No, actually, it's quite different.
....
are only legacy services, and provide no competition with modern Windows services. So they can say, "hey, we don't recommend those insecure services, but here, we offer them" not mentioning the fact that they are very old.
The idea behind these moves - as I think - is putting one feet into the IT center of those companies who still use some very old software. Maybe where no Windows server existed. After the collagues had used to it and got certs from MS they can say "hey, you got experience, you've got good experience* why don't migrate your old software to Windows or write the newer version which use our X,Y solutions". * = they always say they have good results but that's what every company says and X,Y = eg. CRM, SQL2005, etc.
I think that's the idea. Many time I used SFU to create the neccesary attributes into AD and use pam_ldap and nss_ldap for authentication.
bye, Ago