• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

M$ banning file sharing and print sharing using SAMBA ? Why !?!

Because they are a business. Excluding any other software from working with their OS (except the software they allow the users to use) is how they make money. I think thats what the MS zealots say, not sure.

You should also fix your title, you mispelled MS.
 
we put the $ in M$... Why do you think? Companies like M$ aren't known for playing well with others...

I don't know that it's that they WONT network together, or if it's just that they don't want you to.... I set up a Samba server at work once, and my boss was wtf is this.... "Thomas, did you do this...?" As I walked over to his work station, he had My Network Places open, and there was an Icon that said ERS1 Samba (Samba server Xx.Xx). He didn't try, now that I think of it, but still... XP saw it, and recognized it was a Samba server.... I think if you read this you get the feeling that they just don't want you to use other stuff... I might be reading something else into it, which is possible... I just woke up and I'm late for school :Q
 
Nothing surprising really. The typical loss of business for MS is on the network backend - companies want to keep MS on the desktop, but avoid expensive and insecure MS server products for their infrastructure by using *NIX. Take away Samba, and that's harder to do. Though from what I've read, this is not really as a big a threat as it appears, but I don't understand the legal details involved.
 


<< we put the $ in M$... >>



Its silly.

Anyhow, they can work together right now. Maybe not legally once this is all done, but they will work together. We will have SAMBA on the black market. On servers outside of the US' control.
 
Microsoft will and IS attempting to replace TCP/IP by continually allowing security problems to exist. at some point they will say HEY.. we have a replacement here for TCP/IP that is 100% more secure than the current standards.. This is what Bill means when he says from now on the company will be focusing on security..
blocking any app other than theirs is a good step towards securing a 100% ms world..



I'd crap on MS if I could 😀
I've dreamt of knocking on bills door and leaving a pile of Poop on fire in a bag on his porch hehehehe..
 
Ok im sorta confused. What does the term "banning" mean in this case? Are they incorporating code that will prevent SAMBA from working any longer or are they saying that anyone using SAMBA is in violation of the M$ licence and subject to lawsuits?
 
All they really did is release the docs to implement CIFS (i.e. SMB) under a license that specifically prohibits GPL or LGPL'd products from using them.

Samba so far was written with little or no docs (because MS docs of it sucked) anyway so not much has changed. To be able to use those docs all the Samba developers would have to do is relicense future Samba releases under the BSD license, and really I think that would hurt MS as it would be then possible to have many 3rd party SMB servers all closed source but based off of Samba. Theoretically Samba could be the de-facto standard SMB after a while if enough people incorported it instead of Windows.
 


<< Ok im sorta confused. What does the term "banning" mean in this case? Are they incorporating code that will prevent SAMBA from working any longer or are they saying that anyone using SAMBA is in violation of the M$ licence and subject to lawsuits? >>



They want to do both at the same time along with not allowing other MS formats to be used with non-MS software using the GPL liscense or other software that they do not like.
 


<< All they really did is release the docs to implement CIFS (i.e. SMB) under a license that specifically prohibits GPL or LGPL'd products from using them.

Samba so far was written with little or no docs (because MS docs of it sucked) anyway so not much has changed. To be able to use those docs all the Samba developers would have to do is relicense future Samba releases under the BSD license, and really I think that would hurt MS as it would be then possible to have many 3rd party SMB servers all closed source but based off of Samba. Theoretically Samba could be the de-facto standard SMB after a while if enough people incorported it instead of Windows. >>


very interesting speculation.

i think this is just going to further polarize the market. the more stuff like this MS does, the more disgruntled users abandon ship, and the ones who dont, will be probably using 100% MS so it doesnt matter to them. I just got my firewall up and running (hooray), running debian/2.4.18/iptables/ssh, with apache and ftp of some sort to come, perhaps nfs too. i personally could care less about samba. its a neat idea, but similar to wine, it just gives users an excuse to still stay attached to windows in one way or another.
 
I don't like M$, but I agree with BingBongWongFooey.

This is not a thread to Linux as server OS.
A. If one have to store file from Win to Linux box - he 'll use ftp. You can even map ftp site to a network drive.
And there is no need worry about workgroup or name or any of that - as long as one knows IP address. ftp connection can work over the internet too.

B. If I want to get files from Win to linux - I will use SMB <b>CLIENT</b>. And Smb client can be released under different license.

On the other hand, this isn't good for Linux as desktop OS, cause it makes sharing files harder. But you can share folder on Win computer and mount it in Linux.
(Linux will be a client). Either way, there is a workaround.

SMB is M$ protocol and it isn't that great anyway.
 

i was heard to remark on irc:

<StuckMojo> who the f##k are the slimey a$$ lowlife m0therf##kers who sit around there all day
greasing their d!cks while drafting new license agreements that allow them to a$$ f##k
their customers?
 
n0c
check you link in you sig "http://%20http://www.team.net/mjb/hawg.html"



as for this whole M$ thing. im getting reeeeeeeally sick of this :disgust:
 


<< Microsoft will and IS attempting to replace TCP/IP by continually allowing security problems to exist. at some point they will say HEY.. we have a replacement here for TCP/IP that is 100% more secure than the current standards.. This is what Bill means when he says from now on the company will be focusing on security.. >>




Many people have attempted to replace TCP over the years. It's a nice goal. Novell introduced IPX, IBM used to have their own proprietary stack. In the end, TCP won out because:

1) it works
2) it works on everything


Microsoft will never try to replace tcp fully. It simply isnt feasible. There are too many banks / etc that run tcp based services that will never switch to microsoft, and they realize that.


Please stop spreading nonsense.
 


<< A. If one have to store file from Win to Linux box - he 'll use ftp. You can even map ftp site to a network drive. >>



Ever tried watching movies, running applications or anything else over FTP?? For Storage FTP works fine. But not if you want to use the files. And FTP login is not encrypted (you might wanna use ssl or sftp).
 
This sucks like most of Microsoft's actions, but I think that this could be ruled illegal for singling out GPL implementations but not others if somebody wanted to press the issue.
 
I agree.....My SUSE distro does too...I'm waiting for the day when more than the 50 people are using it.

Never heard of the 6bone I guess? There's already a few colleges and other organizations that are using it. Like Debian, they have a few servers on the 6bone for updating and making sure things like apache, ssh, etc that are IPv6 aware are working properly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top