Having MAC OSx authenthicate against AD

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joe
  • Start date Start date
J

Joe

Hey I have a question, there has been some talk here about getting iMACs, so
trying to stay one step ahead, and as much as I think Apple does a good job
with their OS's, they fall short when it comes to allowing seamless
intergration. The growing concern on my part is the Authenthication of
users. I know the work around is to change the AD schema so that
authenthicatino is not encrypted.. I was hoping to have an easier
workaround.

Any ideas?
 
I don't believe that more recent OS X versions require AD schema changes any
longer.

Apple provides a page with more information on this topic (along with
discussion group links) here:

http://www.apple.com/itpro/articles/adintegration/

"Joe" <josephadeluca@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6835BD1E-5DEE-4429-B33D-F1AD4B99C033@microsoft.com...
> Hey I have a question, there has been some talk here about getting iMACs,
> so trying to stay one step ahead, and as much as I think Apple does a good
> job with their OS's, they fall short when it comes to allowing seamless
> intergration. The growing concern on my part is the Authenthication of
> users. I know the work around is to change the AD schema so that
> authenthicatino is not encrypted.. I was hoping to have an easier
> workaround.
>
> Any ideas?
>
 
You should be able to join 10.4.x and higher Mac clients to a W2K3 without
schema changes. Works pretty well actually.

- Jeff

"Joe" <josephadeluca@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6835BD1E-5DEE-4429-B33D-F1AD4B99C033@microsoft.com...
> Hey I have a question, there has been some talk here about getting iMACs,
> so trying to stay one step ahead, and as much as I think Apple does a good
> job with their OS's, they fall short when it comes to allowing seamless
> intergration. The growing concern on my part is the Authenthication of
> users. I know the work around is to change the AD schema so that
> authenthicatino is not encrypted.. I was hoping to have an easier
> workaround.
>
> Any ideas?
>
 
Back
Top