Microsoft Access is a database management system from Microsoft that combines the relational Microsoft Jet Database Engine with a graphical user interface and software-development tools.
$139.99
per PC
Microsoft SQL Server
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft SQL Server is a relational database.
$1,418
Per License
SSIS
Score 7.6 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft's SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) is a data integration solution.
Visual FoxPro is a discontinued software, and no longer has support. Also, very few people still use it, or ever know how to use it. Excel is very popular, but [Microsoft] Access can do things like data joins much easier and faster
Although SQL is a full-blown platform for heavy database management, Microsoft Access serves the purpose perfectly for small and mid-scale enterprises. It is also perfect for people just getting started with database management. The graphical user interface is a major plus …
Unlike enterprise-level databases, MS Access doesn't require setting up a complex server environment with user security schemes. It's an excellent tool for small scale databases where purchasing and setting up a product like MS SQL Server could be an overkill. Unlike …
Microsoft Access is a bit dated compared to other database tools. It is slower, not able to handle quantities of data that are as large as the other tools, and a bit more finicky. However, it is sometimes the preferred tool for some clients. It also has a lower barrier to entry …
Verified User
Employee
Chose Microsoft Access
MS Access is the little brother to all these products. In no way is it as feature-rich as the competition I have selected. It is, however, great when used properly. It does not have the same level of security, availability, access, or recoverability as anything listed above. …
Access is more robust than Excel in terms of data-centricity and robustness. It however isn't meant to support an enterprise-level use case like SQL Server is. That sweet spot in the middle (a departmental solution that requires more than Excel can offer) is the sweet spot for …
Microsoft Access while a data tool cannot scale to number of concurrent users or the great amount of files needed to run a business. Microsoft Access can attach to sql server as a backend but the interface is still limited to less than 20 concurrent users at a time.
Verified User
Technician
Chose Microsoft SQL Server
Microsoft SQL is slower than MySQL and Access but far more feature-rich and reliable. Access is almost obsolete nowadays, so not too many people are considering it, but unless budget or an open-source ethos is a factor, Microsoft SQL is superior in every way. Many commonly used …
[Microsoft] SQL Server has a much better community and professional support and is overall just a more reliable system with Microsoft behind it. I've used MySQL in the past and SQL Server has just become more comfortable for me and is my go to RDBMS.
All of the platforms have their own benefit. I was not the decision maker in selecting Microsoft SQL Server, as it was already being utilized when I joined the company, 7 years ago. I can say that I feel more comfortable with utilizing this platform as opposed to the other ones.
The free version is very powerfull and easy to install and use for small companies. Going to Professional and Standard, gives you all the support and the flexibility needed. It is known within the Database Administrator crew, and you can get support very easily over the …
I use Crystal and Microsoft SQL Server with each other. Each has a unique role that it brings to every query. Microsoft SQL Server allows me to write and refine my base query. Crystal allows me to take that query and make it more visually appealing and easier to interpret.
Compared to free versions, SQL Server just blows away the free/open-source software. Things just run faster, and better, and at less overhead. This is truer and truer with the later versions. Microsoft just invests so much into research and development into their product. And …
When we looked at Oracle, the cost comes up and Oracle is far more costly in terms of TCO compared to Microsoft SQL Server. MySQL is very cost-effective, however, it is not as Enterprise-ready in that our 3rd party products such as financials do not run on MySQL so, for a small …
SQL Server is a better choice for quick time to market solutions and for easier maintenance. Oracle Database setup and programming to support solutions has a harder learning curve and it requires more time and effort to hit the ground running.
The reason we've decided to go with Microsoft over Oracle or MySQL is because our company lives in the Microsoft ecosystem. It works well with other Microsoft products (Exchange, Office, etc.). It allows for easier integration. Also, the support from Microsoft is crucial, in …
SQL Server is a full feature robust platform with relatively mature coding standards. Interactivity with other Microsoft products enhances my workflow with minimal installation headaches.
In contrast, easier licensing for MySQL and SQLite gives them a definite advantage, …
There's really no comparison between Microsoft SQL Server and MySQL tools. While the others, particularly access, make certain plug and play features easy to use (e.g. forms, simple reports), it can not offer the array of integration options and general scalability, …
I started working with databases many years ago with Access, which allows you to create relational database and provide an old-fashioned desktop interface. I had a look at Oracle but I never had the opportunity to get to the bottom (also because of the budget that had the …
Years ago I used Oracle and Oracle Data Integrator and I hated it. It was cumbersome and archaic and I couldn't believe the product could be so popular. Given a database related task and a choice between Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server, SQL Server wins hands down in ease of use, …
I have used Microsoft Access, MySQL, and I have been a user of systems that run on Oracle database servers. All but Oracle are really intended for smaller scale projects and teams as they start to get slow or the performance will suffer once you start getting lots of data input …
I have been a SQL Server focused professional for over 20 years, so SQL Server is my first choice. I have experience and comfort, and the ability to get up to speed quickly. Oracle has been too expensive, though I think it has performed similar to SQL Server in the applications …
We just selected SSIS because we use SQL Server Management System (SSMS) to manage our database. As SSIS is a component of the Microsoft SQL Server there are no problems with integration and everything works perfectly. In addition, we don't have to learn how to use another …
SSIS is similar to Alteryx and Informatica PowerCenter in a way because these are all drag-and-drop ETL tools with similar functionality. Alteryx is a step ahead because it has some advanced ETL functionalities including statistical calculations etc. and a better ability to set …
SQL Server is already in our wheelhouse so it only made sense to utilize the tools we already had available to us--SSIS, SSAS, & SSRS. Other non-technical users seem to be more comfortable using alternatives to SSIS. However, these alternatives are not as good as SSIS at …
These are all great products and, honestly, can move data faster. They include more enterprise features and have some great qualities about each. However, they all cost a lot depending on the implementation you need. With SQL Server Integration Services, you do not have any …
When looking to evaluate different options, we looked first to the experience and software we had in-house that would accomplish the job. When assessing alternatives outside we were looking for the tool that would offer the most flexibility.
SSIS is a very basic, developer-oriented ETL tool and while it lacks many of the nice UX features of its competitors it is a powerful tool that comes as a part of SQL Server and, in the hands of experienced developers with domain knowledge, can meet most organizations' ETL …
SSIS and Denodo differ in their approaches to ETL and Data integrations. SSIS is more affordable from a cost and licensing perspective (if you have Microsoft licensing), but Denodo is no slouch. If you go with Denodo, you are not creating data, there are pros and cons to …
SSIS has more configuration options and its smooth running GUI (in visual studio) makes implementation easier. It's ability to provide visual programming and allow users to input code for more complex logic and configuration gives users a great degree of flexibility.
Unfortunately SSIS is the only ETL tool I have used by far. I used Dundas BI before, didn't like its ETL component, but that is more of a data visualization tool.
Technical Analyst BI II (Global Business Intelligence and Analytics - Data Infrastructure)
Chose SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
I've used several other ETL tools and they can all do the trick once you learn how to get around their shortfalls, including SSIS. I think the best reason to use SSIS is if you're already using Microsoft tools. They integrate well with each other and it's easy to understand how …
While Clover provides a number of the same data transformation techniques, it is not nearly as robust as SSIS. It also requires knowledge of the specific scripting language while SSIS allows the user to choose from a number of commonly-used scripting languages (i.e. VB, C#, …
SAP Data Services is a very good tool and overall its easier to use than SSIS, but SAP is at a much higher price point than Microsoft. Microsoft can be a good fit for businesses of any size, but SAP tends to be a better fit for larger businesses.
Among the various ETL products on the market, I only used DataStage. I think that SQL Server Integration Services is much more intuitive than many others and allows for relatively little time to create a viable and very powerful solution. That obviously requires the right …
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.
Microsoft SQL is ubiquitous, while MySQL runs under the hood all over the place. Microsoft SQL is the platform taught in colleges and certification courses and is the one most likely to be used by businesses because it is backed by Microsoft. Its interface is friendly (well, as pleasant as SQL can be) and has been used by so many for so long that resources are freely available if you encounter any issues.
As I mentioned earlier SQL Server Integration Services is suitable if you want to manage data from different applications. It really helps in fetching the data and generating reports. Its automation make it very easy and time efficient. It works well with large database as well. But it doesn't work well with real time data, it will take some time to gather the real time data. I would not recommend using it in a real time/fast-paced environment.
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.
Microsoft SQL Server Enterprise edition has a high cost but is the only edition which supports SQL Always On Availability Groups. It would be nice to include this feature in the Standard version.
Licensing of Microsoft SQL Server is a quite complex matter, it would be good to simplify licensing in the future. For example, per core vs per user CAL licensing, as well as complex licensing scenarios in the Cloud and on Edge locations.
It would be good to include native tools for converting Oracle, DB2, Postgresql and MySQL/MariaDB databases (schema and data) for import into Microsoft SQL Server.
Connection managers for online data sources can be tricky to configure.
Performance tuning is an art form and trialing different data flow task options can be cumbersome. SSIS can do a better job of providing performance data including historical for monitoring.
Mapping destination using OLE DB command is difficult as destination columns are unnamed.
Excel or flat file connections are limited by version and type.
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.
We understand that the Microsoft SQL Server will continue to advance, offering the same robust and reliable platform while adding new features that enable us, as a software center, to create a superior product. That provides excellent performance while reducing the hardware requirements and the total cost of ownership of our solution.
Some features should be revised or improved, some tools (using it with Visual Studio) of the toolbox should be less schematic and somewhat more flexible. Using for example, the CSV data import is still very old-fashioned and if the data format changes it requires a bit of manual labor to accept the new data structure
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.
SQL Server mostly 'just works' or generates error messages to help you sort out the trouble. You can usually count on the product to get the job done and keep an eye on your potential mistakes. Interaction with other Microsoft products makes operating as a Windows user pretty straight forward. Digging through the multitude of dialogs and wizards can be a pain, but the answer is usually there somewhere.
SSIS is a great tool for most ETL needs. It has the 90% (or more) use cases covered and even in many of the use cases where it is not ideal SSIS can be extended via a .NET language to do the job well in a supportable way for almost any performance workload.
SQL Server Integration Services performance is dependent directly upon the resources provided to the system. In our environment, we allocated 6 nodes of 4 CPUs, 64GB each, running in parallel. Unfortunately, we had to ramp-up to such a robust environment to get the performance to where we needed it. Most of the reports are completed in a reasonable timeframe. However, in the case of slow running reports, it is often difficult if not impossible to cancel the report without killing the report instance or stopping the service.
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.
We managed to handle most of our problems by looking into Microsoft's official documentation that has everything explained and almost every function has an example that illustrates in detail how a particular functionality works. Just like PowerShell has the ability to show you an example of how some cmdlet works, that is the case also here, and in my opinion, it is a very good practice and I like it.
The support, when necessary, is excellent. But beyond that, it is very rarely necessary because the user community is so large, vibrant and knowledgable, a simple Google query or forum question can answer almost everything you want to know. You can also get prewritten script tasks with a variety of functionality that saves a lot of time.
Other than SQL taking quite a bit of time to actually install there are no problems with installation. Even on hardware that has good performance SQL can still take close to an hour to install a typical server with management and reporting services.
The implementation may be different in each case, it is important to properly analyze all the existing infrastructure to understand the kind of work needed, the type of software used and the compatibility between these, the features that you want to exploit, to understand what is possible and which ones require integration with third-party tools
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.
[Microsoft] SQL Server has a much better community and professional support and is overall just a more reliable system with Microsoft behind it. I've used MySQL in the past and SQL Server has just become more comfortable for me and is my go to RDBMS.
I think SQL Server Integration Services is better suited for on-premises data movement and ADF is more suited for the cloud. Though ADF has more connectors, SQL Server Integration Services is more robust and has better functionality just because it has been around much longer
Increased accuracy - We went from multiple users having different versions of an Excel spreadsheet to a single source of truth for our reporting.
Increased Efficiency - We can now generate reports at any time from a single source rather than multiple users spending their time collating data and generating reports.
Improved Security - Enterprise level security on a dedicated server rather than financial files on multiple laptop hard drives.
Without this, we would have to manually update a spreadsheet of our SQL Server inventory
We would also have poor alerting; if an instance was down we wouldn't know until it was reported by a user
We only have one other person who uses SQL Server Integration Services , he's the expert. It would fall to me without him and I would not enjoy being responsible for it.