WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
Forum rules
Before you post read how to get help. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 6 months after creation.
Before you post read how to get help. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 6 months after creation.
WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
I'm beginning to notice a lot of confusion/disagreement over whether Mint's default workgroup should be MSHOME or WORKGROUP, and I think i can help here.
Much of the argument is based around networking with Windows computers, but all arguments are actually rather invalid, and here's why (for the benefit of any newcomers). This is my personal analysis of the situation.
In Windows XP Home the default workgroup name is MSHOME
In Windows XP Professional and Windows Vista (all versions i think) the default workgroup name is WORKGROUP.
so there we have it. an MSMESS.
Currently Linux Mint is following the MSHOME workgroup model, presumably because most most Mint users are in a home environment where networking with Windows XP Home is likely to be the most common scenario.
Comments would be most welcome.
Much of the argument is based around networking with Windows computers, but all arguments are actually rather invalid, and here's why (for the benefit of any newcomers). This is my personal analysis of the situation.
In Windows XP Home the default workgroup name is MSHOME
In Windows XP Professional and Windows Vista (all versions i think) the default workgroup name is WORKGROUP.
so there we have it. an MSMESS.
Currently Linux Mint is following the MSHOME workgroup model, presumably because most most Mint users are in a home environment where networking with Windows XP Home is likely to be the most common scenario.
Comments would be most welcome.
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
I was using MSHOME for the above reason(s).
then I went to GAMER ( as in games), but the PRO is tricky, as I,m not as familar with it.
So, it's stuck on WORKGROUP 'till I figure out how to change it.
Definately a M$MESS !!.
maybe a complete change to, say, LINNET or LINXNET ??.
P.
then I went to GAMER ( as in games), but the PRO is tricky, as I,m not as familar with it.
So, it's stuck on WORKGROUP 'till I figure out how to change it.
Definately a M$MESS !!.
maybe a complete change to, say, LINNET or LINXNET ??.
P.
Please edit your original post title to include [SOLVED] - when your problem is solved!
and DO LOOK at those Unanswered Topics - - you may be able to answer some!.
- Alpha-Geek
- Level 4
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 12:29 am
- Location: Wisconsin, USA
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
To change the workgroup name in XP Pro... open "control panel", select "performance & maintenance" then "system". Click on the "computer name" tab, then click on the "change" button to change the workgroup name or computer name.
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
or... right click on my computer > properties > computername
since when was this a Windows support site?
lol
since when was this a Windows support site?
lol
- Alpha-Geek
- Level 4
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 12:29 am
- Location: Wisconsin, USA
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
Umm, yeah. That works too.
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
why would it even matter? A 'workgroup' is a microsoft thing anyway not a standard networking thing. You can easily access a computer in another workgroup so I am not sure what difference it makes.
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
its called order - most people with a netork of more than 1 PC would probably want to see them all in the same workgroup.
historically you couldn't always access PCs in other workgroups (win95, 98)
historically you couldn't always access PCs in other workgroups (win95, 98)
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
My recent Intrepid install defaults to workgroup, so maybe all will be well in Felicia
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
well, it is quite easy to change the workgroup in both windows and Linux Mint..........
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
Its only "well" if the rest of your MS PCs are running XP Pro or Vista.. hence the reason for this thread.omns wrote:My recent Intrepid install defaults to workgroup, so maybe all will be well in Felicia
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
that depends how many computers you have...deadguy wrote:well, it is quite easy to change the workgroup in both windows and Linux Mint..........
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
Right, it is just a name for a workgroup; a collection of computers networked together, so that they can share files more easily)qbicdesign wrote:I'm beginning to notice a lot of confusion/disagreement over whether Mint's default workgroup should be MSHOME or WORKGROUP, and I think i can help here.
Much of the argument is based around networking with Windows computers, but all arguments are actually rather invalid, and here's why (for the benefit of any newcomers). This is my personal analysis of the situation.
So, it is an invalid argument, unless you didn't know what a Microsoft workgroup's purpose was
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/docu ... ename.mspx
http://www.duxcw.com/faq/network/names.htm
--every computer with the same workgroup name will be part of the same network name and appear as such in Microsoft's Network Places
MSHOME might be more of a problem with windows, as Microsoft uses that name for different services/products
--but essentially you should be able to pick any name you want, as long as you make it a standard; that is, you make all those names the same for every machine, that will remove almost all problems..
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
I purposely give each box on my home network a different workgroup name. I do it mainly so I can write the previous sentance Never had a problem with networking or file sharing. It does make "discovery" a little cumbersome in nautilus - if everyone had the same workgroup name I could see all the machines in one place.
The only exception to this is if you are part of a domain with a domain controller - like a Windows Server - unlikely in a home network. I think "every machine has to have the same workgroup name" was started by a very knowledgeable person who had a lot of experience setting up corporate networks. It don't think it has any relevance to a home network.
The only exception to this is if you are part of a domain with a domain controller - like a Windows Server - unlikely in a home network. I think "every machine has to have the same workgroup name" was started by a very knowledgeable person who had a lot of experience setting up corporate networks. It don't think it has any relevance to a home network.
Please add a [SOLVED] at the end of your original subject header if your question has been answered and solved.
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
It also makes discovery (network browsing) more difficult in a windows-centric (windows only machines) network, home or otherwisealtair4 wrote:I purposely give each box on my home network a different workgroup name. I do it mainly so I can write the previous sentance
...
It does make "discovery" a little cumbersome in nautilus
--there is no security advantage to having each machine be its own workgroup name, the machine's name itself is sufficient to locate, attach and identify it within that network..(hidden admin shares for example c$, or almost any system device/directory followed by $, after you locate the pathname to that computer (machine))
The only reasonable windows network for a business is domain based or other network directory type, eg Novell's e-directory or some other type of ldap, such as windows AD (Active Directory)
--and the only reason that is so, is to allow control & management of the attached (via the network) computers
http://www.novell.com/products/edirectory/
A workgroup (collection of machines/computers) based system, which has any or all machines acting as the server for network discovery on that network, simply doesn't scale, and is limiting in how much control you have over these attached resources (computers)
If you didn't want to get into the management business for your business, then some type of inventory management might be useful, eg Zenworks
http://www.novell.com/products/zenworks ... anagement/
--I picked Novell because of their make good system software..
Last edited by DrHu on Wed Mar 31, 2010 2:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
DrHu,
The rest of your post relates to a corporate network so I'm not sure if that was used to agree with my last paragraph.
I'm not advocating each machine have it's own workgroup name, I'm simply saying that it is not a requirement. It does make thinks look more tidy when all machines have the same workgroup name. And let's be honest, if you've spent 20 hours trying to debug a "Classic Samba" setup who among us hasn't made all the workgroup names match - just in case
I suppose it does theoretically add a few nanoseconds to the discovery process but the home user would never know.It also makes discovery (network browsing) more difficult in a windows-centric (windows only machines) network, home or otherwise
I'm not doing it because of a security advantage. Every tutorial I have ever read on Samba insists that the workgroup name must be the same. I do it because I'm an obstinate, opinionated SOB and so I can "prove" that it is unnecessary.--there is no security advantage to having each machine be its own workgroup name, the machine's name itself is sufficient to locate, attach and identify it within that network
The rest of your post relates to a corporate network so I'm not sure if that was used to agree with my last paragraph.
I'm not advocating each machine have it's own workgroup name, I'm simply saying that it is not a requirement. It does make thinks look more tidy when all machines have the same workgroup name. And let's be honest, if you've spent 20 hours trying to debug a "Classic Samba" setup who among us hasn't made all the workgroup names match - just in case
Please add a [SOLVED] at the end of your original subject header if your question has been answered and solved.
- Alpha-Geek
- Level 4
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 12:29 am
- Location: Wisconsin, USA
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
Yup. I like the KISS method. (Keep It Simple, Stupid)And let's be honest, if you've spent 20 hours trying to debug a "Classic Samba" setup who among us hasn't made all the workgroup names match - just in case
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
How do I change the workgroup in Mint from 'WORKGROUP' to MSHOME' ?
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
Open Terminal
Type gksu gedit /etc/samba/smb.conf
Search for the following entry:
To workgroup = MSHOME
Back in Terminal type: sudo service samba restart
Type gksu gedit /etc/samba/smb.conf
Search for the following entry:
Change workgroup = WORKGROUP# Change this to the workgroup/NT-domain name your Samba server will part of
workgroup = WORKGROUP
To workgroup = MSHOME
Back in Terminal type: sudo service samba restart
Please add a [SOLVED] at the end of your original subject header if your question has been answered and solved.
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
You misinterpreted that statement, I wasn't talking about network speed; I was referring to the user's perception of the network, as in Microsoft's Network Places, what that computer detects as representing the network of computers available (to share files or print to or otherwise interconnect with)altair4 wrote:I suppose it does theoretically add a few nanoseconds to the discovery process but the home user would never know.
A domain/AD (Active directory) is conceptually a big workgroup..
You can also see that Microsoft is confused by the domain/workgroup division, when you try an add a computer to a domain, it sometimes doesn't work, although it should
--you can do it if you add that computer name to a workgroup; same name, then add it into the domain, then it works: the computer gets added to the domain
Re: WORKGROUP vs MSHOME
Hehe, finally someone asked the most important question...alfreddo wrote:How do I change the workgroup in Mint from 'WORKGROUP' to MSHOME' ?
Don't want to get into GUI vs CLI arguments, but IMO the workgroup name should be able to be changed in networking GUI, after all it is a networking feature.