Yes, I ultimately came to that conclusion after a 6 week run-around with Apple. So much for that 80k that Apple was going to get from us.

I’m just a little bit more than annoyed that Apple strung me out that long apparently hoping that I wasn’t going to try a proof of concept lab test.

As to why they decided to break basic functionality of Samba for their custom build, only they know. Hard to fathom that they tout the ability to seamlessly integrate with NT style domains when they simply can’t (or, probably, more aptly, chose not to do so).

IMO, until they come clean and either:

a.) Create a “Unified Messaging” solution on the OSXS platform and change the current line of thought on seamless migration (which they broke most of in their Samba build as well)

or

b.) allow domain trusts to occur to allow existing NT domains the ability to import existing userbase info for authentication to utilize Microsoft (or others) Unified Messaging solutions

they will not be accepted widely in the mainstream corporate sector.

Quite honestly, I don’t think that my organization does anything extreme in the arena of technology. Too bad that Apple can’t support it.

My thoughts on Apple after about 3.5 months:

1. Great hardware, maybe the best there is.

2. Server platform fine for homogenous clients. Mediocre at best for heterogenous clients.

3. Community: Snobbish and aloof – generally unwilling to take a few minutes to help. (Sorry, but that’s how it has played out in my scenario)

Too bad, because I really wanted to make this work, but, alas, it never will until Apple changes their tune.