> If you want a Windows-like environment, run Windows.

One of these questions where we, those doing the discourse, need to pick apart what the word "you" refers to here.

In this context, it is national governments, who have started to fear that there may come a day when they are not allowed to or able to or safe to run Windows. That gives rise to the question, "how can we get a system that minimizes the disruption of migrating away to Windows?"

Ultimately it's not about specifically wanting AD or GP as technologies, either, but the things they enable: seamless single-sign-on across an organization, and management of software security and updates across a fleet of desktops.

(possibly the thing that fills this hole is simply a fleet of consultants which go around explaining things to CIOs!)

Right, I see where you are coming from, I still want to make the stronger argument that we should not strive to re-work Linux in Windows' image. Most such initiatives, like gconf/dconf, have severely degraded the desktop experience.

I have some experience at places where Linux are run on desktops at scale, but they all have in common that these are engineers for whom Linux is the better experience to begin with. It's not like that for administrative staff and management. And as much as I'd like to tell people to use Prezi instead of Powerpoint, and Markdown instead of Word, sometimes Libre Office is the best answer.

We have to be practical. Still, I feel that too often it is engineering that has to use tools intended for administrative people. Once in a while, they other way around may not be that bad.

For a modern workplace, where smartphone and cloud based applications rule, the traditional Windows tools like AD and GP can only do so much. You also need MDM tools, and something like SAML. If you are looking for an out-of-the-box tool that can manage both Linux and Windows clients, Red Hat has FreeIPA. It's not AD, but it goes beyond that capability.