Is this true about Macs?

And for not having to check the statement

#8: Don’t put Mac and Windows users on the same network

If Mac and Windows users share the same network and experience problems, establish a separate network for database users. Macs are extremely noisy, and typical Mac applications generate vast amounts of network traffic when moving large graphics files and printing. In a shared environment, use only high-quality network components.

It’s best to keep the database traffic separate from the graphics traffic, as much as possible. You can accomplish this by allowing administrative workstations to connect directly to the server with the shared database via a local switch.

That is the opinion of the blogger who wrote that.
Access is not the only database out there, and I'd choose other tools depending on what I need to use - SQL, MySQL, Oracle, FMP ....
 
I would argue that any problems a person runs into with Access is that THEY'RE USING ACCESS! ;-)

It is true that Mac OSX could be considered "noisy" because of Bonjour, iTunes and iPhoto sharing but I don't see how it'd be any noisier than NETBIOS.
 
I believe Bon Jour can be disabled if it's not used. Bon Jour can also be a security problem since it makes your systems easily available on the network.
 
If you have ANY Mac on a windows domain then you should bookmark the System Administrator site that specializes in putting Mac in Windows Domains, MacWindows.com. Bookmark it! It will be filled with reader reports/fixes putting Macs into Windows Domains. A lot of the reports will have fixes for certain situations, you just have to read ALL the reports to learn the fixes.
 
This is utter shite. How about securing your network? and using a mac properly?
The functionality to disable these types of outgoing packages is all done by a simple firewall.
Plus. If this huge, really important database is so important WHY STORE IT ON WINDOWS!



Rant over.
 
None of the reasons mentioned in that article should cause corruption to any proper database. MS Access would definitely not get FCC approval if it was a radio device.

Simple solution, as already mentioned: use another database :)
 
Thank you to Satcomer and nixgeek for constructive comments.

The other commenteers could learn from these two who obviously have real life experience with the issues and actively work for solutions.

Note please, that we don't write that macs are sh.t, neither that Access is God, neither that Macs and Access can't coexist, just that some (few) know how to handle this combo - pros like Satcomer and nixgeek - and some (most) - lack this knowledge or refrain from obtaining it.
The advice we give is for the situation where the Mac people are ignorant - the typical attitude is that "if this Windows/Access/Evil Empire crap doesn't work in our Mac environment as is, it is .. crap. Those win geeks are not coming telling us to do anything". All Mac people are friendly, you say, but then read the comments here again. Time has learned me that this discussion is not worth five minutes and, in that case, you just have to take your own precautions like those described.

Note too, that we don't claim that Access/JET is the answer to anything. It is a file based database which is extremely good for what it is designed for. It is not comparable with server based database engines.

Finally, Access/JET does run mission critical applications around the world wether you like it or not - and at just about zero cost. We have clients here running different applications with Access/JET as the backend database experiencing 0 (zero) failures for more than 10 years. This is a fact.
Still, from case to case, we may very well advice clients to use some other database for their specific task if we can see Access/JET won't fit the bill.

/gustav
 
Well, apparently your article only generated some traffic about a year ago. Your reply is a tad late. Your article describes Macs as being "noisy". They're not, of course. You mention Mac users transferring large graphics files. That's not noisiness, that's network useage. If your network can't handle the traffic, you need a router that controls the traffic and keeps enough bandwidth for your database functions. That's not something that has anything to do with Macs being noisy. What if your Windows users start saving or transferring large files? The network doesn't care whether it's graphics or movies or zipped archives or anything. It just handles the traffic.
And: Coming here now after several months to tell us whom you find interesting or, as you put it, "professional", seems a bit tacky. Even more so since you yourself say it's not worth five minutes of your time. Just accept that it kinda sounds funny if a list for Access mentions keeping Macs away. It ignores the actual problem. Sounds racist, even.
 
Last edited:
Wow, reading the comments on the article is kinda funny, and Gustav seems as irritated there as here:

Some quotes from Gustav.

But the remarks on the noisy Macs are based on experience. We have several advertising agencies and TV/film production companies among our clients all of them running an Access based time/billing/ERP application, and the list of "issues" we have seen is endless. Main problem is that Mac tech people (not users, they don't know anything) believe they understand networking. As a general rule and warning (exceptions exist of course) they don't. Worse, when (not if) something misbehaves regarding the network, they blame _everything else_ connected to the network for being the source of trouble.

It is possible to make Macs and their users to coexist with pc users and Access but it requires a top-notch network which Mac people typically neither do or will understand not to say are willing to allocate the money for. It is more fun to spend money on a 30" flat screen or a new stack of RAID disks for a NAS.

Lets just say people on both side of the Mac/Windows fence are guilty of shouting insults across to the other side. :)
 
Better late than never!

You certainly don't add much to the knowledge base, so I'll only spend a minute more on this.

I think we all would benefit from working with the issues that do exist in mixed environments in a constructive way. Many Mac people think likewise but some don't for no apparent reason.

Anyway, thank you for your comment.

/gustav
 
Thanks Ora! You are absolutely right.

Well, you have to draw some sharp lines in an article to gain attention. Editors requests clicks to attract advertisers.

However, these divined Mac people with this "Mac only" attitude do exist. They are not prepared to make any compromise as an attempt to solve a problem.
For some years we have worked with a local Mac house with skilled people and we call them to resolve such cases. We know what to be done, but it is much easier for our Mac friends to persuade a Mac admin.

/gustav
 
CactusData,

With all due respect, you're making some bold claims about the members of this forum that are stellar contributors and have been for many years. You've only recently signed up and you're basing your conclusions on a few comments posted in this thread. Many of these same people work with multiple platforms on a daily basis in various functions.

Welcome to the Internet. Not everyone is going to agree with whatever you posted on your blog, but reacting in the same fashion will not garner much support in your favor.

Also, expect there to be some bias towards the Mac on a Mac-centered forum. The same would happen on any other forum that is of particular interest to a particular platform.

In earnest, it does seem as though you were looking for hits to the site (which can be deduced by your reply to ora's comment here). Considering that it's been close to a year since today's post, I have to wonder if you're looking to generate more visits in order to "refresh everyone's memory" about this blog post. I can only hope that you don't paint the Mac and the users here with a very broad brush, as it would be an injustice not just to the people here, but to yourself as well.
 
Last edited:
Well nixgeek, didn't I exclude you from the crowd?

And no, I don't earn from clicks, but if you visit that page again - which I did today - you will find near the bottom a link to this forum which I didn't know about. That twist made me curious and I signed up.

To my disappointment, to a simple and polite question put by gphillipk only two comments contained useful information. You are right, I may be very wrong about the skills of the other commenteers, but I think you will agree that bashing Access is not to demonstrate a stellar status.

What I write about establishing a (logical) separate network for users of a shared Access/JET database is a zero discussion and fast solution with a success rate of 100% which _will_ work in those cases where other solutions cannot be obtained for whatever reason. To repeat myself, other solutions do exist but they require active and open-minded cooperation from people like you and - sadly - in some cases that may be hard to find.

/gustav
 
Charlie,

> .. why store it in Windows?

Access (JET) is a shared file based database. The file is stored on a shared network drive which can be hosted by just about any OS, including Linux, Solaris, Novell NetWare, Mac OS, and any newer version of Windows.

/gustav
 
I'm going to have to chime in here and express my opinion that the blog on the Access database shows several misunderstandings about Macs, Windows machines, and databases in general.

It's quite clear from the blog entry that the author has little-to-no experience with Mac computers and is operating off of hearsay. Macs are no more "chatty" on a network than Windows computers are. The quip about the fact that Macs transfer large graphic files shows that the author is still under the decades-old assumption that Macs are used for graphics and Windows computers are used for other things.

I don't want to go into depth about this as I feel it's been discussed in detail already, but I do feel the need to stand up and say, "Hey, there are a lot of inaccuracies, misunderstandings and half-truths in the article, and the article as a whole should be taken with a grain of salt."

I would be glad to elaborate greatly, point-by-point, if the author of the blog entry would so desire.

Just some background so that no one misunderstands or misconstrues my experience: I use Macintosh computers, Windows computers, and Linux (as well as UNIX) computers in my career, all about equally. I have over 20 years of experience with all three platforms (including other platforms such as BeOS, and limited Rhapsody/OpenStep/NextStep). I am highly educated by a well-respected university (UTexas, baby!) in the realm of computer science -- specifically software development, networking, database theory and implementation, and computer architecture. I do not limit myself to loving one platform and hating another (which seems to be prevalent with Windows users biased against Mac users, and Mac users biased against Windows users). I use, and, if I may say so myself, rock each platform individually and spectacularly.

I know what I'm talking about, I'm educated on the topics on which I speak, and I don't claim to know anything that I do not know. The blog entry, while helpful and informative in some respects, is largely inaccurate and, plainly, gives some very bad advice and perpetrates "old wives' tales" about both the Macintosh and Windows platforms as well as databases and Access in general.

As I said before, I would be glad to elaborate greatly on any point in the blog or any point that has been discussed here... I felt it necessary to make these points so that other readers can (and should) question the information put forth by those who claim to know what they're talking about. There's nothing more damaging than purporting to be an expert in an area that you are not an expert in -- while less experienced people may not be able to see through the smoke and fog, all it takes is someone more experienced and knowledgeable to come along and call the bluff.

I'm calling the author's bluff. It's clear that they are indeed experienced, but are overstepping their comfort zone and perpetrating myths and half-truths.
 
Please Jeff (that is Jeff, right), step forward - it sounds like you know what you are talking about.

However, you don't talk much about Access, so please keep in mind that you will talk to someone who does.

Just to clarify, let me stress that the advice given in the article about Macs has nothing to do with how Macs can and should behave, it's about how some handle their Mac environment and how to circumvent that situation. I'm happy to learn about people like you and the other contributors and I wish you had been present at some of the cases we've seen.

Also, you are right about Windows workstations running graphic applications as Macs do. It is just so, that this situation is not common here; advertising agencies (which is where we meet the Macs) _is_ Mac country here.

Finally, please have in mind that editors don't leave much room to this-and-if-and-that; articles have to be brief and to the point and the finer details have to go. That said, not much can be added to the nine other advices given based on real-life experience as they are.

Thanks for stepping in. That made me spend more than five minutes on this thread.

/gustav
 
Yes, Jeff is correct.

I understand completely about "editorial decisions" and that the author, many times, does not have much control nor say about what goes in and what gets axed from an article due to length constraints and audiences and other factors. I realize that sometimes it is difficult to summarize a point of view and limit it to a certain number of words or sentences -- and when this does happen, sometimes the point trying to be made is "lost in translation." Some things just need lengthier explanations and cannot be explained accurately when they're limited by space. Perhaps some of the ideas and concepts expressed in the blog were misconstrued by myself due to this.

I do have experience with Access -- perhaps not as much as to go writing blog entries about it, but I do know it quite well. The points that I took issue with were concerned with the storage of certain datum (for example, "images") and the assumption that storage of a specific data type inherently causes or is a factor in database corruption. My experience says that this is impossible -- an integer is no more likely to corrupt a database than a floating-point value, and a BLOB is no more likely to corrupt a database than an image (which are basically the same thing, anyway). What can corrupt a database with the use of these data types is improper use of them -- unsafely writing, modifying or adding data to a database that could cause some or all of the data to be written incorrectly or incompletely. This is more user behavior, though, than the binary data itself causing the corruption, and I agree -- it happens more frequently with those data types (simply because writing integers is closer to being an atomic operation than writing a much larger data type; in some cases, binary image data).

At any rate, perhaps we can swing back to some middle ground here and have ourselves a nice conversation about the pros and cons of this or that. We all have our opinions here, and because of the fact that they're opinions, that means that neither you nor I are "right" or "wrong;" in fact, there is no "right" or "wrong" -- simply "this view" and "that." I love a good debate, as long as it stays friendly and does not venture too far into the personal realm (hell, check out our nice little ditty in the "Viruses on OS X thread" -- fun conversation!).

I welcome any knowledge I can leech off of you as I'm sure you do me. ;) I mean, that's why we're here, right? "The more you know..." as they say, and I am a believer that knowledge of and familiarity with a subject breeds convenience.
 
To get back to the Access portion is to say why hasn't Microsoft added Access to OS X? The author should have talked about that. Plus the "noisy" Mac portion drop off the radar since macs went to TCP/IP back in the day (probably before the author was born) and Apple drop AppleTalk as a network language. so the author is just grasping at very old arguments and probably never touched a Mac since 1983.

Now getting a Mac onto a windows domain is easier and than it has ever been. Just read the thread (that I started - shameless plug) called [HOW TO] Bind Leopard to Active Directory.

Lastly IMHO anyone who claims to be a System Administrator and that person only know Windows (badly most of the time) should never be called a System Admin. If that can't support even another computer than Windows then they are no expert it anything and are just posers.
 
Back
Top