What is the difference and advantage using a Domain over Workgroup? Any info will be much appriecated. Thanks.
Domain vs. Workgroup
- Thread starter sumyungai
- Start date
big question short answer(sorry its friday and i want to go drink that delicious stuff called booze) workgroups are networks that are typically setup in small offices say 3-15 computers, one where you are sharing out a printer or two or maybe a shared drive. Domains are used where you want to store data (user dats, apps etc on a server) along with requiring users to log into with a username and password (to the domain) and have scrips run to map drives, printers, etc... basicly you use a domain on largr enterprise networks, and workgroups on smaller networks. cet yourself a copy of 2000 or 03 and dcpromo it and play around best advice i can tell you the occasional 2000 or 03 server books dont hurt
- Oct 25, 1999
- 29,548
- 424
- 126
A domain based Network needs Windows Server OS (Win2000 server or Win2003).
It is more Complex to set up and involved learning.
However, it provides one location for all user accounts, groups and computers; passwords are same for all computers.
Because of having one location it is easier maintain, and to scale up with more computers.
Cost of OS server and Lic. stations makes building the Network more expensive.
Workgroup]/b] based Network, is useful for small networks up to 10 computers.
Very easy to setup, but each computer has to be set on its own (No central setup).
No easily scale Up, if using more than 10 computers.
If you have a spare computer and you would like to experinment there is Windows 2003 trial version for download, http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/trial/default.mspx
:sun:
It is more Complex to set up and involved learning.
However, it provides one location for all user accounts, groups and computers; passwords are same for all computers.
Because of having one location it is easier maintain, and to scale up with more computers.
Cost of OS server and Lic. stations makes building the Network more expensive.
Workgroup]/b] based Network, is useful for small networks up to 10 computers.
Very easy to setup, but each computer has to be set on its own (No central setup).
No easily scale Up, if using more than 10 computers.
If you have a spare computer and you would like to experinment there is Windows 2003 trial version for download, http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/trial/default.mspx
:sun:
While you have to use a server OS if you have more than 10 pcs on a network (win 2000 and XP pro do not allow more than 10 concurrent connections), they do not have be in a domain - both win 2k and 2003 server can be set up as a File Server with appropriate CALs, meaning you do have to have Client Access licences for each pc that will be accessing the "server".
As Jack states a workgroup arrangement is simpler to set up but more difficult to manage, its particularly suited for a network with mixed OSs and sub networks. For instance I have a network with over 50 machines, but 20 of them never access the "server", but they do connect to a pc on network (that accesses the server) to get work files or write results/error files. I have every OS - win95/98/XP H & P/Linux/DOS/NT 3.5 & 4. Why? Moving to XP Pro would require upgrading application software and hardware costing tens of thousands of dollars or are no longer supported - the software/hardware vendor has disappeared. This is obviously a patchwork arrangement with all its resultant problems.
A domain set up is suited to larger networks, running similar programs, all needing access to a central server, and can affort the needed staffing and maintenance costs. Its more standardized, more expensive, and more secure with enhanced network services.
As Jack states a workgroup arrangement is simpler to set up but more difficult to manage, its particularly suited for a network with mixed OSs and sub networks. For instance I have a network with over 50 machines, but 20 of them never access the "server", but they do connect to a pc on network (that accesses the server) to get work files or write results/error files. I have every OS - win95/98/XP H & P/Linux/DOS/NT 3.5 & 4. Why? Moving to XP Pro would require upgrading application software and hardware costing tens of thousands of dollars or are no longer supported - the software/hardware vendor has disappeared. This is obviously a patchwork arrangement with all its resultant problems.
A domain set up is suited to larger networks, running similar programs, all needing access to a central server, and can affort the needed staffing and maintenance costs. Its more standardized, more expensive, and more secure with enhanced network services.
As always sage information
One thing to note however is that you can also create a windows domain using Linux and Samba. This is a *free* way to accomplish similar functionality. I use Samba as my PDC in my apartment, I haven't tested integration with 2k or 2k3 servers yet, I'll need some more hardware, but I'm planning on it soon TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter