As far as many comments about redundancy and not all eggs in one basket. Just need to have a backup system that runs a nightly backup and restore script to another server or two. Setting up a server cluster is also possible for both systems.
Samba is quite capable of running AD, but what about management options or multi-site environments?
What is the issue with management (the Windows tools should work with it) and what happens with multi-site?
Sorry, didn't see your question because of the formatting. FTFY.
Like I said, the whole topic is just about discussing valid alternatives for the typical SMB / EDU environment. I was aware that Samba 4 got full DC capabilities, at least when it comes to authentication. I did not know about its GPO support and other things like replication between "DC"s or the possibility to use Microsoft's RSAT tools for management.
@coliver (and you) mentioned one can use RSAT for management. That's good and would mean that the Samba4-team is trying hard to get to a high level of compatibility. How to say... looks like a perfect replacement for a real DC.
Back to your question, multi-site (and/or subdomain) is a quite important feature in case you got a branch office, for example.
I've run many branch offices with no local DC. AD authentication is extremely light traffic wise. installing software via GPO could give you problems, or needing a local server for file access might be needed, but and AD in most branch offices isn't. Unless your branch is like 100+ people.
you can put Linux fileservers in branch offices to handle the load locally.
My major concern about using Microsoft software is not about the quality or the price. It's about managing all the licensing, which really is a PITA and nearly impossible to overcome for just a one or two men show.
I am often amazed to find SMBs unwilling to consider the licensing overhead aspects of software choices. It can represent a massive cost. When people talk about the "hidden" costs of open source, they normally mention things that are equal with closed source, but they universally overlook licensing which is the only unique cost between the two and often one of the largest.
"You git what you pay fer" - Every anti-Open Source salesman. Every once in a while I still hear that from regular IT people who shouldn't be in IT. It used to happen more often, about 15 years ago I used to constantly hear "Linux? You get what you pay for!" and of course quotes from Robert Heinlein novels about neoliberals on the Moon.
I heard this from financial VPs at a company I used to work for. Even when I would give a list of open source products that we used.
that's when you come to NTG and ask us to "sell" any open source product that you need, at 20% above the cost of whatever closed source product you are looking at instead. Problem solved.
Haha, oddly enough I did exactly that. Worked like a charm!
Once "highest price means best deal" happens, all logic is out the window and some weird things happen.