This week's book giveaway is in the OCAJP 8 forum. We're giving away four copies of OCA Java SE 8 Programmer I Study Guide and have Edward Finegan & Robert Liguori on-line! See this thread for details.
"Mac Mom", We're really glad that you joined us here on the Ranch, and there aren't many rules you'll have to worry about, but one is that proper names are required. Please take a look at the JavaRanch Naming Policy and change your display name to match it. In particular, your display name must be a first and a last name separated by a space character, and must not be obviously fictitious. Thanks! bear Forum Bartender
Btw, I've also heard a rumor that Access might be in the next Office X release, but no concrete confirmation. Howver, if you are planning to use the DB with JDBC, I'd still recommend one of the alternatives (just glance through the JDBC forum for examples of problems people have connecting to Access via JDBC).
My reaction is, why would anyone want to use Access on a Mac? There are so many better databases available! Filemaker if you need a GUI, and as others mentioned, MySQL or PostGreSQL if you want a real database (in which case you'd be using Microsoft SQL Server even on Windows, not Access). If Microsoft wants to come out with things that would be useful on a Mac, they should do: - a recent version of Microsoft Project - Microsoft Exchange Server - Get freaking Virtual PC ported to the G5, already!!! Oh, well. It's nothing new for the Microsoft Mac Business Unit to fail to listen to actual Mac users.
I stumbled across this thread in a Google search (it comes up near the top on a search for "microsoft access mac") so I figured I'd follow up.
1. As of 2007 there doesn't appear to be an official Microsoft Access version available for Mac.
2. Parallels works great, but it's not a good solution for programmatic access (and you have to buy Access and Windows to install on your Mac).
3. A read-only ODBC driver is available from Actual Technologies. It's closed source but relatively inexpensive. I'm thinking of giving it a try...
4. In answer to an earlier poster who asked, in essence, why bother when FileMaker, MySQL, PostgreSQL and others are available, there are a lot of offices out there were someone starts plugging data into an Access database because "it's there". A few years later, you're going to get hired to extract the data from that database and do something useful with it.
To answer your post about #4 being the obvious solution (as i also found this forum on a web search); the reason to use Access on the Mac is that the Access application is already a developed, running, mature application. It's also not just a stand-alone data collector, it grabs data from a real database, allows the user to manipulate it in Access, and then writes the changes back to sql server.
But from reading the replies on this forum and others, looks like i am screwed. There is no Access that runs on the Mac, I would have to buy Parallel, Windows, and Access. So I'm stuck with re-writing it for the Mac which I'm not going to do.
While I agree that for somone used to using Access, having to learn another DB could be a pain, you don't make your points very well:
Originally posted by Todd Mo: the Access application is already a developed, running, mature application
The same can be said for all the other DB solutions mentioned in this thread, some being much more mature and stable than Access.
It's also not just a stand-alone data collector, it grabs data from a real database
Then why would you need it? Use the backing database directly and avoid the middleman.
There is no Access that runs on the Mac
That is correct. For whatever reason, Microsoft did not see fit to make it available in Office for Mac.
But from reading the replies on this forum and others, looks like i am screwed.
Only if you are unwilling to accept change.
So I'm stuck with re-writing it for the Mac which I'm not going to do.
What is "it"? Access itself? That makes no sense. Is "it" an applciation that employs Access? If so, you can look around some of the other forums here to learn how to properly structure database-backed applications in such a way that they are not tied to a particular database. [ August 15, 2007: Message edited by: Bear Bibeault ]
In your answer to Todd, I think you missed what he meant when he said "the Access application is already a developed, running, mature application." I know when I say that same thing, what I mean is the application that has been written in Access (not Access itself) is already a developed, running, mature appliation. That why I found this thread, I'm looking to port an application I wrote in Access to a MAC because the client really does not want to pay to have it re-written. I don't blame them.