Ubuntu Domain Server

[Ryan Dwyer]

My goal is for businesses to use Ubuntu, especially as workstations, because
I believe you won't convert the majority of people unless they experience it
at work. My motive is entirely to get Ubuntu used by more people.
The only way I see Ubuntu being used in the workplace is by having a "domain
solution" where the server and desktop editions integrate tightly to provide
a better solution than Windows. Servers having GUIs is not my main goal but
I think it's important if we want to get Ubuntu used in businesses.

I personally don't mind using a CLI environment. At work I have an Ubuntu
Server providing file sharing services which I manage only using SSH.
However, I fear that when I eventually leave no one will know how to manage
it and it will be decommissioned.

I realise I may have come across as a typical newbie who just wants a GUI
server, and I apologise if anyone got that impression.

-Ryan

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:10 AM, Onno Benschop <onno at itmaze.com.au> wrote:

> On 20/10/09 15:24, Ryan Dwyer wrote:
> > What are your thoughts on having a server product that competes with
> > Windows Server? Something which has a GUI, is very easy to manage and
> > works best with Ubuntu workstations.
> In light of some of the other comments in this thread, I'd like to make
> an observation, which may or may not hold true.
>
> I personally prefer the CLI for many, if not most, tasks.
>
> The reason that I do is because I have an understanding of what is going
> on for the tools that I use.
>
> The reason that a GUI is nice, is for those times when the understanding
> is poor. For example, I'm still trying to get my head around how LDAP
> and Samba work together to make a Domain Controller. I've read lots of
> documentation on the subject, but the overall picture some how still
> eludes me. A well built GUI can remove some of the complexity in the
> implementation and management of such a complex environment.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about the Windows or KDE approach
> that everything in the system has a check-box or a menu option. I'm
> talking about how a GUI can simplify the complexities of such an
> environment. (This is not intended as a swipe on KDE, just that I've
> never liked the thundering horde of options it provides - I use a CLI
> for that.)
>
> If all the processes on a server were simple, we wouldn't need system
> administrators. That's unlikely to ever happen.
>
> I think what you are trying to discuss is a way of making server
> administration less complex.
>
> I think that you feel that a GUI will assist in that, and to some degree
> it will.
>
> I think it is admirable that you want Ubuntu to be used by more people,
> but I'm beginning to wonder if you're asking the right question.
>
> What I think you're asking is for a simpler way to manage a complex
> system - and for me that comes with installing sensible defaults.
> Perhaps your blueprint might attempt to describe functionality, rather
> than a GUI. If you're not careful you will be building ebox or webmin
> all over again.
>
> --
> Onno Benschop
>
> Connected via Bigpond NextG at S31°54'06" - E115°50'39" (Yokine, WA)
> --
> ()/)/)()        ..ASCII for Onno..
> |>>?            ..EBCDIC for Onno..
> --- -. -. ---   ..Morse for Onno..
>
> ITmaze   -   ABN: 56 178 057 063   -  ph: 04 1219 8888   -
> onno at itmaze.com.au
>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/attachments/20091022/56ef7b5a/attachment.html>