thelinuxlink.net

Hi all.

We are setting up the hardware for a Linux lab at my work - this lab is to evaluate moving from a MS Server 2003 AD (XP Pro on the desktops) to an open alternative. I'm the prime motivator for doing this. I have Google'd but have not found great references on doing 100+ desktops/laptops in an integrated, replicated, scalable, maintainable environment.

Lots of options exist

• Terminal Service-like, thin-client - plenty of options, commerical or open

• Traditional NFS/NIS(Or LDAP) environment

• Red Hat solution

• Novell solution

(others?)

Of these, Novell has stated that it aims for 60-80% costs of a MS solution. I was hoping for better savings.

We have two offices at either side of North America - we need to replicate whichever SSO that we choose - as well any roaming home or files will need to be replaced (currently using Expand Accellerator/WAFS to excellent effect).

I don't want to outsource to IBM or another - which effectively eats any potential savings. (though I may try Novell Service Offerings - at least for the lab)

Novell Zenworks is the only Linux that I've seen that comes close to some of the functionality within AD (more of an intersection than a subset). But I'm willing to compromise in this.

Money is not the main issue - but is my top bullet for the company executive. Our current hardware at the server and desktops are less than 18 months old.

Any suggestions is appreciative?

You would have to look at what inhouse skills your work has available, the second solution is possibly the cheapest and works well, but you would need someone to set it up and maintain it. Whereas if you paid novell , you would get the solution but at a monetary price.

allix wrote:You would have to look at what inhouse skills your work has available, the second solution is possibly the cheapest and works well, but you would need someone to set it up and maintain it. Whereas if you paid novell , you would get the solution but at a monetary price.

True. The necessity to train or hire new resources will be part of the cost-benefit analysis. This may change the decision only in that do we go for a more centralized solution (thin-clients) or distributed (NFS homes).

I still would like more information online for migrating mid-sized offices to Linux. I'm surprised at the lack of documention actually.

Will the effectiveness of the remote installation be the strong deciding factor on which distribution you use?

We used to used Kickstart with Redhat 9 at my old job. It seemed to scale very well. But the main reason we chose that distro and deployment method was the simplicity of Redhat's interface, not Kickstart.

Another thing to consider is whether you have a sysadmin at both locations. If you have someone at both locations to support the environment, you can reduce the bandwidth costs and greatly expand your distribution choices by developing some manner of cd deployment that gets shipped to both locations on a release cycle.

Also, I'd consider what systems are needed for your environment (i.e. CRM, NAS, etc.) . Determine what can be web-based. Having your core systems web-based will aid in making changes on the fly and keep costs down. Web applications tend to scale much better over WAN connections and you can cache a considerable amount of information using SQUID.

In short, focus your decision on what fits the workflow. Getting Novell or IBM involved this early in the decision making process will only drain resources you will need for development cycles.