were they intra, extra, or internet facing servers?

Umm.. what is the purpose of this? Who cares, Novel sucks, intra, extra and inter.

- What software was hosted?

No software, canned out of the box. Lets take file sharing. Have you even setup a Novel file server? Its a pain in the ass, and you can't administrate from a workstation.. I can adminstrate shares from a Workstation in Windows...

- How did you manage security?

From that stupid NDS tree. Damn I hate that thing. Another one you can't administrate easily from a remote work station...

- Did you keep logs of uptime / patch outages, etc?

Fine. Novel is up. It runs, but if there is no need to move from 4.11 to 4.12, that's a minor patch, so they don't touch it. That in and of itself is another reason administrators don't like novel. Patches are a pain also. I could make a windows server and never touch it, and it would be fine to run at least as long as the next Novel server.. But I don't want to waste a resource that just sits in the corner. Who buys a $5000 piece of equipment to just do 1 thing? Its rediculous, Windows machines are versatile and can be a multi-use device.. Not just a print server or a file server, or SQL server...

- We would love to see your data.

Google it "novell vs windows". There you go.

Hahahaa..

- Adios people!

Don't let the doorknob hit you in the a** on the way out!!

And take your time on vacation, we won't miss you...

Already there.. Fine you use Netware. Have fun doing cross platform. Is there a linux client for Novell?

MS is already caught up, passed, and is pioneering new technology. Netware is a thing of the past, evidently you are a Novell dinosaur. The whole world is on Windows buddy. Just look around you. You have dig deep to find companies even using Novell. Take the top 20 on the fortune 500 list..

I gurantee, you won't fine Novell on ANY of those machines, what does that tell you? Netware is not an enterprise server... Maybe it was when we were still on DOS, but not now.

And if you do happen to find Novell in a fortune 500 company, I will wager, they are in the process of migrating...

"From that stupid NDS tree. Damn I hate that thing. Another one you can't administrate easily from a remote work station..."

Your lack of understanding and experience is astounding for someone who runs off at the mouth as much as you.

You can manage NDS from virtually ANY platform, from ANY current web browser. You can also use a handheld.

You can install eDirectory on Linux, NetWare, Windows, Unix, Mainframe, et al.

You can install Active Directory on... Windows.

NetWare / eDirectory does not care which client you are running - DOS, Macintosh, Linux, Unix, Web Access, Windows (Windows 3.x, 9x, ME, NT, 2000, XP Home/Pro, 2003), etc.

Active Directory in Windows 2003 Native Mode lets you use Windows XP Professional to login. How all-encompassing of them.

Novell is about getting everything connected and manageable from any point in the network, providing you have proper credentials and permissions.

Microsoft is about Microsoft.

Aside from this, what's with all the personal attacks on people? Seems to me that when people do that, it's because they run out of facts.

"Is there a linux client for Novell?"

Yes.

"MS is already caught up, passed, and is pioneering new technology."

In what way? Please expound with specifics. Rhetoric is for those who can't defend their position.

"Netware is a thing of the past, evidently you are a Novell dinosaur."

As I was saying. When you get ONE concrete, specific example, please let us know.

"The whole world is on Windows buddy."

The "whole world"? I don't suppose you get out much, do you? This must be one of the most stupidest lines ever written by any person ever. (The whole world! please!)

"Just look around you. You have dig deep to find companies even using Novell."

I can look out my office window and see at least 50 different companies who run NetWare. Do you live in a well?

"Take the top 20 on the fortune 500 list.."

For what? Have you personally visited them all and verified this for yourself? Didn't think so.

"I gurantee, you won't fine Novell on ANY of those machines, what does that tell you?"

You've been there? What a putz. Some of my clients are Fortune 50, and let me tell you - they would not be able to stay in business without NetWare / eDirectory. I have been there. I have seen it. I've helped re-design and upgrade some of them.

"Netware is not an enterprise server... Maybe it was when we were still on DOS, but not now."

Sigh - you really don't have a clue, do you?

I have personally helped build NetWare 4.11 servers that had well over 12,000 simultaneous connections - per server. When Microsoft reps heard about it, they were totally dismissive at it. Then our Director showed them. They were speechless (and clueless).

Windows is a Peer-to-Peer OS based upon the old LAN Manager from way back and still can't handle enterprise loads without needed a bunch of servers. What's the purpose of a "Site Server"? See the difference?

"And if you do happen to find Novell in a fortune 500 company, I will wager, they are in the process of migrating..."

How much are you willing to wager? I'll put up a year's worth of contracts.

Remember - Google is our friend. Use it once in a while before you start spouting off.

You seem very quite now that your bluff has been called and your false assertions have been corrected.

Humble Pie giving you heartburn?

A simple admittance of being wrong would be a good start.

From a famous philosopher:
"NetWare - it does a server good!"

Check out the "MS (In)Security" section at www.iwantnetware.com

Wow, didn't see this one coming... I'm just surprised it took so long.

I can almost bet that most the negative comments here about linux come from those who could not figure out how to administrate it. Personally, the way I see it, any admin that requires the use of adware or spyware type programs on their network shouldn't be an admin anyhow. Considering It don't take much for one to get an mcse these days it doesn't suprise me some of the comments made here.

I have had experience tho pretty little, of administering both windows and linux servers. This is more like a read about reply...

Now dont get me wrong, windows is a nice product, everything designed around point and click, with a kernel (2000/2003) which seems to do its job. Now compare that against linux, we are looking at an open source kernel with more developers running round the clock from various parts of the world who are ready to patch things up. Linux on its own is nothing more than the kernel and in its raw used form is in commandline. As administers would have it, true administers prefer this, editing files, and writing their own scripts to do their dirty jobs. As compared to hunting registries, and writing a full fledged desktop application or asp.net or something to do the same thing.

Process handling which was re-done for 2000 and then 2003 was based on posix based systems. This was first introduced in nix based systems.

Also, dont forget that linux systems can be recovered with a single iso, and can be mounted and reused accordingly. Anyone know how long it takes to recover a windows box???

Ofcourse there are alot of pros and cons, windows does offer that point and click, which lets you do almost anything you want. But when your working with servers, do you really want to sit and figure out how to get back your data? or do you just want to throw in a disc and start it up on another kernel ?

Did i mention you can keep the kernel seperate? like on a floppy or CD ? Imagine that???

As for patches, remember i said linux is just the kernel, windows is the kernel and the whole inchalata of softwares you just dont need? Well, the patches for the linux kernel is wayyyyyy below all the patches avilable for stock windows. As a user, you are responsible for the updates of the softwares. If that means there is a bug in IE (which here is part of windows, then its a windows bug) but, if there is a bug in linux on firefox, you are not necessarily affected as you may have not installed it.

A bug which may arise from IMAIL ( a windows product ) cannot be blamed on windows, as it is not part of the core, Similarly Sendmail, which has had a few bugs till date, cannot be used to blame the linux kernel for its errors as its another software from a third party developer. Patches to software which are not designed around the core of the Operating system cannot be used to blame the operating system.