[lpi-discuss] Re: LPIC-3 core exam -- the "Superstore" profit model applied to Enterprises ...

[Bryan J. Smith]

"Bryan J. Smith" <b.j.smith at ieee.org> wrote:
> In other words, they want a specific ADS version set and
> capability.  And when an older version of ADS doesn't work, they
> will upgrade, paying all those upgrade costs, etc...  As any
> Microsoft Gold Partner, the design is that companies _must_
> upgrade _all_ clients, servers, etc... every 2-3 years.  Why?
> Because companies keep deploying specific Windows technologies that
> require specific Windows services that only work on specific
> Windows versions with specific LDAP schema and related services.
> That's not even "proprietary" anymore.  "Proprietary" requires
> long-term support from a vendor that "values" it's own,
> "proprietary" standards.
> There are better terms -- "Orphanware" and "Hostageware."
> You either "Orphan" yourself or you become a "Hostage" to upgrades.
> Linux will *NEVER* solve the problem of "vendor lock-in."  Samba
> does its best in many aspects, but at some point, you have to
> *CHOOSE* not to deploy an "Orphanware/Hostageware" solution.

Microsoft is basically mirroring its '90s "Superstore" profit model
of software and peripherals requiring a specific PC and OS** to the
network world in the 21st century.  I.e., specific software and
services requiring a specific PC Server and Server OS.  The upgrade
model becomes every 2-3 years, and that means entire IT
infrastructures have to "migrate" every 2-3 years.

**NOTE:  Related Blog Article on the "Superstore" profit model from a
Consumer stanpoint ... "6 Things To Know About Linux" ... 
http://thebs413.blogspot.com/2005/10/6-things-to-know-about-linux.html
  

> That's why enterprise, *MAJOR* enterprise, maintain a separate LDAP
> tree and Kerberos realms from ADS.  In fact, they often use the
> LDAP tree and its Kerberos realms as the "master" for the
> corporation.  Why?
> Because when they upgrade from ADS 2000 to 2003 to "Longhorn," they
> can have *1* base tree and credential reference.  In other words
> they synchronize to the *NON* Microsoft, Linux-hosted
> "infrastructure" instead of trying to get ADS 2000, 2003 and
> "Longhorn" servers to talk to each other.  ;->

90% of the complaints I see about Linux projects have *NOTHING* to do
with Linux.  They have to do with the fact that Linux does not solve
their Orphanware/Hostageware issues any better than Windows did.

It's one thing to take Microsoft Orphanware (i.e., Microsoft
solutions now over 3 years old), and migrate to Linux solutions. 
That works.

But most companies want to use Linux to not only support working with
their old, Microsoft Orphanware solutions, but they _expect_ it to
support the latest Microsoft Hostageware implementations.

Which is why if you either have 3 choices:  
- Hostageware:  Keep paying every 2-3 years for the full migration
- Orphan:  Stick with an older version, no new capabilities
- Open:  Build a core, open infrastructure

Open directly supports not only open systems, but often directly
supports Microsoft Ophanware client systems and services.  Samba's
RPC services work _better_ for Windows 2000, NT and 9x than Windows
Server 2003.  Ziff-Davis regularly confirms this.

At the same time, even Microsoft has to deal with "open standards." 
Which is why most enterprise _still_ maintain a separate "open
infrastructure" to synchronize Microsoft Hostageware with.  No, the
Hostageware solution doesn't work directly, but you _can_ implement
SSO, shared Kerberos Realms, partitioned DNS, etc...

What you're basically asking Ford to do is build an engine _today_
for the 2008 Chevy Corvette.  No -- let me rephrase that.  What
you're basically asking those in the community (say your _neighbors_)
to do is build an engine _today_ for the 2008 Chevy Corvette. 
*SMACK* think things through man!  ;->

> If they want to do that, they *MUST* be willing to pay for
> "Hostageware" upgrades every 2-3 years.  I've had this discussion
> over 1,000 times, and I'll have it again 1,000+ times more.  If you
> want it, pay Microsoft for it and quite talking about "cost and
> stability."
> If you want to build a _perpetual_, _flexible_ and _open_ network
> infrastructure -- you use "open" systems.  They exist!  They have
> *BEFORE* ADS was introduced.

I honestly hope my wasting time to explain this (yet again) really
"gets people to understand" what I educate major corporations
regularly when it comes to their enterprise networks.

I really, really, *REALLY* get tired of "*FIGHTING*" Linux people who
are basically providing "free marketing" to Microsoft.  Linux (let
alone Sun Solaris and other platforms) have _always_ had _powerful_
enterprise network infrastructure capabilities.  But most people
don't assume so.

And they still like to think in products, making Samba analogous to
ADS, which it is *NOT*.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith   Professional, Technical Annoyance
b.j.smith at ieee.org    http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------
     Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution