A US company that creates software to link disparate applications and operating systems says business is brisk.
Software firm slots Unix and Linux into Windows
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
if so, I wouldn’t touch their products with a bargepole.
It looks that way, Vintela’s whois address is exactly the same one as Canopy. Also SCO is selling this exact same service under the name “Vintela Authentication from SCO”
http://www.caldera.com/products/authentication/
Vintela Management Extensions seems to have also originated from SCO, then called Volution Manager/SCO Manager
http://www.nwfusion.com/newsletters/netware/2003/1117nw1.html
My understanding is this is the descendent of Caldera’s only in-house product. “Coast” may have tried out the ideas. Then “Volution” appeared. At some time (as part of turning prior to moving to a litigation business model) this was floated off to a separate company. Volution became Vintela. And the company has the same name as the product.
If it’s a good service then buy it….
“If it’s a good service then buy it….”
How much do you get paid to troll here? Just wondering.
Just a small nitpick, the product slots applications into MS Windows. Nowhere it is said that the kernel is slotted into MS Windows, therefore it slots GNU or UNIX, nothing else. I know, the article doesn’t make this distinction but then the article is on ZDNet and not OSNews.
And Anonymous (IP: —.cm-upc.chello.se):
The definition of “a good service” depends on your preferences. I deem a good service one that is using free (as in freedom) software, this one doesn’t.
Regards
The definition of “a good service” depends on your preferences. I deem a good service one that is using free (as in freedom) software, this one doesn’t.
Based on what FSF says in their marketing or as in what the reality actually is reading the fine prints?
that’s mean.
Some posters have expressed some confusion over what this product actually is – As far as I can tell:
This product seems to be a PAM (Pluggable Authentication Modules – a UNIX/Linux quasi-standard) plugin that you install on a UNIX machine, and a modification to the Active Directory server to support storing ‘UNIX-side’ attributes, like uid/gid, posixAccount and a server component that runs on a UNIX/Linux machine that the PAM module talks directly to, and which is responsible for syncing the UNIX user details with the Active Directory server – It seems that this server implements LDAP and NIS interfaces for this information, and contains the proprietary Active Directory ‘glue’ code.
Most likely, the only difference from an existing LDAP authentication systems is that this one has support for MS’s proprietary Kerberos implementation, which relies on a MS proprietary extension to the published Kerberos standards.
Most Linux distros support LDAP authentication for user logons using PAM, and most major Linux server software packages (Samba, Apache etc. etc. )support using LDAP or LDAP-through-PAM for authentication etc. as well
This product basically allows you to maintain your users/groups on a Microsoft domain controller, while allowing you to freely deploy UNIX/Linux servers and workstations without the hassle of maintaining a separate authentication database (i.e. you dont have to create individual users on the workstations/servers, or use an additional LDAP or NIS server).
As such, it sounds like a useful product, and if it works well, I would say it will make managing Linux servers and workstations in a Windows-centric environment much easier.
However, this company’s association with a pack of litigious liars who seem to be in the business of suing their own users (Microsoft/Canopy Group/SCO) is a major cause for concern, and I certainly would not recommend buying this product unless Vintela offer complete and unlimited indemnification against claims by any party (including themselves) relating to copyright, patent and trade secret infringment resulting from the legal use and/or distribution of this product.
linux is a attempt to re-write a free version of unix from scratch. linux is unix. unix is just a specification.. eh well it’s unix-like enough to be considered unix.
i never understood why people perfer on saying unix and linux are totally different things
trolltech is owned by the canopy group too.. which own a large stake in SCO.
time to start hating on KDE although KDE will remain free for all
is it a crime to have an opinion of supporting SCO? I personally think SCO shot themselves in a foot but they might have a claim… im open to everything since their cases haven’t even reached trail….
“is it a crime to have an opinion of supporting SCO?”
It could be (ie. libel), but by default i’d say no. It ain’t wise imo, and this was a troll (the infamous upc.chello.se anti-Linux troll).
It could be (ie. libel), but by default i’d say no. It ain’t wise imo, and this was a troll (the infamous upc.chello.se anti-Linux troll).
I think it’s pretty good that someone dares to go against the masses who applause GPL and Linux without considering technical merits. Reading through some of the statements of the chello.se anti-Linux “troll” you’d soon realise plenty of them are valid points that the general GPL zealot ignores.
Reading through some of the statements of the chello.se anti-Linux “troll” you’d soon realise plenty of them are valid points that the general GPL zealot ignores.
Just like many stood by and watched as Stalin make his moves and Hitler and … Thinking for yourself is not obvious anymore, hence the amount of zealots.
I think it’s pretty good that someone dares to go against the masses who applause GPL and Linux without considering technical merits.
With “all methods available”? Like for example the litigation way SCO has been driving throught past year?
It’s not (only) technical merits which counts for everyone. Do you have a problem with that?
Anyway i applaud your opinion as general statement in such way that i agree certain forms of resistance against common, uninformed, mass opinions is a Good Thing ™.
SCO however, does not challenge that, and tis easy to argue the uprise of Linux and/or GPL is just that in relation to Microsoft’s imperium.
Reading through some of the statements of the chello.se anti-Linux “troll” you’d soon realise plenty of them are valid points that the general GPL zealot ignores.
(In an earlier sentence you spoke about GPL and Linux)
I failed. What’s the penalty?
Anyway, you’re far too easy to debunk and not worth my time =] baai.
>>linux is a attempt to re-write a free version of unix from scratch. linux is unix. unix is just a specification.. eh well it’s unix-like enough to be considered unix.
i never understood why people perfer on saying unix and linux are totally different things<<
The Single UNIX Specification (SUS) states, in a very compressed form, that the following must be provided to be considered an UNIX OS.:
1) Base Definitions — A list of definitions and conventions used in the specifications and a list of C header files which must be provided by compliant systems.
2) Shell and Utilities — A list of utilities and a description of the shell, sh.
3) System Interfaces — A list of available C system calls which must be provided.
Only part 3 is provided by Linux. Part 1 and 2 are provided by GNU. Therefore Linux is not UNIX. GNU and Linux are probably UNIX but i don’t know a single GNU/Linux distribution that is SUS compliant. I guess because certification costs money. The Linux Standard Base (LSB) is partly based of the SUS but doesn’t require certification for usage of the term “LSB compliant”.
HTH, regards