AVEVA Historian vs. Microsoft Access

Paired with Citect SCADA or System Platform, this is an excellent process historian. It also works well collecting OPC data. For basic data storage, retrieval, and analysis, this is well suited. This is not well suited for very large deployments. Multiple instances would need to be used to scale up, and the data fed into a second-tier/enterprise historian for corporate user consumption.

Incentivized

As a Material Purchasing/Planning/inventory tracking application, Microsoft Access serves its purpose well. It's presentation is clean, data entry is simple and the ability to customize search fields is welcome. It does, however, come with some caveats; namely, when setting search filters and the need arises to back up a step or two, with Microsoft Access you have to reset, or "clear all", adding extra steps/time to a query.

Incentivized

• Data storage--multiple data sources stream data in real time; it is stored without issue
• Data retrieval--small to moderate queries and trends are generally fast and efficient
• Cost effectiveness--it is one of the cheaper (non-enterprise) historian offers and therefore is good value for money (with a reduced feature set)

Incentivized

• Very easy to create entity-relationship diagrams for various tables and designing mock layouts.
• Really easy to navigate as it hold[s] the classic Microsoft UI. Another good thing is that it comes with the complete MS Office Suite.
• It is really fast when joining multiple tables no matter what type of join.
• Works on pretty much same SQL scripts so no need to learn a new language!

Incentivized

• Query performance--for very long-term/large queries; the latest version which we are yet to commission has some improvements in this area
• User interface--the trend, query, and Excel add-ins are basic and could do with a refresh; web-based clients are a paid add-on and less full featured, so not a true replacement
• Connectivity--Wonderware System Platform driver packs are required for additional data source types, where native connectors are not provided by other products

Incentivized

• Microsoft Access has not really changed at all for several years. It might be nice to see some upgrades and changes.
• The help info is often not helpful. Need more tutorials for Microsoft Access to show how to do specific things.
• Be careful naming objects such as tables, forms, etc. Names that are too long can get cut off in dialog boxes to choose a table, form, report, etc. So, I wish they would have resizable dialog boxes to allow you to see objects with long names.
• I wish it could show me objects that are not in use in the database for current queries, tables, reports, forms, and macros. That way unused objects can be deleted without worrying about losing a report or query because you deleted the underlying object.

Incentivized

I and the rest of my team will renew our Microsoft Access in the future because we use and maintain many different applications and databases created using Microsoft Access so we will need to maintain them in the future. Additionally, it is a standard at our place of work so it is at $0 cost to us to use. Another reason for renewing Microsoft Access is that we just don' t have the resources needed to extend into a network of users so we need to remain a single-desktop application at this time.

Microsoft Access is easy to use. It is compatible with spreadsheets. It is a very good data management tool. There is scope to save a large amount of data in one place. For using this database, one does not need much training, can be shared among multiple users. This database has to sort and filtering features which seem to be very useful.

Incentivized

I don't think the program has ever failed me. It is one of those programs where there is always a solution if you know where to look.

Incentivized

While I have never contacted Microsoft directly for product support, for some reason there's a real prejudice against MS Access among most IT support professionals. They are usually discouraging when it comes to using MS Access. Most of this is due to their lack of understanding of MS Access and how it can improve one's productivity. If Microsoft invested more resources towards enhancing and promoting the use of MS Access then maybe things would be different.

Incentivized

there is no key idea, since it is easy to implement Microsoft Access

AVEVA Historian, formerly Wonderware, was the best of the process tier historians in terms of reliability and functionality. It is still under development and not a "dead" product. It is also more cost effective than the more full-featured enterprise historians, such as PI, which our organization is not yet ready for. The feature set is at the right cost level, coupled with current support, were the key factors in the decision.

Incentivized

Excel is a fantastic - robust application that can do so much so easily. Its easy to train and understand. However - excel does not provide a reporting function and that is typically where we will suggest a move to [Microsoft] Access. [Microsoft] Access requires a little more knowledge of data manipulation.

Incentivized

• Increased efficiency, reduction in labour for preparing reports--data is available to be queried and reported with less effort
• Increased production efficiency--near real-time data availability and comparisons to historical data has been used to make faster and better operational decisions
• Increased reliability--data has been used for maintenance optimization and planning purposes

Incentivized

• Not having to recreate queries or reports every time you want to use them.
• Once an item is created and saved as part of the database, you save manpower by not having to recreate them.
• ROI from a usability standpoint is great. Solid product with great functionality that requires low maintenance usually.

Incentivized