Remote Access (Access XP)

**patt** · 2005-01-28 20:16

Does anybody know of a different (much faster) way of operating an Access database than via PC Anywhere?

**charlotte** · 2005-01-28 22:57

There is no such product, Pat. Remoting Access means dragging every query, combobox source, lookup table, and subdatasheet kicking and screaming across the connection. Terminal Services might be an alternative, but you didn't offer any detail in your question, so I don't know whether that's a possibility for you or not.

**WendellB** · 2005-01-29 00:02

Actually, PC Anywhere and Windows Terminal Services both work on the same general principle. You send keystrokes and mouse moves and clicks to the server, and it sends back screen images to you. Neither are really acceptable using a dial-up modem. On the other hand with DSL or other broadband services (256Kb or faster), either work reasonably well. We actually do design work and support of two clients about 1000 miles away using Terminal Services. It isn't quite as responsive as being on their site, but it is viable.

We have also tried other approaches, such as putting a front-end on the local workstation, and then connecting to tables in a back-end using VPN, Remote Access, etc, and none of them are workable, even over a 1.544 Mbit connection.

**patt** · 2005-01-29 19:27

The subject "Remote Access" was an attempt to describe in a couple of words what I was trying to accomplish, hence the reference to PC Anywhere.

I am after a solution that users can operate an Access database remotely, ie. over a Dialup (very slow) or some kind of connection (Broadband, say).
Broadband seems a quicker solution, does that mean the remote users need a broadband connection?

What is DSL all about? Wendell mentioned this in his post.

**charlotte** · 2005-01-29 19:38

DSL is a kind of broadband service. The kind of broadband you get depends on what is available in your are. And yes, the remote users would need broadband service because otherwise, they're going to watch the screen draw one line at a time, and the risk of corruption or just lost of connection will be unacceptable.

**patt** · 2005-01-29 19:47

Thanks Charlotte.

Yes I know what screen painting one line at a time is like, I used PC Anywhere at some stage in the past with a remote client.

Does that mean that broadband will be a lot faster, something that the users would accept.

**charlotte** · 2005-01-29 20:25

Broadband is a lot faster than dialup. Whether users will accept it over a remote connection is something else again. Access wasn't really designed to be used like this, and Jet is notoriously inefficient accross connections like that. Also, broadband services run at different speeds depending on the service and your location, so I doubt there is a definitive answer to your question. A great deal depends on how the application is built in the first place and how it is used.

**patt** · 2005-01-29 20:34

What I was considering was that users would select a particular frontend that resides on the server, the backend would also reside there.
So the user would access the database via their frontend that resides on the server, not on the users remote PC. If this was the case then they could use PC Anywhere over a broadband connection. This should then be acceptable to the user as the only traffic would be the screen stuff only.

Am I right in all this or am I thinking pie in the sky.

**charlotte** · 2005-01-29 20:42

I haven't tried it, Pat, but it sounds like you're reinventing Terminal Server or Citrix. Maybe Wendell will chime in with his wisdom on those topics.

**patt** · 2005-01-29 20:49

I hadn't thought of Citrix, this was used on a client site I was at a couple of years ago. If you had a broadband connection this would be the way to go, because the users want an acceptable response.

What is Terminal Server, is it anything like Cirix or PCAnywhere?

**WendellB** · 2005-01-29 23:25

Windows Terminal Services is a feature of Windows 2000 Server or Windows 2003 Server - the latter has much nicer bells and whistles. We especially like the SBS 2003 version, as you get SQL Server with it. We use this feature with a client in Tacoma, WA, which is about 1000 miles from Denver. It or Citrix are the most workable things we found when trying to work with a remote Access database. And we do split the front-end away so that each remote user has their own copy. Let me know if you have more questions.

**patt** · 2005-01-30 01:19

Thanks Wendell, when you talk about Citrix and splitting the database into a FE/BE where the user has their own copy, where does this FE reside? It doesn't reside on the users PC, does it? It would reside on the Citrix server, wouldn't it?

**WendellB** · 2005-01-30 01:34

Yes - the front-end would reside on the Citrix or Terminal Services server. But each user login would have their own copy to work with - that solves all sorts of problems that you run into when users try to share a front-end.

**MarkLiquorman** · 2005-01-30 12:06

You also might want to check-out GoToMyPC. This essentially would work like a terminal server situation, in which everything takes place on the host.

**patt** · 2005-01-30 19:32

Where do I look for GoToMyPC?

Thread: Remote Access (Access XP)

Thread Tools