Windows Server 2008 drops the ball for Mac compatibility
Summary: Recently I've been faced with the task of helping somebody with a network of Mac computers, that have Windows servers. They have both Windows Server 2003 and Windows Server 2008, and are looking to migrate and upgrade to Windows Server 2008 across the board.
Recently I've been faced with the task of helping somebody with a network of Mac computers, that have Windows servers. They have both Windows Server 2003 and Windows Server 2008, and are looking to migrate and upgrade to Windows Server 2008 across the board. Unfortunately, we've run into a roadblock which has turned into a huge headache with the file servers. We've discovered that Services for Macintosh that has been on Windows Server for over a decade and a half, is being mysteriously dropped in Windows Server 2008.
Reading around on this subject, and you will find that everybody says to use Samba. This sounds all well and good, however it just has too many problems and flat out doesn't work reliably. When connecting from any Macintosh (running Leopard, Snow Leopard, doesn't matter) to the Windows 2008 server using Samba, we've encountered various permissions issues. The worst problem is with creating and saving files in Adobe CS3/CS4 applications, where users can open files but not save them, and need to save with a new file name. None of these problems happened before when accessing the shares on Windows Server 2003 that had Services for Macintosh installed. So, we are faced with 3 possibilities: Stay on Windows Server 2003, pay for an expensive 3rd party software package to run on top of the Windows file servers that will enable Apple AFP (Apple Filing Protocol), or look at using Linux with the netatalk service. From experience, netatalk on Linux is rock solid, and fully supports Apple AFP flawlessly. It's an amazing piece of software, and this wouldn't be the first time that Linux has picked up the slack that Windows left hanging behind. But unfortunately in this situation, there's the issue of training the local IT personnel to use the Linux server. At the moment, we are not sure which path to take, so for now they will continue using Windows Server 2003 for Mac file sharing.
Why would Microsoft simply drop a feature like this? Especially when there is no solid solution to replace it? If they want customers to use Windows Server, then wouldn't they want it compatible with everything else? I've seen that other services were also dropped with Windows Server 2008 as well, like services for Netware. I can understand that, but I don't understand why Services for Macintosh were dropped, considering Apple's increasing market share and Macs becoming more and more common.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
M
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?path=ServerAdmin/10.6/en/fse71ee115.html
An additional interesting note that they mention in the above reference page: "However, NFS doesn’t provide AFP features that Mac OS users are accustomed to, such as Spotlight searching, native ACL, and extended attribute support.". So I think NFS is out for us.
I cannot believe this is happening though.. Microsoft is definitely pulling my chain here. "We took it away because we haven't supported it" is like saying "We don't want to make a highway here because no one is driving on this dirt road"! What they should have done is put AFP 3.x support in there and the problem would have been solved. Now we'll HAVE to pay ~2000 USD for a 10 user license of ExtremeZ-IP, which we'll have to dig pretty deep into our pockets to find. If I'd known, I'd hesitated before going all-in on a server upgrade.
That being said, I'm here because the AFP which seems to be greatly hallowed is no longer supported by Apple, the people who made it. Hmmm... who's dropping the ball now? Fortunately in most cases you can change the AFP to either SMB or CIFS when you use the GO command on the mac to get to the server shares that used to AFP.
Ummm...Microsoft discontinued this for Windows Server 2008. So I'm not sure what you're running. It doesn't exist. Then you go on to say "free download". Huh? What free download? Windows Server 2008 uses Roles and Features. Microsoft dropped the ball on Mac client support at a time when more people are using Mac's again, and we have to support them on Windows Server. Not the first time Microsoft made idiotic moves.
It's funny when Apple enthusiasts bash Microsoft products for removing features, but I don't hear any of you complaining about Apple removing the Appletalk protocol. We had a lot of legacy copiers in our office, and when Snow Leopard came out, those users were unable to print to said copiers.
So, who's making the idiodic move here is irrellevant. I wish someone would just post a plausible solution that doesn't require "switching to an all Mac shop" or "switching to an all PC shop", or reversing the role by putting an Apple server in place, requiring Windows users to connect to Macs. From what I gather the best solution is to move to an NFS based solution (Windows/Mac neutral).
I've noticed that Windows Server R2 has a "NFS Sharing" tab when going to the properties of the folder that is being shared, and was wondering if anyone has had any success sharing with Mac clients using the Windows NFS advanced sharing feature.
Is it Microsoft or Apple?
Surely, as Apple has basically gotten rid of their own mainstream server products, except the lowly Mac Mini Server or the ridiculously-expensive Mac Pro Server, the onus is on them to properly support SMB as most clients are likely to be using Windows shares. The fact that more people are using Mac laptops or desktops now is even more reason why THEY have to ensure their products work well in a typical business or enterprise environment.
Why can't Apple create an affordable alternative to ExtremeZ-IP that sits on top of the Windows server? They are the ones who know AFP intimately and who will benefit from such a product since it would encourage more IT departments to be happy to recommend Macs.
As others have mentioned, Netatalk is an option. Another option if it's just storage you need is to use a QNAP NAS with enough resources to suit your requirements and enable the AFP protocol. One just needs to ensure they factor it into their backup strategy.
Just as al_langevin pointed out, with Windows Server 2008 there is no Services for Macintosh anymore. It's gone, not available. And a free download to enable some sort of Macintosh protocols? I would like to see that, I've never heard of such a thing for Windows Server.
Niclas :
ExtremeZ-IP is probably loving the fact that Microsoft dropped support for native Macintosh protocols, I bet their business has been booming. In the original case that I posted, we ended up purchasing ExtremeZ-IP as well, at a hefty price, because the company is vendor-locked in to Microsoft at the moment. So not only do Microsoft customers with Mac clients need to buy Windows Server 2008, but they need to go out and buy yet another product to provide true AFP support because Microsoft didn't think it was important anymore to support the competition's products. Great job again, Microsoft, way to treat your customers.
txtrainguy :
Appletalk is a very old protocol and Macs have been able to use the AFP protocol over TCP/IP for many years. Even the old Mac OS 8 and 9 had support for AFP over TCP/IP. If you are looking for an overall stable and viable option, I would strongly suggest checking in to Netatalk on a Linux server. Why? Because Netatalk has been out for well over a decade, and is rock solid. And best of all, it's open source and doesn't involve paying recursive licensing fees. Not only that, but Linux is basically the swiss army knife of operating systems, and can do many other things as well. I can't say enough good things about Netatalk, it's great stuff and is still actively being developed, probably due to high demand of Macs gaining market share.
You can read more on the Netatalk Sourceforge page:
http://netatalk.sourceforge.net/
Netatalk is included with most GNU/Linux distributions right out of the box.
A Windows Server 2008 is being used because the environment that the Macs are in is a heavy Windows environment. I am proposing that they invest in Intel hardware (or a virtual machine), and use CentOS with Netatalk. A Mac server is definitely another option, we have not yet looked in to it. But building a virtual machine and installing CentOS + Netatalk is a relatively inexpensive and very stable solution. I would strongly recommend Netatalk to anybody that needs a good solid file server for Macs, it really is a good product.
windows 2008 R2 supported Mac OS