Failing to see a good use for Linux. Something I'm missing?

[ronanian]

Linux is a rock-solid, no-fuss server OS for my Oracle server, one of my web servers, and a couple other servers. It makes my job easy. In some contexts Windows provides more compatibility, ease of configuration for advanced stuff, features, etc, but Windows is what makes my job busy. It's funny, while my co-workers can handle Windows stuff and know almost nothing about linux, it's really Windows that keeps me in a job -- and modern Windows servers run way better than those of the past.

I've been using linux personally since around 1994 and professionally since 1999 or so. I've been in and out of fanaticism and at this point I care little for proselytizing, I just like to use the best tool for the job, so Linux fills certain niches and Windows is used elsewhere.

[Si2100]

Ive been using Linux about 2004ish - Always Stuck with Ubuntu, Although ive played with CentOS, Debian, Arch and Fedora Desktop.
I Have Linux Servers at home, which run over a ESXi Hpyervisor. Running a 2TB Media Server, and hopefully (over easter) a Games and Web Server,
I Also have plans, to move away from my crappy netgear router, and implement, either a virtual or dedicated software router - running Ubuntu LTS with DHCP Capability and a couple of WAPs around the house - but that's more long term project.

[Squip]

I know it's a bit late but I thought I should probably update on my progress..

I started small and bought myself a Raspberry Pi and a fairly comprehensive book on Linux. Whereas I used avoid most things to do with Linux it was only because I knew very little about it. I feel like I almost know it inside-out and have found many uses for it. Thanks to all for the insight

[mdench]

Good to hear there are so many things you can do with it and it the list will keep growing

[jinnantonnixx]

Good for you! Linux knowledge is scalable (from the Pi up to datacentre servers) and future-proof. I still have manuals from old Xenix/286 systems from the 1980s. These are relics, but the the command syntax and examples are still current.

[Ephelyon]

Not to rain on any parades but pfSense is actually based on FreeBSD. It does look very interesting though; if I ever find myself without a wireless controller that can provide captive portals I'll definitely take a look.

The same rule for a migration applies as much to Linux and FOSS in general as it does to anything else: don't do it for the sake of it. You need a reason to change things. Having said that, most of the responses so far have highlighted some very good reasons for doing so, but if you're going to switch the majority of your back-end system over to FOSS, make sure the school is aware they may need to recruit at a higher salary level next time in order to find someone with strong Unix management skills (another hidden cost of FOSS as these people tend to cost more - some notable exceptions though!)...

Also be aware that if you rely heavily on Group Policy to manage user restrictions, software deployments and the like, then Samba is nowhere near as functional as a Windows DC (though other packages for managing software are available).

[CyberNerd]

Also be aware that if you rely heavily on Group Policy to manage user restrictions, software deployments and the like, then Samba is nowhere near as functional as a Windows DC (though other packages for managing software are available).

In what way? Are you comparing samba3 or samba 4?

[Ephelyon]

Samba 4 is undoubtedly a marked improvement (in that it actually supports GPOs), but some are known to be dodgy (folder redirection for one).

[ConradJones]

Never worked in windows so thats an authentic emulation

[Ephelyon]

Most of our user folders depend on it... it is possible to get it working.

[CyberNerd]

Most of our user folders depend on it... it is possible to get it working.

All our user folders depend on samba, including folder redirection :-)

[Ephelyon]

It works for you then... but it was a thorny one sometime last year if I recall. The main issue I'd have with it at our site is lack of support for multiple DCs (or cross-forest trusts, so if you use a learning platform like LP+ and want to federate your domain to support SSO, that won't work). Alpha releases are now showing the ability to join an existing Windows domain as an additional DC, but there's no mention of multiple DCs in a Samba-only domain yet.

Naturally it will improve with time (as will the original technology), but I wouldn't say it's ready for a slot-in AD replace at the enterprise level yet.

[matt40k]

Linux\Unix\Mac\Windows\*BSD is only as good as the person setting it up and maintaining it. I've heard too often that someone has slapped in the disc installed it, got it "working" only and shouted from the roof tops how brilliant it is and how they are never going back for it to go horribly wrong then revert back.

[CyberNerd]

The main issue I'd have with it at our site is lack of support for multiple DCs (or cross-forest trusts, so if you use a learning platform like LP+ and want to federate your domain to support SSO, that won't work). Alpha releases are now showing the ability to join an existing Windows domain as an additional DC, but there's no mention of multiple DCs in a Samba-only domain yet.
.

I don't know where your getting this from, certainly not from the manual.

Joining a Windows Domain Controller as an Additional DC in a Domain

Once you have a Samba domain controller set up, you can choose to join additional domain controllers to the domain, whether they be additional Samba domain controllers, or additional Windows domain controllers.
If you wish to join an additional Samba domain controller to a domain, then please see the Joining a domain as a DC page. The instructions on that page are the same for joining Samba to a Windows domain as they are for joining Samba to an existing Samba domain.
If you wish to join a new Windows domain controller to a Samba domain, then you should use the 'dcpromo' tool on the Windows machine. Please see the normal instructions for installing dcpromo on Windows, with the exception that you should not check the 'DNS server' option box when it is offered. Right now you should either use Windows for DNS, or use Samba and bind9 for DNS. Mixing the two can work, but it is an advanced topic that is beyond the scope of this howto.

[Ephelyon]

That's very strange - my source was the page it links to (both pages on the same site updated on the same date last month) plus a review from a couple of months ago I think. Must have different people writing the docs...

Nothing in there about federating either. I'd still say that at the end of the day if you want 100% compatibility in real-time (i.e. Samba has to catch up whenever Microsoft releases a new feature) then get the client and server made by the same people; it's the most logical approach from a development point of view. If that's not a big concern or you're short of cash and the environment can handle it, then tech like Linux, Samba, LAMP all become perfectly viable options (though in Samba's case I wouldn't have said that a couple of years ago).