Re: [WinMac] MS Office differences between platforms (was: Re: [WinMac]

Tim Scoff(tscoff[at]pitt.edu)
Tue, 27 Jul 1999 11:31:31 -0400

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Next message: Darron Spohn: "Re: [WinMac] RE: How I can get screen shots?"
• Previous message: Welch, John C.: "Re: [WinMac] Asset management/network updating"
• Maybe in reply to: Owen Watson: "[WinMac] Asset management/network updating"

>
>> MS Access just does not exist for the Mac and probably never will
>
> Or you could buy Filemaker Pro for both platforms, actually
> get some cross-platform functionality, and get some work done.
>
> We use FM for both platforms here. Relational if you need it
> and the current versions read SQL. You don't have to be
> a computer geek to organize sophisticated datebases and your
> users achieve greater independence.

      There are five reasons why that is not a viable option for me and they
probably apply to many other businesses as well.

      The first one is pricing. MS Access is, "free" because it comes with
MS Office Pro. FileMaker Pro costs money above the basic cost of our
office productivity standard product. Yes the basic MS Office for the PC
costs less than MS Office Pro, however the perception is that Access is
free while FileMaker costs money and the perception is the reality.
      The second one is Microsoft. We don't trust Microsoft to test the
next release of Windows with any other vendor's products completely,
especially competitor's products. We do believe that Microsoft would
release a new Service Pack which breaks their competitor's products and
then we would be in a situation where we don't have anything that works
because we chose not to use Microsoft's solutions. This may or may not be
true, however this has been brought up as a point in formal meetings where
we were deciding what products to use as our standards!
      The third one is the fact that FileMaker only reads SQL, it can't
write to a SQL server and we're implementing MS SQL Server in the near
future. That means when we install SQL Server our default database
application won't be able to write to the databases that we store on it.
      The fourth reason is because FileMaker is an Apple product. Apple's
public relations/marketing departments have made it extremely difficult to
be taken seriously if you suggest an Apple solution for anything in many
parts of corporate America. I happen to work in one of those organizations
where the attitude is, "get with the times, Apple's history." Apple is
improving their image, but it's going to take years for them to overcome
that stereotype.
      The fifth reason is because, "everyone else is using Access."
Everyone else knows what's best so we're following the crowd.

      As for myself, I own and use FileMaker Pro 4.1 at home and when I do
consulting. It's just at work where Access is the only viable choice, and
only one of the reasons why it isn't a viable choice is technologically
based.

Tim Scoff
casper@nb.net

"Trust the computer industry to shorten "Year 2000" to Y2K. It was this
kind of thinking that caused the problem in the first place."

* Windows-MacOS Cooperation List *

• Next message: Darron Spohn: "Re: [WinMac] RE: How I can get screen shots?"
• Previous message: Welch, John C.: "Re: [WinMac] Asset management/network updating"
• Maybe in reply to: Owen Watson: "[WinMac] Asset management/network updating"

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Tue Jul 27 1999 - 08:37:42 PDT