So why do I hammer on that?

Because peer-to-peer networking as it evolved in Windows is an often unreliable, “second rate” approach to the problem.

And because the distinction between “desktop” and “server” editions of the GNU/Linux OS is mostly a marketing approach…it really has no bearing on the suitability of the distribution for either role.

An Ubuntu Samba based file and print server is networking in one of the true server-centric models.

Samba is Samba whether it is running on a GNU/Linux distribution marketed as a “desktop” release or one designated by marketers as for the “server.”

Server editions typically have additional tools installed that address the security and administrative needs of larger, even huge, organizations with professional IT staff…needs that don’t often apply in the smaller and more trustworthy environment of the very small office.

One of the ironies is that server oriented distributions are actually often more difficult for the non IT professional to setup and administer in a small office of fewer than ten users, because there are so many tools intended to foil corporate espionage, malicious cracking by insiders, and even to protect state secrets.

The small office Samba file and print server built from something like Ubuntu “Feisty Fawn,” is every bit the “real deal,” as the latest release of RHEL, or Ubuntu’s upcoming server edition…and is likely better suited as a server OS in that setting than one of the enterprise oriented server editions.

Ten years ago, these arbitrary distinctions were not generally attempted by GNU/Linux distributions, and I think in some ways, that helped the new and/or prospective user better understand the potential of the OS, even before they figured out how to deploy it.

Remember, “small business,” as defined by the SBA here in the States, can include operations with up to 100 employees. That’s the environment envisioned by companies putting together “small business server” editions of GNU/Linux.

And I think we’re talking about small law practices with anywhere from 2 to 10 people including the law partners. Not the same environment, and not the same needs.

Based on my own experience (not in a law practice, but in a similarly sized {15 employees/desktop users} operation), I think server needs are usually better, and more easily, met with a general purpose or desktop oriented distribution than with the server oriented releases (which I have also used to a more limited degree).

Sorry to keep harping on this, but one of the effects of internet based communuity support and knowledge sharing is that the owner/operator of a “Mom & Pop” appliance repair shop may be rubbing shoulders with an admininstrator working in the defense industry. That’s not a bad thing, but it can cause the blender repairman to conclude that his needs are comparable to those of Lockheed.

Anyhow, I’ll shut up now.

I noticed a link above to SME server, and in years past I tried SME server, or rather, its original version, before Mitel got their hands on it. At that time it was known as “ESmith Server.” It was great. But it was also little known and that can play into worries about the future of the product you’re about to dump into a server your business will rely on.

Yes, I know, I know…but we’re discussing GNU/Linux adoption by small law practices that haven’t gotten their “feet wet” with GNU/Linux, and when coming from a Windows world, an obscure distribution downloaded from the Internet sounds “risky.”

Right now, Ubuntu has the buzz, and you can even buy laptops from Dell with Ubuntu preloaded. Availability from a major PC vendor brings a certain credibility to Ubuntu lacking with a product like SME Server.

And Ubuntu is bringing a server version to market.

BUT…and I think this is important for new GNU/Linux users to understand, server distributions tend to address needs far in excess of SOHO server requirements. An office staffed by two lawyers, a receptionist/book keeper, and maybe a couple of para-legals, doesn’t represent the same networking problems as an office with 150 people, and it is the needs of that office of 150 people that Ubuntu seeks to address with a server version of their distribution.

Plain ol’ desktop Ubuntu, just like almost every other freely downloadable desktop GNU/Linux distribution, is perfectly capable of meeting the requirements for file and print serving in the small office. Despite being targeted at the desktop, Ubuntu’s underpinning is still a general purpose operating system and the arbitrary separation of server OS and desktop OS that Microsoft enforces does not apply to mainstream GNU/Linux.

I believe that is one of the key benefits of GNU/Linux that cannot be emphasized too much to people considering migration from Windows to GNU/Linux.

I found a very thorough tutorial for using Ubuntu as a Samba file and print server for Windows clients at “HowtoForge.”

Here is a link.

A disclaimer: The tutorial uses their “Breezy Badger” release (although it should work with the current release as well).

Second disclaimer: I haven’t tried this with Ubuntu, because I use Slackware for all file and print serving (including Samba), but Slackware doesn’t target the same audience as Ubuntu.

Rather than waiting to see if an Ubuntu server version is easy to install and configure as a Windows domain controller, I think a more fruitful course of action might be to test and report results using this tutorial…and then, if changes are needed, tweek the tutorial to conform with the current desktop Ubuntu release. Post it here. Post it everywhere.

Because that’s another difference between Windows and GNU/Linux…rather than depending upon vendors to release something essentially preconfigured…the user just needs access to simple tutorials so that he or she can configure the product in hand to do the job.

I believe that anyone who can survive Windows peer-to-peer networking or a NetWare LAN, can easily follow a tutorial such as the one I linked. What the prospective user needs now is for you to get the word out so that the knowledge base expands.

No matter how fed up I, as a solo, get with Microsoft, I do not have the time to make Linux work for me; I would rather spend that time practicing law.”

I think you hit the nail on the head, “spend that time practicing law”, make the money and hire a professional.

The general public goes to work so they can hire lawyers because they don’t have the time to practice law.

hence: They are called IT professionals

1. OpenOffice and Evolution can certainly get you far, but not necessarily far enough. Many applications that have come out for Windows like case management (Time Matters, Abacus, Amicus Law, and the like) are programs that attorneys (including myself) have come to depend on heavily. They need an equivalent in the Linux world. Legal research, I would agree, is web based and can be done from Firefox, but not all of an attorney’s software needs are necessarily met by web based apps. As to VMWare, emulators, and Wine, they only remove the incentive for vendors to write Linux versions of their software (why do that, Cross Over does it for us). From my research and discussions on this, I have found that there is a difference of opinion on whether these programs help or hurt the spread of Linux in the market. In addition, the Cross Over compatibility database does not show one legal application as tested for working with the product. That challenges my belief that VMware like that is a solution.

2. No, not so easy. I think you are oversimplifying this. No matter how fed up I, as a solo, get with Microsoft, I do not have the time to make Linux work for me; I would rather spend that time practicing law. The same goes for the small firms I know. Instead, I buy a machine from Dell and proven case management, time management, money management software that I know will work with a lot less time and effort on my part. Yes, we have less beurocracy; but we also have less time to bring along Linux to do it instead. There may be a grassroots infiltration from what you have seen (I guess it depends upon your definition of small law firm, which is the perspective from which I write), but that does not mean that the entrance of Linux into the legal profession will sweep UPWARDS rather than DOWNWARDS.

3. First of all, I never said that larger firms are more cost-aware; I said “Larger law firms . . . face a proportional cost of implementation for technology.” When one attorney upgrades his software for $100, it is $100. When 50-100 do it in a larger firm, it is $5-$10,000. Yes, big firms constitute a larger ship to turn around, while smaller firms are more nimble, but the larger firm has a greater economic incentive. Second of all, you state that “the small ones may be on a shoe-string budget. Large firms are not. If a small firm has to pay $100 and up on software, when there is a free alternative, they’ll adopt it much quicker.” I am a solo lawyer with no secretary on a shoestring budget, and I can assure you that is not the case! I bill at $150 per hour; if it takes me more than 40 minutes to implement your “free alternative” that I could have had for $100, I have lost money; even more if I hire a consultant. My cost for software in the Windows world is much smaller for me, so I go with what I know will work; I don’t have the time (and time = money for an attorney) to look for the “free alternative.”

4. I never said that “small firms are less tech savvy than larger ones.” That was also not the “underlying premise” of my post. The attorneys are not as likely to bring about Linux in the market when they do not have IT departments or the time to do it themselves. Other than that, I am not all that clear on the point you are making here.

You mention four blogs, including yours, that you imply disagree with me. Okay, so they do. That does not mean they are right in their opinion and I am “fundamentally flawed” in mine. Just because Linux started out at a grassroots level does not mean that it will spread that way in the legal world.

I invite your comments here, whether you agree with me or not; however, I would just ask that you couch those comments as disagreements and not dogma.

hope this help.

http://www.howtoforge.com/fileserver_with_sme_server7.1