Comments on: PH34R Teh FuD! http://www.ensight.org/2004/10/ph34r-teh-fud/ A Personal Blog Mon, 07 May 2012 18:40:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Jeremy C. Wright http://www.ensight.org/2004/10/ph34r-teh-fud/#comment-3724 Jeremy C. Wright Fri, 29 Oct 2004 02:07:35 +0000 /?p=1472#comment-3724 SMS rates among the top 5 desktop management apps. I'm figuring 2005 will put it as either the top or the second. Fingers crossed though ;) SMS rates among the top 5 desktop management apps. I’m figuring 2005 will put it as either the top or the second.

Fingers crossed though ;)

]]> By: Aaron http://www.ensight.org/2004/10/ph34r-teh-fud/#comment-3723 Aaron Fri, 29 Oct 2004 01:03:16 +0000 /?p=1472#comment-3723 SMS 2003 is great in conjunction with AD. Running fabulous in our testing. We're still running SMS 2 with NO A.D. and it's a beast managing about 1000 seats. SMS 2003 is great in conjunction with AD. Running fabulous in our testing. We’re still running SMS 2 with NO A.D. and it’s a beast managing about 1000 seats.

]]> By: Jeremy C. Wright http://www.ensight.org/2004/10/ph34r-teh-fud/#comment-3722 Jeremy C. Wright Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:11:52 +0000 /?p=1472#comment-3722 Yep. SMS2003 is okay. 2005, due out soon, is actually fantastic. We use Novell for our Directory and Desktop Management stuff here, and I really enjoy it. Novell's management stuff works fantastically in an Windows environment Yep. SMS2003 is okay. 2005, due out soon, is actually fantastic.

We use Novell for our Directory and Desktop Management stuff here, and I really enjoy it. Novell’s management stuff works fantastically in an Windows environment

]]> By: G http://www.ensight.org/2004/10/ph34r-teh-fud/#comment-3721 G Thu, 28 Oct 2004 19:42:43 +0000 /?p=1472#comment-3721 Are admins still using MS SMS (System Management Server) to manage large amounts of Windows machines these days? Are admins still using MS SMS (System Management Server) to manage large amounts of Windows machines these days?

]]> By: Jeremy C. Wright http://www.ensight.org/2004/10/ph34r-teh-fud/#comment-3720 Jeremy C. Wright Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:44:01 +0000 /?p=1472#comment-3720 Aaron, I didn't say Linux couldn't do these things... The oped I pointed to said that Windows would be incredibly more expensive because of viruses. Their calculation was: 3500 desktops * 25.00/hour * 1 hour/desktop=87,500$/infection Which would be false if the enterprise had the above tools in place, whether it's Linux or Windows. Migrating accounts between directory services is easy as pie. Migrating data on servers is easy as pie. It's when users have data on their computers, applications on their computers, etc, that migration gets incredibly evil. Sorry for the confusion :) Aaron, I didn’t say Linux couldn’t do these things… The oped I pointed to said that Windows would be incredibly more expensive because of viruses.

Their calculation was:

3500 desktops * 25.00/hour * 1 hour/desktop=87,500$/infection

Which would be false if the enterprise had the above tools in place, whether it’s Linux or Windows.

Migrating accounts between directory services is easy as pie. Migrating data on servers is easy as pie. It’s when users have data on their computers, applications on their computers, etc, that migration gets incredibly evil.

Sorry for the confusion :)

]]> By: Aaron http://www.ensight.org/2004/10/ph34r-teh-fud/#comment-3719 Aaron Thu, 28 Oct 2004 17:21:38 +0000 /?p=1472#comment-3719 If the enterprise is using LDAP then why is it hard to migrate accounts? As for data migration, yeah that could be hairy but that would be hairy anyway. I users you network shares or personal shares, there would be no real issue as Linux can easily map a drive with an nfs mount just as Windows can. As for these points: <blockquote> * Patch management * Imaging * PXE-boot capabilities * Anti-virus * Context-scanning of your internet traffic * Multiple zones * Internal and extrnal firewalls </blockquote> * Patch management is simple. Redhat uses Up2Date but I happened to roll my own up2date which works phenomenally. If you want to make it SUS-like, that's even easier. * Imaging? Are we talking about Ghost or what? * Anti virus and firewall are built in to most Linux distros and in a routered environment, that can be more effectivley stripped prior to the end user even seeing any harmful traffic. * Multiple zones... why is this a problem at all? Bottom line is that for the end user, using a Windows environment probably makes the most sense for usability, efficiency and familiarity. Many of the issues you bring up are on the server end and I don't see why you can't keep a low TOC when it comes to servers. Biggest thing is is that in a currency analogy, MCSEs are like nickels and RHCEs are like silver dollars. One is worth more. One is more common. If the enterprise is using LDAP then why is it hard to migrate accounts?

As for data migration, yeah that could be hairy but that would be hairy anyway. I users you network shares or personal shares, there would be no real issue as Linux can easily map a drive with an nfs mount just as Windows can.

As for these points:

* Patch management
* Imaging
* PXE-boot capabilities
* Anti-virus
* Context-scanning of your internet traffic
* Multiple zones
* Internal and extrnal firewalls

* Patch management is simple. Redhat uses Up2Date but I happened to roll my own up2date which works phenomenally. If you want to make it SUS-like, that’s even easier.

* Imaging? Are we talking about Ghost or what?

* Anti virus and firewall are built in to most Linux distros and in a routered environment, that can be more effectivley stripped prior to the end user even seeing any harmful traffic.

* Multiple zones… why is this a problem at all?

Bottom line is that for the end user, using a Windows environment probably makes the most sense for usability, efficiency and familiarity. Many of the issues you bring up are on the server end and I don’t see why you can’t keep a low TOC when it comes to servers. Biggest thing is is that in a currency analogy, MCSEs are like nickels and RHCEs are like silver dollars. One is worth more. One is more common.

]]>