PDA

View Full Version : Goodbye Netware and hello SLES or Windows?



lanaleon
20-Aug-2012, 17:36
We have been a non-profit using GroupWise and Netware for more than a
decade. The two Netware servers have been playing nice to the four
Windows servers, but now we must decide if we keep GroupWise and move
into SLES or we move to Exchange. My IT dept of two :) wants to keep
GroupWise and dive into SLES while our consultants keep saying drop it
and move to Exchange because GroupWise is on death row and SLES is
wonderful until it breaks and then is hard to get help. If you have been
in the same cross road and kept GroupWise, how difficult is the
administration of SLES and does it play nice with Windows servers?

Your expertise will be greatly appreciated!


--
lanaleon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
lanaleon's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=16538
View this thread: http://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=459123

Anders Gustafsson
20-Aug-2012, 19:10
Lanaleon,
> while our consultants keep saying drop it
> and move to Exchange

They are likely to say so because it will cost you more consulting
fees...

GW on SLES runs just fine. In what way do you want it to play with the
Windows servers?

--
Anders Gustafsson (NKP)
The Aaland Islands (N60 E20)

Have an idea for a product enhancement? Please visit:
http://www.novell.com/rms

Joseph Marton
20-Aug-2012, 19:17
lanaleon wrote:

>
> We have been a non-profit using GroupWise and Netware for more than a
> decade. The two Netware servers have been playing nice to the four
> Windows servers, but now we must decide if we keep GroupWise and move
> into SLES or we move to Exchange. My IT dept of two :) wants to keep
> GroupWise and dive into SLES while our consultants keep saying drop it
> and move to Exchange because GroupWise is on death row and SLES is
> wonderful until it breaks and then is hard to get help. If you have
> been in the same cross road and kept GroupWise, how difficult is the
> administration of SLES and does it play nice with Windows servers?

GroupWise is hardly on death row--that is pure FUD. There's a great
interactive roadmap located at www.novell.com/gwroadmap. There's also
been some great comments from independent analysts such as Gartner.
Not to mention moving GroupWise from NW to Linux is a much simpler
process than migrating to Exchange, saving both time and money. You
can find more info comparing GroupWise 2012 to Exchange 2010 here.

http://www.novell.com/products/groupwise/resource-library.html#competitive

Also keep in mind that with our next release of GroupWise (code-named
"Windmere") we're targeting a new admin model which will do things such
as remove the requirement for eDirectory, introduce web administration,
etc.

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

Stevo
20-Aug-2012, 19:22
lanaleon sounds like they 'said':

> Your expertise will be greatly appreciated!

So my response to lanaleon's comment is...

I would say stick w/ Groupwise on SLES, runs great. Consultants want
exchange, etc as it means more money for them in consulting fees.

We went from Netware to SLES/OES, went pretty smooth for the most part.

Consultants won't tell you about the additional CALs you'll need for MS
servers anyway. We've been told that *any* user that connects in *any*
way to an MS server requires a CAL for that server as well as for AD,
so you're looking @ AD licenses, exchange licenses, plus CALs for users
on servers.

--
Stevo

Paullamontagne
20-Aug-2012, 19:28
> but now we must decide if we keep GroupWise and move
> into SLES or we move to Exchange.?
>


GroupWise also works on Windows...so you can tell the Consultants that. So
no extra cost to you since you already own GroupWise....

--
Paul

lanaleon
20-Aug-2012, 20:06
The windows servers we have are: backup server using BackupExec (backups
Novell without a problem and I know there are other options like SEP), a
property management server with a SQL db, a WTS server to share the SQL
db and other in-house databases and a Blackberry server. We want to make
sure the new platform continues to work with Active Directory.


--
lanaleon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
lanaleon's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=16538
View this thread: http://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=459123

Paullamontagne
20-Aug-2012, 20:47
>>>

> The windows servers we have are: backup server using BackupExec (backups
> Novell without a problem and I know there are other options like SEP), a
> property management server with a SQL db, a WTS server to share the SQL
> db and other in‑house databases and a Blackberry server. We want to
make
> sure the new platform continues to work with Active Directory.

While with GroupWise 2012 (and SP! releasing in the next month or so)It
still does require eDirectory. So you can Add either SLES boxes with
eDirectory or add Windows Server, with eDirectory only(do not put AD on it)

Also if you chose to go to SLES, remember you also get Data Synchronizer -
Mobility Pack which will allow you to sync e-mail, appointments , contacts
with users who are not using Blackberries, such as iPhones, iPads, Android
tablets and Blackberry PlayBooks, without using Blackberry Bridge

The next major release of GroupWise code named Windemere will remove the
dependency on eDirectory, so either eDirectory or Active Directory can be
the User Source for the GroupWise accounts.


By keeping GroupWise you will be able to leverage your current knowledge,
reduce the need for End-user training and stay with a secure mail system. It
will also have no issues existing with your Existing BES environment.

--
Paul

craig wilson
20-Aug-2012, 21:17
On 8/20/2012 2:10 PM, Anders Gustafsson wrote:
> Lanaleon,
>> while our consultants keep saying drop it
>> and move to Exchange
>
> They are likely to say so because it will cost you more consulting
> fees...
>
> GW on SLES runs just fine. In what way do you want it to play with the
> Windows servers?
>

Or because that is what they know.

Make the correct choice of product for your company, then pick the
consultant that can help with that.

Don't pick the Product based on the Consultant.


--
Craig Wilson - MCNE, MCSE, CCNA
Novell Knowledge Partner

Novell does not officially monitor these forums.

Suggestions/Opinions/Statements made by me are solely my own.
These thoughts may not be shared by either Novell or any rational human.

unsigned
20-Aug-2012, 21:36
I know this is Novell hosted an all, but lets keep the FUD to a minimum.
Education purposes only folks.

MS licenses the core product and then USER *or* DEVICE cals. Server,
Exchange and SQL work the same way.

For example you have a windows server for file/print, an Exchange server
and 10 workstations. (not that you would do this, just an example)

the license count would be:
2x Server OS
1x Exchange Server
5x Windows Server device or User CALs
5x Exchange Device or User CALs

If an Org has 25 users and only 10 shared workstations, device licenses
are acceptable. If an organization has users with a workstation, laptop
and cell phone, then user licensing makes sense.

There are no 'AD' licenses.




On 8/20/2012 1:22 PM, Stevo wrote:
> Consultants won't tell you about the additional CALs you'll need for MS
> servers anyway. We've been told that *any* user that connects in *any*
> way to an MS server requires a CAL for that server as well as for AD,
> so you're looking @ AD licenses, exchange licenses, plus CALs for users
> on servers.
>

Susan
20-Aug-2012, 22:15
One man's FUD is another man's reality. One of the things most have
learned in here is that MS licensing reality varies from company to
company, and the answers you get for your questions vary from moment to
moment from MS staff, including those specifically in licensing.

There are people in here whose companies have been hit with bills for
far, far more in licensing than they were led to believe they would
have to pay, but that bill only came AFTER everything was installed and
MS audited their licensing. : )

--
Susan
Novell Community Chat Moderator

http://forums.novell.com/faq.php?faq=novfor#faq_rules
http://www.ncci.org NCCIrregulars Web Site
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NCCIrregulars

Please read the following before posting in here:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/27zopdy

Stevo
20-Aug-2012, 22:47
unsigned sounds like they 'said':

> I know this is Novell hosted an all, but lets keep the FUD to a
> minimum. Education purposes only folks.

So my response to unsigned's comment is...

Was not meaning to be bashing or anything like that. We have an app
(timecard app) that users access via a web interface. We were told
that we need CALs for this server for users to access the web
interface. To me that doesn't make any sense, when we already paid a
pile of money for the software, which included licensing.

--
Stevo

unsigned
20-Aug-2012, 23:26
FUD and perceived reality isn't a replacement for education.

I too have experienced my fare share of MS licensing quandaries, but do
know the basics are the basics. This wasn't in reference to server
virtualization, VDI, DR, product clusters or such where things can get
hairy. No matter our core OS's, as IT Pro's its likely that we will
touch MS products and have to account for licensing in some capacity.

I will also say that MS isn't unique in having inconsistent licensing
application, yet they are far from antagonistic. I process our Novell
yearly MLA renewals and the methods and responses have varied widely
each year. It has been in the neighborhood of 10 years and I can't think
of one where I wasn't surprised by something. Granted, Novell takes good
care of us customers and if there is a question and documentation of a
prior answer (right/wrong/changed), the issue is taken care of. I
wouldn't hold my breath that MS would take the same position.



On 8/20/2012 4:15 PM, Susan wrote:
> One man's FUD is another man's reality. One of the things most have
> learned in here is that MS licensing reality varies from company to
> company, and the answers you get for your questions vary from moment to
> moment from MS staff, including those specifically in licensing.
>
> There are people in here whose companies have been hit with bills for
> far, far more in licensing than they were led to believe they would
> have to pay, but that bill only came AFTER everything was installed and
> MS audited their licensing. : )
>

unsigned
20-Aug-2012, 23:42
I didn't think there was bashing, sorry! I was just trying to put some
solid info out there.

Its not legal advice, but its my understanding that it depends on the
version of windows and whether or not the user uses AD as a login
processor for the web site.

The licensing requirement is pretty well publicized for web servers as
MS has been, since the 2008 release anyway, attempting to erode the OSS
hold. (right or wrong, IMHO, I prefer apache for web servers). This is
one of the reasons MS released the Web edition of server.


On 8/20/2012 4:47 PM, Stevo wrote:
> unsigned sounds like they 'said':
>
>> I know this is Novell hosted an all, but lets keep the FUD to a
>> minimum. Education purposes only folks.
>
> So my response to unsigned's comment is...
>
> Was not meaning to be bashing or anything like that. We have an app
> (timecard app) that users access via a web interface. We were told
> that we need CALs for this server for users to access the web
> interface. To me that doesn't make any sense, when we already paid a
> pile of money for the software, which included licensing.
>

gleach1
21-Aug-2012, 00:46
the consultants either know SFA about groupwise and want to put you on
something they know about (as well as the fees to migrate from groupwise
to exchange, software and so on)

if groupwise works for the company then keep groupwise and move it to
SLES, don't take the consultants word as gospel as half the time they
can't care less about the needs of the company

honestly i'd stick with what works well which soudns like groupwise for
you guys


--
gleach1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
gleach1's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=934
View this thread: http://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=459123

Susan
21-Aug-2012, 05:17
How's the weather up above Chicago these days? Has the heat wave
finally broken? : )

--
Susan
Novell Community Chat Moderator

http://forums.novell.com/faq.php?faq=novfor#faq_rules
http://www.ncci.org NCCIrregulars Web Site
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NCCIrregulars

Please read the following before posting in here:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/27zopdy

Dave Howe
21-Aug-2012, 14:05
On 20/08/2012 17:36, lanaleon wrote:
>
> We have been a non-profit using GroupWise and Netware for more than a
> decade. The two Netware servers have been playing nice to the four
> Windows servers, but now we must decide if we keep GroupWise and move
> into SLES or we move to Exchange. My IT dept of two :) wants to keep
> GroupWise and dive into SLES while our consultants keep saying drop it
> and move to Exchange because GroupWise is on death row and SLES is
> wonderful until it breaks and then is hard to get help. If you have been
> in the same cross road and kept GroupWise, how difficult is the
> administration of SLES and does it play nice with Windows servers?

GW on windows isn't *quite* as nice as on sles or netware, but works
fine. if you want to avoid linux (and many do, that don't already have
skills there but are a mixed netware/windows shop) then its worth
considering.

Anders Gustafsson
21-Aug-2012, 14:19
Lanaleon,
> property management server with a SQL db, a WTS server to share the SQL
> db and other in-house databases and a Blackberry server. We want to make
> sure the new platform continues to work with Active Directory.

OK. FWIW, you might not even need AD as MS SQL can authenticate against
Domain Services on Novell.

--
Anders Gustafsson (NKP)
The Aaland Islands (N60 E20)

Have an idea for a product enhancement? Please visit:
http://www.novell.com/rms

KeN Etter
21-Aug-2012, 15:22
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 20:36:08 GMT, unsigned <unsigned@digerati.us>
wrote:

>I know this is Novell hosted an all, but lets keep the FUD to a minimum.
>Education purposes only folks.
>
>MS licenses the core product and then USER *or* DEVICE cals. Server,
>Exchange and SQL work the same way.
>
>For example you have a windows server for file/print, an Exchange server
>and 10 workstations. (not that you would do this, just an example)
>
>the license count would be:
>2x Server OS
>1x Exchange Server
>5x Windows Server device or User CALs
>5x Exchange Device or User CALs

If you have 10 workstations, wouldn't it be:
10x Windows Server device or User CALs
10x Exchange Device or User CALs

Steve B
21-Aug-2012, 15:41
On 8/20/2012 11:36 AM, lanaleon wrote:
>
> We have been a non-profit using GroupWise and Netware for more than a
> decade. The two Netware servers have been playing nice to the four
> Windows servers, but now we must decide if we keep GroupWise and move
> into SLES or we move to Exchange. My IT dept of two :) wants to keep
> GroupWise and dive into SLES while our consultants keep saying drop it
> and move to Exchange because GroupWise is on death row and SLES is
> wonderful until it breaks and then is hard to get help. If you have been
> in the same cross road and kept GroupWise, how difficult is the
> administration of SLES and does it play nice with Windows servers?
>
> Your expertise will be greatly appreciated!
>
>

we are kind of in the same boat, but we did decide to stick with
GroupWise and OES/SLES for now. We are a small shop and needed a
consultant for help on OES issues and found none in our area. Every
consultant we talked to couldn't help us. (Actually my GWAVA rep told me
we are the last GW shop in this area.)

The quotes we got for migrating to Windows servers, Exchange, etc was
way beyond what we could afford. So, we are moving forward with the
GW/OES migrations, which is scary with no help around.

Anders Gustafsson
21-Aug-2012, 16:28
Steve B,
> which is scary with no help around.

We are here! :)

--
Anders Gustafsson (NKP)
The Aaland Islands (N60 E20)

Have an idea for a product enhancement? Please visit:
http://www.novell.com/rms

Steve B
21-Aug-2012, 17:36
On 8/21/2012 10:28 AM, Anders Gustafsson wrote:
> Steve B,
>> which is scary with no help around.
>
> We are here! :)
>

don't get me wrong - the forums have always been my lifeline, but it
helps to have someone on site when it all goes in the crapper.

Anders Gustafsson
21-Aug-2012, 18:44
Steve B,
> , but it
> helps to have someone on site when it all goes in the crapper

There are several consultants that do this type of support. Have you
talked to Danita?

--
Anders Gustafsson (NKP)
The Aaland Islands (N60 E20)

Have an idea for a product enhancement? Please visit:
http://www.novell.com/rms

kjhurni
21-Aug-2012, 18:46
Stevo;2214168 Wrote:
> unsigned sounds like they 'said':
>
> > I know this is Novell hosted an all, but lets keep the FUD to a
> > minimum. Education purposes only folks.
>
> So my response to unsigned's comment is...
>
> Was not meaning to be bashing or anything like that. We have an app
> (timecard app) that users access via a web interface. We were told
> that we need CALs for this server for users to access the web
> interface. To me that doesn't make any sense, when we already paid a
> pile of money for the software, which included licensing.
>
> --
> Stevo

That's correct. If the timecard server is running on a Windows server,
then any user/device that connects to it (even if through a reverse
proxy) AND authenticates (ie, you have to login to the app to use it)
requires a CAL.
MS is quite clear on that and gives only two specific use cases where
that's not the case:
1) This is a web-based app that's public facing and does not require
authentication (ie, some generic website with info on it)
or
2) You buy the external connector license and I THINK (this is NYS
contract pricing) it was like $75,000 per server (licensed per server).


--
The opinions expressed are my own.
Check out my OES2 Guides:
Installing OES2 SP2:
http://www.novell.com/communities/node/11600/oes2-sp2-installation-guide
Upgrading to OES2 with ID Transfer:
http://www.novell.com/communities/node/11601/oes2-sp2-migration-guide-transfer-id-scenarios
GroupWise Migration with OES2 ID Transfer:
http://www.novell.com/communities/node/11602/groupwise-migration-netware-oes2-sp2-transfer-id
------------------------------------------------------------------------
kjhurni's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=734
View this thread: http://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=459123

George
21-Aug-2012, 18:48
On 8/21/2012 10:22 AM, KeN Etter wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 20:36:08 GMT, unsigned <unsigned@digerati.us>
> wrote:
>
>> I know this is Novell hosted an all, but lets keep the FUD to a minimum.
>> Education purposes only folks.
>>
>> MS licenses the core product and then USER *or* DEVICE cals. Server,
>> Exchange and SQL work the same way.
>>
>> For example you have a windows server for file/print, an Exchange server
>> and 10 workstations. (not that you would do this, just an example)
>>
>> the license count would be:
>> 2x Server OS
>> 1x Exchange Server
>> 5x Windows Server device or User CALs
>> 5x Exchange Device or User CALs
>
> If you have 10 workstations, wouldn't it be:
> 10x Windows Server device or User CALs
> 10x Exchange Device or User CALs
>
>

Likely no additional Win server CALs would be needed because I think all
of the server OSs come with 5 CALs. So 2 server licenses would cover the
10 workstations.

Massimo Rosen
21-Aug-2012, 19:21
Kevin,

On 21.08.2012 19:46, kjhurni wrote:
> That's correct. If the timecard server is running on a Windows server,
> then any user/device that connects to it (even if through a reverse
> proxy) AND authenticates

Clarification: You can remove the authentication bit. Authentication is
irrelevant to the question if you need a CAL or not. On non-Web-Editions
of Windows that is.


CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Novell Knowledge Partner
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de

Massimo Rosen
21-Aug-2012, 19:24
Hi.

On 21.08.2012 16:41, Steve B wrote:
> we are kind of in the same boat, but we did decide to stick with
> GroupWise and OES/SLES for now. We are a small shop and needed a
> consultant for help on OES issues and found none in our area.

Of course, that begs the question: What is your area?

> The quotes we got for migrating to Windows servers, Exchange, etc was
> way beyond what we could afford.

And rest assured: There's a 99% chance that the quotes were *WAY* too
low compared to reality.

> So, we are moving forward with the
> GW/OES migrations, which is scary with no help around.

Good choice. ;)

CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Novell Knowledge Partner
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de

kjhurni
21-Aug-2012, 22:46
mrosen;2214376 Wrote:
> Kevin,
>
> On 21.08.2012 19:46, kjhurni wrote:
> > That's correct. If the timecard server is running on a Windows
> server,
> > then any user/device that connects to it (even if through a reverse
> > proxy) AND authenticates
>
> Clarification: You can remove the authentication bit. Authentication
> is
> irrelevant to the question if you need a CAL or not. On
> non-Web-Editions
> of Windows that is.
>
>
> CU,
> --
> Massimo Rosen
> Novell Knowledge Partner
> No emails please!
> 'Untitled Document' (http://www.cfc-it.de)

Not quite:

from MS own FAQ page (for non-specialty versions of Windows):

> If a user or device accesses a server running Windows Server but is
> authenticating via a third-party authentication application
> (non-Microsoft-based authentication), does the user or device still
> require a Windows Server CAL?
>
> Yes, if the user or device is authenticated or otherwise individually
> identified by a server running Windows Server through any other means,
> it requires a Windows Server CAL. The specific Windows Server CAL
> requirement is defined in the Microsoft Product Use Rights as follows:
> "You do not need CALs for any user or device that accesses your
> instances of the server software only through the Internet without being
> authenticated or otherwise individually identified by the server
> software or through any other means."

So authentication IS relevant in the above on non-web enabled
versions.

Their web-enabled stuff is covered under specialty licenses:

> I am using Windows Web Server 2008 to deploy Internet facing web
> services. Is a Windows Server CAL required if access to the servers is
> authenticated?
>
> No. Windows Web Server 2008 is licensed with a server license only and
> no CALs are required even if the access is authenticated. However, when
> Windows Web Server 2008 is used as a scale-out front end for
> applications running on back end servers, Windows Server CALs may still
> be required on these back end servers running Windows Server.

So authentication is irrelevant on Web-enabled versions (specialty)
versions of Windows


--
The opinions expressed are my own.
Check out my OES2 Guides:
Installing OES2 SP2:
http://www.novell.com/communities/node/11600/oes2-sp2-installation-guide
Upgrading to OES2 with ID Transfer:
http://www.novell.com/communities/node/11601/oes2-sp2-migration-guide-transfer-id-scenarios
GroupWise Migration with OES2 ID Transfer:
http://www.novell.com/communities/node/11602/groupwise-migration-netware-oes2-sp2-transfer-id
------------------------------------------------------------------------
kjhurni's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=734
View this thread: http://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=459123

Joseph Marton
21-Aug-2012, 23:14
kjhurni wrote:

> So authentication is irrelevant on Web-enabled versions (specialty)
> versions of Windows

And it's all irrelevant if customers just stick with Novell solutions.
:-)

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

Massimo Rosen
21-Aug-2012, 23:34
Kevin,

On 21.08.2012 23:46, kjhurni wrote:
> Not quite:

Hmm. Let me highlight the important part for you:

> from MS own FAQ page (for non-specialty versions of Windows):
>> "You do not need CALs for any user or device that accesses your
>> instances of the server software *only through the Internet* without being
>> authenticated or otherwise individually identified by the server
>> software or through any other means."

E.G:

Access *from the Internet* without auth: No CAL.

Access from the Interne with authentication (regardless which): CAL

Access from a local LAN, regardless if authenticated by any means or
not: CAL.

There used to be a nice example somewhere at Microsofts site. If you use
Windows Server solely and exclusively for DHCP, you need a CAL for
*every* device that gets an IP from it.

CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Novell Knowledge Partner
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de

Steve B
22-Aug-2012, 14:53
On 8/21/2012 12:44 PM, Anders Gustafsson wrote:
> Steve B,
>> , but it
>> helps to have someone on site when it all goes in the crapper
>
> There are several consultants that do this type of support. Have you
> talked to Danita?
>
I know they are out there - we wanted someone local that could
physically come into the office. ("if Steve gets hit by a bus and we
have IT issues, who do we call?) There are a lot of consultants around
here that can do that, but they only work on MS stuff.
Probably not a big deal - I have only had to contact NTS once in the
past 18yrs, and haven't been hit by a bus - so not a bad track record.

unsigned
22-Aug-2012, 16:13
Absolutely correct. I changed the numbers above before posting and
didn't below. Crow eaten. :(

> If you have 10 workstations, wouldn't it be:
> 10x Windows Server device or User CALs
> 10x Exchange Device or User CALs
>
>

kjhurni
22-Aug-2012, 17:06
mrosen;2214414 Wrote:
> Kevin,
>
> On 21.08.2012 23:46, kjhurni wrote:
> > Not quite:
>
> Hmm. Let me highlight the important part for you:
>
> > from MS own FAQ page (for non-specialty versions of Windows):
> >> "You do not need CALs for any user or device that accesses your
> >> instances of the server software *only through the Internet* without
> being
> >> authenticated or otherwise individually identified by the server
> >> software or through any other means."
>
> E.G:
>
> Access *from the Internet* without auth: No CAL.
>
> Access from the Interne with authentication (regardless which): CAL
>
> Access from a local LAN, regardless if authenticated by any means or
> not: CAL.
>
> There used to be a nice example somewhere at Microsofts site. If you
> use
> Windows Server solely and exclusively for DHCP, you need a CAL for
> *every* device that gets an IP from it.
>
> CU,
> --
> Massimo Rosen
> Novell Knowledge Partner
> No emails please!
> 'Untitled Document' (http://www.cfc-it.de)

Yes, but you said that authentication is IRRELEVANT with non-web
versions of Windows. I was pointing out that Authentication IS relevant
for non-web versions (specialty).

In regards to DHCP the FAQ I quoted addresses that since it falls
outside of the 'Internet only ... or otherwise individually identified
by the server software". Since DHCP identifies via MAC address, then
you need a CAL according to the FAQ, which does coincide with what you
mention.


--
The opinions expressed are my own.
Check out my OES2 Guides:
Installing OES2 SP2:
http://www.novell.com/communities/node/11600/oes2-sp2-installation-guide
Upgrading to OES2 with ID Transfer:
http://www.novell.com/communities/node/11601/oes2-sp2-migration-guide-transfer-id-scenarios
GroupWise Migration with OES2 ID Transfer:
http://www.novell.com/communities/node/11602/groupwise-migration-netware-oes2-sp2-transfer-id
------------------------------------------------------------------------
kjhurni's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=734
View this thread: http://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=459123

unsigned
22-Aug-2012, 17:15
Yep, and that was my initial point. All of those items are in the MS
Licensing documents on their website. Sure its difficult to work through
(right, wrong, indifferent), but that's what we IT types have to do. If
anything, this is a great reminder of the tremendous value Novell
brings to our networks.


On 8/21/2012 5:34 PM, Massimo Rosen wrote:
> E.G:
>
> Access *from the Internet* without auth: No CAL.
>
> Access from the Interne with authentication (regardless which): CAL
>
> Access from a local LAN, regardless if authenticated by any means or
> not: CAL.
>
> There used to be a nice example somewhere at Microsofts site. If you use
> Windows Server solely and exclusively for DHCP, you need a CAL for
> *every* device that gets an IP from it.
>
> CU,

lanaleon
22-Aug-2012, 18:16
I want to thank everyone that contributed to the thread. I am going to
push to stay with GW in my meeting in two weeks. We are lucky we are
near the NYC area, so we won't have a lack of Novell consultants if
something goes wrong. Thanks again! :)


--
lanaleon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
lanaleon's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=16538
View this thread: http://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=459123

Douglas Black
22-Aug-2012, 19:22
lanaleon,

>
> I want to thank everyone that contributed to the thread. I am going to
> push to stay with GW in my meeting in two weeks. We are lucky we are
> near the NYC area, so we won't have a lack of Novell consultants if
> something goes wrong. Thanks again! :)
>

Be sure to run the numbers on storage cost for an Exchange environment.
Our disk space requirements went through the roof when we migrated.

Good luck.

craig wilson
22-Aug-2012, 19:31
And 3rd Party Mgmt Tools.

I recall when a previous employer migrated to AD, they ended up spending
many millions on AD and Exchange Management products that dwarfed the
cost of everything else.



On 8/22/2012 2:22 PM, Douglas Black wrote:
> lanaleon,
>
>>
>> I want to thank everyone that contributed to the thread. I am going to
>> push to stay with GW in my meeting in two weeks. We are lucky we are
>> near the NYC area, so we won't have a lack of Novell consultants if
>> something goes wrong. Thanks again! :)
>>
>
> Be sure to run the numbers on storage cost for an Exchange environment.
> Our disk space requirements went through the roof when we migrated.
>
> Good luck.
>


--
Craig Wilson - MCNE, MCSE, CCNA
Novell Knowledge Partner

Novell does not officially monitor these forums.

Suggestions/Opinions/Statements made by me are solely my own.
These thoughts may not be shared by either Novell or any rational human.

Simon Flood
23-Aug-2012, 10:43
On 22/08/2012 19:22, Douglas Black wrote:

> Be sure to run the numbers on storage cost for an Exchange environment.
> Our disk space requirements went through the roof when we migrated.

Apparently our memory requirements went through the roof too just for
handling files - it seems you require 1KB of RAM per file!
--
Simon
Novell/SUSE/NetIQ Knowledge Partner

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you work with Novell technologies at a university, college or school?
If so, your campus could benefit from joining the Novell Technology
Transfer Partner (TTP) program. See novell.com/ttp for more details.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stevo
28-Aug-2012, 14:44
kjhurni sounds like they 'said':

> That's correct. If the timecard server is running on a Windows
> server, then any user/device that connects to it (even if through a
> reverse proxy) AND authenticates (ie, you have to login to the app to
> use it) requires a CAL.

So my response to kjhurni's comment is...

Ok, so why the heck would the software vendor not mention this and
include it in the initial purchase?

--
Stevo

Anders Gustafsson
28-Aug-2012, 15:13
Stevo,
> Ok, so why the heck would the software vendor not mention this and
> include it in the initial purchase?

Because it would make his app more expensive...?

--
Anders Gustafsson (NKP)
The Aaland Islands (N60 E20)

Have an idea for a product enhancement? Please visit:
http://www.novell.com/rms

Simon Flood
28-Aug-2012, 15:22
On 28/08/2012 14:44, Stevo wrote:

> So my response to kjhurni's comment is...
>
> Ok, so why the heck would the software vendor not mention this and
> include it in the initial purchase?

Err ... perhaps so you still buy their software?!
--
Simon
Novell/SUSE/NetIQ Knowledge Partner

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you work with Novell technologies at a university, college or school?
If so, your campus could benefit from joining the Novell Technology
Transfer Partner (TTP) program. See novell.com/ttp for more details.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Massimo Rosen
28-Aug-2012, 15:44
On 28.08.2012 15:44, Stevo wrote:
> kjhurni sounds like they 'said':
>
>> That's correct. If the timecard server is running on a Windows
>> server, then any user/device that connects to it (even if through a
>> reverse proxy) AND authenticates (ie, you have to login to the app to
>> use it) requires a CAL.
>
> So my response to kjhurni's comment is...
>
> Ok, so why the heck would the software vendor not mention this and
> include it in the initial purchase?

That's harmless. Most vendors of software which runs on windows servers
not only don't mention this, they outright actively tell you you don't
need windows CALs (heck, even Novell itself is guilty of this). Either
because they don't know better, or, worse, they knowingly lie.

CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Novell Knowledge Partner
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de

kjhurni
28-Aug-2012, 16:46
mrosen;2215656 Wrote:
> On 28.08.2012 15:44, Stevo wrote:
> > kjhurni sounds like they 'said':
> >
> >> That's correct. If the timecard server is running on a Windows
> >> server, then any user/device that connects to it (even if through a
> >> reverse proxy) AND authenticates (ie, you have to login to the app
> to
> >> use it) requires a CAL.
> >
> > So my response to kjhurni's comment is...
> >
> > Ok, so why the heck would the software vendor not mention this and
> > include it in the initial purchase?
>
> That's harmless. Most vendors of software which runs on windows
> servers
> not only don't mention this, they outright actively tell you you don't
> need windows CALs (heck, even Novell itself is guilty of this). Either
> because they don't know better, or, worse, they knowingly lie.
>
> CU,
> --
> Massimo Rosen
> Novell Knowledge Partner
> No emails please!
> 'Untitled Document' (http://www.cfc-it.de)

Yeah, part of that "this is cheap/free" stuff. Like MS has "free"
sharepoint, but it needs MS SQL, and Windows CALs, etc. etc. etc.

AUGH!


--
The opinions expressed are my own.
Check out my OES2 Guides:
Installing OES2 SP2:
http://www.novell.com/communities/node/11600/oes2-sp2-installation-guide
Upgrading to OES2 with ID Transfer:
http://www.novell.com/communities/node/11601/oes2-sp2-migration-guide-transfer-id-scenarios
GroupWise Migration with OES2 ID Transfer:
http://www.novell.com/communities/node/11602/groupwise-migration-netware-oes2-sp2-transfer-id
------------------------------------------------------------------------
kjhurni's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=734
View this thread: http://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=459123

Jim Henderson
28-Aug-2012, 16:59
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:46:01 +0000, kjhurni wrote:

> Yeah, part of that "this is cheap/free" stuff. Like MS has "free"
> sharepoint, but it needs MS SQL, and Windows CALs, etc. etc. etc.

SharePoint can be made to work (IIRC) with the free version of MS SQL
Server ("Express", I think they call it?)

Jim



--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Anders Gustafsson
28-Aug-2012, 17:03
Jim Henderson,
> SharePoint can be made to work (IIRC) with the free version of MS SQL
> Server ("Express", I think they call it?)

Yes, but you still need CALs for the Windows server..

--
Anders Gustafsson (NKP)
The Aaland Islands (N60 E20)

Have an idea for a product enhancement? Please visit:
http://www.novell.com/rms

Jim Henderson
28-Aug-2012, 18:49
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:03:57 +0000, Anders Gustafsson wrote:

> Jim Henderson,
>> SharePoint can be made to work (IIRC) with the free version of MS SQL
>> Server ("Express", I think they call it?)
>
> Yes, but you still need CALs for the Windows server..

That could be, I've not had to deal with that. (Did some review of
SharePoint courses about a year ago and licensing wasn't part of what I
had to deal with).

Jim



--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

jamesgosling
29-Aug-2012, 15:26
Good Morning Starshine, The Earth Says "Hello!"


--
JAMES GOSLING
'www.jamesgosling.com' (http://www.jamesgosling.com)
'www.novellblog.com' (http://www.novellblog.com)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
jamesgosling's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=9688
View this thread: http://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=459123

George
30-Aug-2012, 13:12
On 8/28/2012 10:44 AM, Massimo Rosen wrote:
> On 28.08.2012 15:44, Stevo wrote:
>> kjhurni sounds like they 'said':
>>
>>> That's correct. If the timecard server is running on a Windows
>>> server, then any user/device that connects to it (even if through a
>>> reverse proxy) AND authenticates (ie, you have to login to the app to
>>> use it) requires a CAL.
>>
>> So my response to kjhurni's comment is...
>>
>> Ok, so why the heck would the software vendor not mention this and
>> include it in the initial purchase?
>
> That's harmless. Most vendors of software which runs on windows servers
> not only don't mention this, they outright actively tell you you don't
> need windows CALs (heck, even Novell itself is guilty of this). Either
> because they don't know better, or, worse, they knowingly lie.
>
> CU,

Vendors often knowingly lie about anything additional that is necessary
that will increase the cost to implement whatever they are selling and
it works.

George
30-Aug-2012, 13:17
On 8/28/2012 10:13 AM, Anders Gustafsson wrote:
> Stevo,
>> Ok, so why the heck would the software vendor not mention this and
>> include it in the initial purchase?
>
> Because it would make his app more expensive...?
>

Exactly, they lie to keep the acquisition cost they are trying to burn
into your brain low to make it sound reasonable.

It would be like hiring someone to run an event and they told you food
would cost $50/person but they neglected to mention that it would cost
$10,000 to rent the space.

Dave Howe
30-Aug-2012, 14:12
On 30/08/2012 13:12, George wrote:
> Vendors often knowingly lie about anything additional that is necessary
> that will increase the cost to implement whatever they are selling and
> it works.

Sadly, its largely because most vendors assume that CALs are a "sunk
cost" - for convenience of course, but usually in a MS monoculture shop,
every device *already* needs a CAL, so they can at least claim the
incremental cost of CALs for them is zero (if you already have them).

Only in cases where a device that wouldn't normally use a CAL (Or
reasonably could be expected to not do so without needing access to the
vendor's software, such as data capture devices for a warehousing
system) does that one play thin.

Its one of the insidious things about the constant demand for Exchange
as the email solution of choice - once you have sunk cash on CALs for
every device, mobile or fixed, the additional cost to provide
Sharepoint, f&p etc for those same nodes is only for the server and
package itself - no further CALs are required, and the cost of having
provided them is, in itself, leverage to further utilize MS solutions to
get ROI on that large initial investment in access to the MS world.