# Best server OS for a school network of 90 clients



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

A government administered school in my village is going overkill with its IT infrastructure expansion. They are setting up a 50 client lab, 20 in the offices and the rest in the library. The principal, a good friend of mine, was about to invest heavily in consultation companies. I stopped him and bought time for this week to figure out a suitable server OS that would drive two reasonably powerful AMD Opteron based servers. I hope you can visualise the network. Based on the following factors, help me choose a server OS:

1. Stability and low running cost
2. Security
3. Administrative control on clients (to make sure the kids aren't fooling around)
4. Optimal utilisation of system resources
5. Easy to troubleshoot

Vote in the poll.

Thank You


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 18, 2007)

Windows Server 2005 RC2 is best  IMO


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 18, 2007)

craigwhiteside said:


> Windows 2000 is best , at school you wont need any fancy features or a nice looking gui



He asked about the server. 



I think Win2k3 is easiest to manage, finding Windows admins is easier than Linux admins. Administrative controls are done via OU's in the AD very easily. Stability shouldn't be an issue with server OSes. If they are unstable they have no right to exist.
Performance wise 2k3 does pretty good.


----------



## Disparia (Dec 18, 2007)

What are the client machines running?

Does the person in charge know the in's and out's of either distro? or Server 2003 for that matter?


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

The clients run Windows XP (genuine) with a lot of stuff disabled like themes, etc.

Based on the infrastructure, the school would hire an admin. Linux/BSD is not a very rare thing here.


----------



## Disparia (Dec 18, 2007)

Just checking 

Here we're hard pressed to find someone like that. Server 2003 with policies, permissions, RIS, etc - no problem. But doing the equivalent with linux? I'd have to do some research and test lab.


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

Adding restrictions to client machines isn't a tough thing with Linux, though I doubt how I'd keep restrictions on applications, which was piece-of-cake using a NT4 server.

Just that running cost could be reduced using RHEL as far are client licenses go.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 18, 2007)

btarunr said:


> Adding restrictions to client machines isn't a tough thing with Linux



What alternative is there to the AD in Linux? Samba doesn't offer anything useful here.


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

true.

SaMBa merely is for resource sharing. But the Linux hosts would proxy the internet line. You can have a certain degree of control here. Blocking apps and account-level restrictions is no no with Linux.

With Linux I could evade the client licensing fee. A very tricky situation.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 18, 2007)

btarunr said:


> true.





> Adding restrictions to client machines isn't a tough thing with Linux



Care to explain then? How for example do I restrict a user from accessing the control panel when using a Linux server? Can it be done at all?

Edit: Other than using Windows files in the netlogon dir which isn't very user friendly. I recall doing something along those lines some years ago. Worked really crappy. Could have improved over time, or I'm just an idiot


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

restrictions in context of what online resource a student can access and what he can't because like I said, the hosts are going to proxy the internet.

rgd AD, there's no alternative.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 18, 2007)

btarunr said:


> restrictions in context of what online resource a student can access and what he can't because like I said, the hosts are going to proxy the internet.
> 
> rgd AD, there's no alternative.



Still, doesn't an ISA server offer more options here for Windows clients? Again via the AD though.
IE allow protocols, ports, logon times/dates all based on user account/group membership.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 18, 2007)

i vote ubunto  just cause i like using it and i have never had a crashing issue on my servers but those are converted from old home pcs


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 18, 2007)

cdawall said:


> i vote ubunto  just cause i like using it and i have never had a crashing issue on my servers but those are converted from old home pcs



Any argument besides personal preference? IE why do you prefer it? Did you have other distros/BSD's/Unices/Windows servers crash on you? Do you actually have users on you servers with restricted rights?


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Still, doesn't an ISA server offer more options here for Windows clients? Again via the AD though.
> IE allow protocols, ports, logon times/dates all based on user account/group membership.



sure does. and to discuss this exact tussle between features and price, I started this thread. I am humbled by your interest being a supermod. 

the crucial factor is the costs involved in licensing the clients, something that can be evaded if we use a *nix/BSD. Is Windows Server worth paying for the client licenses or can I end up saving that (and end up losing on AD) by using Linux (while still having decent control on students' internet access and whitelisting/blacklisting websites, allowing downloads, etc.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 18, 2007)

btarunr said:


> sure does. and to discuss this exact tussle between features and price



Price is a hard one, Windows Licenses usually cost more. However a Linux/Unix admin costs more than a Windows one. If you count in the hassle in getting free source environments to work the discussion can go either way. 
There are plenty of articles on this, half of them favor Linux the others favor Windows. I think the ease of administration eventually becomes an issue. 

For example, what kind of school is it? If they teach IT related things the school might have the knowledge to manage Linux already, ie no extra costs.
However if they teach 16 girls who want to become pretty for a living they might be better offer hiring a single Windows admin who could manage everything on his own. ie the savings in operational costs outweigh the licenses.


The company I work at works mainly with open source stuff, ie Linux servers, thin clients logging on to those servers. We use a call registration system called PHProjekt instead of Topdesk for example. Finding personnel with the right knowledge is hard. 

I have to admit, I have no clue where the turn point is, in network size for example. I would simply make two calculations, one of each situations and present both to the schools directors, whoever has to give the green light. Offering alternatives is a positive thing in any situation.
Whichever is cheaper, I would say the Microsoft way will be the easiest. If the finances are there it would certainly not be a bad choice like some people would claim.





btarunr said:


> I started this thread. I am humbled by your interest being a supermod.



Yay, finally someone that actually bothers to suck up to me


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 18, 2007)

hmm maybe use solaris 10?


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

craigwhiteside said:


> hmm maybe use solaris 10?



Solaris has its own issues with licensing and hardware compatibility. Solaris is an awesome db server OS (and I can understand you're looking at it from the context of a school network where records are maintained) but it's a bit hi-fi I'd assume and I don't think Solaris has any better user administrative features compared to Linux when dealing with Windows clients. Thanks!!

Say can you pl modify my poll so I could see who voted for what? sometimes besides volumes you also have to note on the quality of the voter. tks.


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 18, 2007)

btarunr said:


> Say can you pl modify my poll so I could see who voted for what? sometimes besides volumes you also have to note on the quality of the voter. tks.



i would if i had permissions


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 18, 2007)

solaris has improved on its hardware compatibility and many other things, i think you should at least give it a go, you can get it for free 
IMO, 

http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/get.jsp

ill actually try this out and give a review on it, i have a rack server just sitting here


----------



## wiak (Dec 18, 2007)

FreeBSD hands down
easy installation, best security out of the box, based on the good old Berkeley Software Distribution
ports are the best software collection ever!, just "cd /usr/ports/program & make install clean" and it will install it and all the needed packages
http://www.freebsd.org/


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Price is a hard one,



We were actually ready for a full-fledged Windows setup, just thought we could save a little here and there.



DanTheBanjoman said:


> Windows Licenses usually cost more. However a Linux/Unix admin costs more than a Windows one. If you count in the hassle in getting free source environments to work the discussion can go either way.
> There are plenty of articles on this, half of them favor Linux the others favor Windows. I think the ease of administration eventually becomes an issue.



Finding a *nix admin isn't an expensive thing here in India. Linux pretty-much rules the enterprise segment, for obvious reasons that it's comparitivly less expensive. So actually admins are trained in both. An average Indian admin would have both MSCE and RHCE in his belt.  



DanTheBanjoman said:


> For example, what kind of school is it? If they teach IT related things the school might have the knowledge to manage Linux already, ie no extra costs.


That's just a high-school in a rural setup. 



DanTheBanjoman said:


> The company I work at works mainly with open source stuff, ie Linux servers, thin clients logging on to those servers. We use a call registration system called PHProjekt instead of Topdesk for example. Finding personnel with the right knowledge is hard.
> 
> I have to admit, I have no clue where the turn point is, in network size for example. I would simply make two calculations, one of each situations and present both to the schools directors, whoever has to give the green light. Offering alternatives is a positive thing in any situation.
> Whichever is cheaper, I would say the Microsoft way will be the easiest. If the finances are there it would certainly not be a bad choice like some people would claim.



Yes it looks that way. My high-school used to run good'ol NT 4.0 SP6. (server and workstation)


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 18, 2007)

> Yes it looks that way. My high-school used to run good'ol NT 4.0 SP6. (server and workstation)



then in that case stick with a windows environment, go with windows server 2003 standard/enterprise or go with the windows server 2005 RC2


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

craigwhiteside said:


> or go with the windows server 2005 RC2



Are you recommending the use of a release-candidate OS?  2k3 looks fine, 2k5 RC2 isn't a fully stable product that I can get support from Microsoft.....or can I?


----------



## cdawall (Dec 18, 2007)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Any argument besides personal preference? IE why do you prefer it? Did you have other distros/BSD's/Unices/Windows servers crash on you? Do you actually have users on you servers with restricted rights?



i ran windows servers for a while and they were down a lot more than my ub, i uninstalled windows server 03 and put ubuntu i believe it was 5.x originally now its 6.6LTS, but it has gone down maybe half as often

my current servers

P4 HT 3.2ghz, an MSI neo something mobo, 512mb supertalent DDR400, antec 450watt
celeron 533mhz, Dell mobo, 256mb PC133, Dell PSU
Amd Athlon XP 1400+, ECS mobo, 512mb Mushkin DDR266 (flashed@333), 300watt PSU

all of them have ubuntu 6.6LTS on them but i only have the celeron running now, mainly since i moved i havent had a chance to set the others up


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 18, 2007)

cdawall said:


> i ran windows servers for a while and they were down a lot more than my ub, i uninstalled windows server 03 and put ubuntu i believe it was 5.x originally now its 6.6LTS, but it has gone down maybe half as often
> 
> my current servers
> 
> ...



And what was the downtime caused by? What are the servers running?


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

Dan, can you pl modify my poll so I could see who voted for what? sometimes besides volumes you also have to note on the quality of the voter. tks


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 18, 2007)

No I cannot. Can only add/remove options and mess with answers. Can't change the type of poll.

However, you shouldn't require a poll to decide. Just read constructed arguments instead. Who cares what 100 people randomly clicked when two people actually have solid arguments. Also, you shouldn't follow opinions, create your own. Just analyze arguments. At the end of the ride it's gonna be you who has to stand behind his own choices. 

ie I could recommend you plenty of platforms, but if you know nothing about them in the first place it's pointless. Even though W1zOS (he's writing it, don't tell anyone it's still a secret) is far superior to anything on the market you can't configure it so it's not an option.


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> No I cannot. Can only add/remove options and mess with answers. Can't change the type of poll.
> 
> However, you shouldn't require a poll to decide. Just read constructed arguments instead. Who cares what 100 people randomly clicked when two people actually have solid arguments. Also, you shouldn't follow opinions, create your own. Just analyze arguments. At the end of the ride it's gonna be you who has to stand behind his own choices.
> 
> ie I could recommend you plenty of platforms, but if you know nothing about them in the first place it's pointless. Even though W1zOS (he's writing it, don't tell anyone it's still a secret) is far superior to anything on the market you can't configure it so it's not an option.



I'd like your take on Win 2005 RC2 as suggested by Craig. Shhhh.....you're talking about something top-secret in a public thread. 

Yes, votes don't quite decide things. I put up a poll for those who are too lazy/busy to type a post. And so I could see who chose what and make an understanding. Click on the thread blow my SIG, look where most people casted their vote and where W1z did.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 18, 2007)

btarunr said:


> I'd like your take on Win 2005 RC2 as suggested by Craig. Shhhh.....you're talking about something top-secret in a public thread.
> 
> Yes, votes don't quite decide things. I put up a poll for those who are too lazy/busy to type a post. And so I could see who chose what and make an understanding. Click on the thread blow my SIG, look where most people casted their vote and where W1z did.



Haven't used 2005, did download it some time ago but never had time to toy with it. However I would not recommend using release candidates in a production environment. And since 2005 basically is Vista server you could expect some driver related issues, specially when running on older hardware.
As usual, I'd wait for SP1 before using an OS, by then major issues are solved.


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

Ohh so is 2005 server what they call Longhorn server? Then I'm miles away. The TYAN boards I'm using has a pre-historic 16MB ATI Rage....but hey that's just for display functionality and I don't know how it'd go with Longhorn Display Driver Model.

Yes...I can't use a RC in mission-critical environments where childrens' academic records, projects are for safe-keeping in a server. The only _RC_ I can't resist is RC planes a la Infrared.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 18, 2007)

btarunr said:


> Ohh so is 2005 server what they call Longhorn server? Then I'm miles away. The TYAN boards I'm using has a pre-historic 16MB ATI Rage....but hey that's just for display functionality and I don't know how it'd go with Longhorn Display Driver Model.
> 
> Yes...I can't use a RC in mission-critical environments where childrens' academic records, projects are for safe-keeping in a server. The only _RC_ I can't resist is RC planes a la Infrared.



The most current boards still use 16MB ATi or XGI cards. There is no need for anything more on a server.

Also, since the server is going to hold precious data, make use of RAID and daily off site backups. And TEST the recovery procedure. It's a joke how many companies have no clue how to recover their backups.


----------



## craigwhiteside (Dec 18, 2007)

just because its vista doesnt mean it cant scale down the graphics, if its a server i dont think it would have all the fancy graphics that we have as standard.


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

craigwhiteside said:


> just because its vista doesnt mean it cant scale down the graphics, if its a server i dont think it would have all the fancy graphics that we have as standard.



True, but even without the Aero, Longhorn (be it 2005 server or Vista) have known to be heavy on the resources. Classic example: comparing Windows XP to Windows Vista Home Basic (no Aero). 

You might say "in this case go back to 2000," but 2000 lacks muti-core and virtualisation optimisations.



DanTheBanjoman said:


> Also, since the server is going to hold precious data, make use of RAID and daily off site backups. And TEST the recovery procedure. It's a joke how many companies have no clue how to recover their backups



Agree, which is why I'm using 6x 320GB SATA II drives in RAID 0+1, also looking at tape solutions from HP. Not considered SAS for $$ reasons, the servers are in the humane E-ATX form-factor and not a scary looking rack.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 18, 2007)

craigwhiteside said:


> just because its vista doesnt mean it cant scale down the graphics, if its a server i dont think it would have all the fancy graphics that we have as standard.



But it uses the same driver model, ie not every piece of hardware has drivers available. The graphical part is disabled by default on servers for obvious reasons. In fact 2k3 comes with hardware acceleration for graphics at minimum, same for sound.


----------



## Disparia (Dec 18, 2007)

> Ohh so is 2005 server what they call Longhorn server? Then I'm miles away. The TYAN boards I'm using has a pre-historic 16MB ATI Rage....but hey that's just for display functionality and I don't know how it'd go with Longhorn Display Driver Model.
> 
> Yes...I can't use a RC in mission-critical environments where childrens' academic records, projects are for safe-keeping in a server. The only RC I can't resist is RC planes a la Infrared.



He can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it's Server 2003, Server 2003 R2 ("Release 2", came out in 2005), and Server 2008 which is still in beta.

-edit- Scratch that, 2008 is in RC1 at the moment.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 18, 2007)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> And what was the downtime caused by? What are the servers running?



downtime was caused by instablility and i had no oc on anything. now i admit the downtime on the P4 system was caused by a broken fan bracket. the celeron 533mhz it was down a lot for unknown reasons but they disappeared when i switched to ubuntu maybe driver problems? the AXP set up was down do to power supply issues so that has nothing to do with server 03.

i also noticed the celeron/AXP system seemed to be a lot more responsive, kinda like they ran a little faster when i switched to ubuntu, but that could be my imagination.

they ran as basic web servers and controlled the entire wired network IE firewalls etc the P4 had some video converting done on it aswell.

longhorn is server 08



			
				CNET said:
			
		

> LOS ANGELES--For the second time in recent days, Microsoft has inadvertently confirmed Windows Server 2008 as the official name for Longhorn Server.
> 
> Microsoft France had the name up on its Web site as of 10:30 p.m. PT Sunday, though it may well take it down (Credit to bink.nu and other Microsoft enthusiast sites for bringing attention to the posting). The move follows an earlier slip-up on its U.S. press site.



source


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 18, 2007)

Jizzler said:


> He can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it's Server 2003, Server 2003 R2 ("Release 2", came out in 2005), and Server 2008 which is still in beta.
> 
> -edit- Scratch that, 2008 is in RC1 at the moment.



You're still right, there is no such thing as server 2005. Just virtual server 2005, sql server 2005 etc. Can't believe I blindly copied the year 

Anyway, obviously I was referring to 2008.


----------



## btarunr (Dec 18, 2007)

VERSION CONFLICT ---which is why I kept all non-stable/ un-relased products out of my poll, being ignorant about a RC2 OS.


----------



## wiak (Dec 18, 2007)

the reason i said FreeBSD, same for other *Unix is that, with windows you have to restart everytime micro$oft releases security updates, *unix systems are alot more uptime friendly as you dont need to reboot when some updates comes, as most software in unix systems arnt the kernel and can easly be updated without any restarts, you only need to restart when you upgrade the kernel, and that is good as you can download the source code and compile it on the server, then put it in and restart once a year or two, like if dell installed freebsd 6.0, you dont need to reinstall the os, just download the kernel and compile it and then restart

and another reason i recommend FreeBSD is that you will have less problems with depencies when using the excellent ports collection, it supports nearly every software written for linux, and even some that are exclusive like valve's steam, it can be run via the linux kernel in emulation without any performace loss, so its a win win 

and there is the improved smp support in the upcoming freebsd 7.0, and 6.x to 7.0 is easy to upgrade 
should scale a lot better on opteron rigs!
http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/scaling/7.0 Preview.pdf
http://ivoras.sharanet.org/freebsd/freebsd7.html


----------



## btarunr (Dec 19, 2007)

wiak said:


> the reason i said FreeBSD, same for other *Unix is that, with windows you have to restart everytime micro$oft releases security updates, *unix systems are alot more uptime friendly as you dont need to reboot when some updates comes, as most software in unix systems arnt the kernel and can easly be updated without any restarts, you only need to restart when you upgrade the kernel, and that is good as you can download the source code and compile it on the server, then put it in and restart once a year or two, like if dell installed freebsd 6.0, you dont need to reinstall the os, just download the kernel and compile it and then restart
> 
> and another reason i recommend FreeBSD is that you will have less problems with depencies when using the excellent ports collection, it supports nearly every software written for linux, and even some that are exclusive like valve's steam, it can be run via the linux kernel in emulation without any performace loss, so its a win win
> 
> ...



I agree, when it comes to uptime, BSD servers are a legend...most web-servers use BSD for this sole reason....uptime. Also that all while *nix-derived OSes have a monolithic kernel, BSD alone has a hybrid monolithic "client inside server, client outside server" kernel where by "client" I mean process, by "server" I mean CPU-time arbiter. Where every process "connects"   to the kernel like clients connect to a server, erratic processes are killed and respawned. critical processes are "client inside server" like Windows NT kernel....non critical processes are "client outside".....this is one thing that makes BSD stand apart from Linux while most ignorant people would argue "meh...BSD is verbatim Linux"....that's why BSD got the informal title "Bull Shit Deprived (BSD)" meaning no-nonsense OS.

Despite all that BSD's uptime capability wouldn't benefit this scenario of a school network, where the servers would anyway go down at 6pm when the school, students and staff call it a day. And if the admin wishes to apply an update, he can do it before shut-down at 6pm each day.

Secondly BSD offers no advantages over any other *nix derivative, be it Solaris or Linux (though Solaris is looking to be an excellent db framework), when it comes to making sure a kid doesn't fool around with Control Panel. Thanks a lot....BSD is the BEST web-server OS....nothing can prove it wrong when it comes to uptime and web-servers need uptime. School servers enjoy the luxury of switching off everyday at 6pm.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 19, 2007)

wiak said:


> the reason i said FreeBSD, same for other *Unix is that, with windows you have to restart everytime micro$oft releases security updates, *unix systems are alot more uptime friendly as you dont need to reboot when some updates comes, as most software in unix systems arnt the kernel and can easly be updated without any restarts, you only need to restart when you upgrade the kernel, and that is good as you can download the source code and compile it on the server, then put it in and restart once a year or two, like if dell installed freebsd 6.0, you dont need to reinstall the os, just download the kernel and compile it and then restart



Restarts, even though they're requires a lot less than you think, aren't relevant in the school situations. Restarts can be done at night or in weekends. 



wiak said:


> and another reason i recommend FreeBSD is that you will have less problems with depencies when using the excellent ports collection, it supports nearly every software written for linux, and even some that are exclusive like valve's steam, it can be run via the linux kernel in emulation without any performace loss, so its a win win



It's a server, nobody cares about Steam. Nor about random software written for Linux. The few servers it'll run (web, domain, file, print, whatever) are available on basically any platform. Does BSD offer anything extra over any Linux or Unix distro in this respect? Does BSD offer you any control over what users can do on their clients? And what clients would these options be available to?


----------



## mixa (Dec 19, 2007)

For me there`s no clear answer to this.
It`s highly dependable on the level of knowledge of the administration.
In one case freeBSD may is the best choice but it requires years and years fighting the complicated monster called UNIX + some specifics that fbsd brings.
In other hand Windows Server 2003 brings everything that may be needed and it`s much easier to manage.Ofcourse it has it`s own glitches and stuff but overall it works fairly good.
Performance on both is very high.Also most of the software needed for any server is available for both platforms (lets say apache, mysql to ftp , ssh/telnet , remote administration , routing , touneling ...whatever).
If that were me choosing the OS for the new server I would go for FreeBSD, but hey that`s just me.


----------



## btarunr (Dec 19, 2007)

make a choice keeping in mind you're controlling a naughty kid from getting into the Control Panel and fooling around with things. We're talking about a school network here, BSD isn't helping in this though the dilemma strikes up where Windows alternatives like Solaris are an excellent data pooling/ db server OS. We want our servers to do both: hosting the labs + maintaining critical data and db's.


----------



## Steevo (Dec 19, 2007)

Kissasses.



But I vote server 03. Light on resources, easy to manage, stable on GOOD hardware, too many times people throw shit togeather for cheap or leftovers and blame the OS, not the shitty drivers, or hardware. Build or buy with at least 30% more headroom before you run out of resources.


----------



## niko084 (Dec 19, 2007)

As much of a Linux guy I am...

I voted Server 2003...

Reasons- Schools use Windows primarily, its easy to setup, easier to secure, everything about a windows server is simply simpler. Makes the network admin's jobs easy and keep things clean and simple. Almost all the local schools systems I have seen around here are running Windows 2000 Server or Sever 2003.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 19, 2007)

niko084 said:


> As much of a Linux guy I am...
> 
> I voted Server 2003...
> 
> Reasons- Schools use Windows primarily, its easy to setup, easier to secure, everything about a windows server is simply simpler. Makes the network admin's jobs easy and keep things clean and simple. Almost all the local schools systems I have seen around here are running Windows 2000 Server or Sever 2003.



Novell is a common choice as well.


----------



## btarunr (Dec 19, 2007)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Novell is a common choice as well.



In context of db and data-pooling?


----------



## niko084 (Dec 19, 2007)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Novell is a common choice as well.



Yes it generally is, but around here at least I don't see it anymore...


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 19, 2007)

btarunr said:


> In context of db and data-pooling?



If by DB you mean a user/computer DB similar to AD, yes. Haven't heard much of them since they bought Suse though.


----------



## btarunr (Dec 19, 2007)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> If by DB you mean a user/computer DB similar to AD, yes. Haven't heard much of them since they bought Suse though.



i mean db as in general (maintaining student records, financial accounts + keeping it accessible and secure).


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Dec 19, 2007)

Well student records most likely are kept in either teacher files, ie on a fileserver. Then It would be yes. However I have no clue what options there are for SQL DB's and the likes on Novell. Not sure how old the latest version is either, last time I used it was several years ago.


----------



## btarunr (Dec 19, 2007)

aargh...

I'm convincing that old man to another single server that runs licensed Solaris(apart from these two) there's just so much I'd be missing if I swing either way, so at least there's a dedicated db server running SQL (MAPiS to be precise) atop Solaris. Win 2k3 playing nanny for Pesky kids.

but hey I was a pesky kid too...crashed a client by trying to tighten its memory timings (OC) as the BIOS setup was unlocked. Got away before the admin could notice


----------

