Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!occrsh!uokmax!apple!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!IFI.UIO.NO!ingea From: ingea@IFI.UIO.NO (Inge Arnesen) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: LAN Manager and UNIX Message-ID: Date: 11 Sep 90 18:07:14 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Lines: 43 X-Unparsable-Date: Tue, 11 Sep 90 20:06:37 MET DST Today, years after the release of OS/2 and LAN Manager, som people believe that LAN Manager will become _the_ network standard for interoperability between DOS, OS/2 and UNIX boxes, and also take a big chunk of the UNIX to UNIX market within the next 3 years! This is suppose to happen on all levels: - Named pipes will replace TLI & sockets. RPC-libs will be based on named pipes. - File sharing will replace NFS (and RFS :-). - Printer sharing will replace the braindead UNIX remote lpd. - LAN Manager autentication will become the standard security and autentication system. The event that is supposed to trigger this drastic change is the release of the portable LAN Manager server (LMX) which is due in Desember. I must admit that LAN Manager have superior solutions to some the solutions available on UNIX today, but I can't see how LM can get a grip on the UNIX market this late. LM is a something that grew out of the MS DOS (and later OS/2) world, which is not regarded as kosher among UNIX people, and it does not offer any great leap in functionality compared to what we have on UNIX today. I would like arguments for and against LM as a standard taking marked shares OUTSIDE the DOS / OS/2 environments, and I welcome both well founded arguments as well as statements like : "I don't like the feel of the API..". Have any UNIX vendors said how they will relate to LM ? If only Microsoft and PC SW vendors support LM, LM will probably remain in the PC world....... Inge (BoB) { ingea@ifi.uio.no } ========================================================================= == Inge Arnesen, University of Oslo, Norway. == == ==