Office 365 and Access
-
I have the Business Premium plan, which is $12.50 in the US. Mixing plans just so some users can use Access is a ballache and not really practical.
Worse still, the UK pricing is very different. It's only $11.82 for Business Premium, but $22.27 for E3. So Business Premium is cheaper than the US, whilst E3 is more expensive. I have no idea why they have done that! But it means the "extra cost" of Access is even worse in the UK than the US. It's almost double. And of course, you're paying for features you don't want or need, just to get Access, which is crazy.
I think I'm going to put an e-mail out saying the company will have to stop using Access by 2017 and everyone needs to start thinking about how they're going to replace it.
-
Probably good, leaving Access behind provides opportunity for other approaches that might make more sense.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I think I'm going to put an e-mail out saying the company will have to stop using Access by 2017 and everyone needs to start thinking about how they're going to replace it.
This seems like a classic example of IT leading the business instead of the IT taking it's queue from the business.
Now perhaps you're right, and it's time to move away from Access, but until you know what that will entail, what will replace it, how long and how much cost is involved in converting all of the old Access stuff into something new, it seems premature to simply dictate the ditching of Access.
-
But I am dictator.
Access is quite unique in that it kind of sits in between full scale database development environments and simple end-user productivity tools. It's use often starts off as simple productivity tool, then develops in to something more powerful and difficult to support.
You wouldn't expect Sue in the Accounts Department to start developing applications using MySQL and PHP, and if she did, the company would rightly raise some concerns. But anyone and everyone can pretend to be developers because historically Access was bundled in with Office. That's dangerous.
Regardless, I get to dictate what software the company uses. If a user decided they preferred LibreOffice then that would be tough on them, as I wouldn't permit it's use. A couple of years ago I banned Lotus Smartsuite, and that worked out fine. It was a hassle for a few users in the short term, but a long term benefit to the company.
-
I take it then that either you're a stakeholder in the company, or the the stakeholders have given you CIO type control of the company... ok cool.
-
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
But I am dictator.
Access is quite unique in that it kind of sits in between full scale database development environments and simple end-user productivity tools. It's use often starts off as simple productivity tool, then develops in to something more powerful and difficult to support.
You wouldn't expect Sue in the Accounts Department to start developing applications using MySQL and PHP, and if she did, the company would rightly raise some concerns. But anyone and everyone can pretend to be developers because historically Access was bundled in with Office. That's dangerous.
Regardless, I get to dictate what software the company uses. If a user decided they preferred LibreOffice then that would be tough on them, as I wouldn't permit it's use. A couple of years ago I banned Lotus Smartsuite, and that worked out fine. It was a hassle for a few users in the short term, but a long term benefit to the company.
I think that that is a good summary. Access is dangerous because it acts kind of like it is Excel but it is used to build full scale applications for the business which, after being built, are incredibly expensive, fragile and generally problematic. It tends to be a tool for bypassing good processes and creates all kinds of problems. There are great business reasons for banning its usage as it is a way to avoid IT oversight in an area (data integrity, secrity and system availability) where it is most needed.
-
So, you can't run previous versions of Access (Access 2013) on the same machine as Office 2016. The Office 2016 installation will actually un-install Access if it isn't Access 2016.
This is a pain. Microsoft is currently offering free upgrades to Access 2016 if you have old Access retail licences, but how long this will last I'm not sure.
We often run old versions of Access, as new versions aren't always compatible with some of our old database applications. I have never had a problem with this. But this is no longer allowed.
More info here:
https://support.office.com/en-ie/article/-We-need-to-remove-some-older-apps-error-a225347f-e102-4ea6-9796-5d1ac5220c3b -
@Carnival-Boy said:
So, you can't run previous versions of Access (Access 2013) on the same machine as Office 2016. The Office 2016 installation will actually un-install Access if it isn't Access 2016.
Now that is pretty surprising!
-
meh, Access needs to die in a fire anyway. Right alongside faxing.
-
-
@JaredBusch said:
meh, Access needs to die in a fire anyway. Right alongside faxing.
Or printing out Access screenshots and then faxing them.
-
We don't allow access. It requires a written letter signed by the employee and their boss to be submitted to the board for approval. we have 2 users across a very large company as well. we also don't support anything users make with formulas or macros in excel.
