A domain doesn't start to become practical until the number of computers 
to administer exceeds around 10. A workgroup ceases to scale properly at 
about 20 computers. XP Home is not very suited for a domain , but XP Pro 
is. Win2K won't care either way. That having been said, a domain is 
administered centrally from the domain controller, a dedicated server in 
addition to any other systems on the network. It is a lot simpler to 
maintain in that you do not have to go to each individual computer to 
set up users, access permissions, and the like, as you have to do for a 
workgroup. The fun part with a domain is the learning curve, especially 
as you add different functionality to support beyond the obvious 
centralized authentication and access control.

Jeff Long wrote:
> I am looking for opinions on the benefits and costs of a server vs peer to peer.
>
> We currently have a peer to peer network with 4 computers: 3 machines running XP Home, 1 box I built running Win2K, and 3 printers.  I will eventually add a scanner. 2 computers have printers attached directly.
>
> I had some help setting up the network, but maintain it myself.
>
> How much ongoing maintenance is involved in a small server-based network?
>
> Thanks for any input.
>
> Jeff
>
>             Do you want to signoff PCBUILD or just change to
>                     Digest mode - visit our web site:
>                    http://freepctech.com/pcbuild.shtml
>
>   

              The NOSPIN Group is now offering Free PC Tech
                     support at our newest website:
                          http://freepctech.com