news

Malke wrote:
> news wrote:
>
>> Hi Malke,
>> so maybe you can answer this question. windows XP, 2000, NT, even 98
>> could see more than one workgroup at the same time.
>
> Yes, but for some reason it works better to have the same Workgroup in
> some instances. It's a mystery, but for instance in our school network
> putting all the workstations (not domain members) in Workgroup instead
> of MSHOME pops up the connection to a server share immediately. They
> never find it if we leave them MSHOME - oh, and those workstations are
> running XP Home Edition.
>
>> network neighborhood was browseable by entire microsoft network or
>> computers near you. I've tried for 2 weeks now to get vista to see a
>> network with mixed OS's and 2 workgroups. I've tried the suggestions
>> on the article you mentioned. I even turned off the windows firewall
>> (since we're behind a firewall already) and it still refuses to see 2
>> workgroups.
>
> It's not possible for me to tell you what you're doing wrong, but you
> *are* doing something wrong. I have Linux, OS X, Vista Premium, XP Home,
> and XP Pro on my network and all the machines can share files just fine.
>
>>
>> So is the bottom line that vista sees only ONE workgroup? I've got
>> several sites I work at that have more than one workgroup on purpose.
>> These people don't have the $$$ to spend for a server so they do what
>> they need with the windows workstation OS they have.
>
> I can't confirm that Vista only sees one Workgroup. I have read that you
> should set the same Workgroup but have not seen where that is an actual
> requirement. If your clients have multiple Workgroups, then the Vista
> machine will be in one of them so what's the big deal? Or tell your
> clients not to move to Vista. Businesses shouldn't be moving to Vista
> yet anyway.

this is exactly what I did, vista can see one workgroup but not the
other via network neighborhood. if i point vista directly to the
servers on the other workgroup (via //server1/share), this works fine.
but client wants to know why vista can't see the other workgroup via
network neighborhood. this is how their office has worked for years
without any problems, until windows vista.

I suggest to them that I can just map the drives manually, but they
insist on being able to browse to those shared folders via network
neighborhood (like they can on windows xp and unix/linux servers).

what do I tell them? I would really like to know the answer to this.
At this point it seems to me that vista can see only ONE workgroup. I'm
not sure of this - if anyone else can verify this that would be great.

Thank you so much for your patience with this matter. I'm sorry if I
get on a rant but this can start to get on your nerves after a while.

Oskar


>
>> so the way network neighborhood used to work is now gone? I'm still
>> in the early stages of using vista but I have to admit this is a bit
>> confusing. what was wrong with the way network browsing worked? I
>> didn't hear anyone complaining about that aspect of windows. what
>> people complained about was security problems, viruses, having to run
>> windows as administrator (which is NOT a good idea for production
>> use), having to reboot windows at least once a week due to memory
>> leaks, windows (or applications) prone to corruption (patches
>> anyone??), etc.
>
> Actually Network Neighborhood (My Network Places in XP) was always very
> unreliable and not the best way to access network resources. Better to
> create shortcuts to regularly used network resources and/or map drives.
>
> Again, I don't know why you are having such difficulties. Vista machines
> aren't yet thick on the ground here but I haven't had any difficulty in
> networking them for clients or myself.
>
>
> Malke