That is true. People don't understand that there is an upper limit to Access before you run into issues - but it's fairly large.. what was it? 4GB?
Edit: 2gb!
Edit: 2gb!
It worked quite well for several years, until of course I reached a limit (which was much smaller than 4GB), and I had to delete old posts.
The thing that imposes these limitations is the somewhat primitive DB engine for Access, which is codenamed MS Jet:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_Database_Engine
But the big that MS & MS fans don't like to mention is that MS Exchange Server uses a version of the same storage engine.
It's not mentioned even once in these Wikipedia articles, for instance, but if you look, you will find telltale giveaways such as Exchange store size limitations:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Exchange_Server
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Microsoft_Exchange_...
However, if you dig a little, you'll find that the underlying storage engine is also codenamed "Jet":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Storage_Engine
Jet Red vs Jet Blue. Totally different, honest.
These days, it's also used in trivial unimportant Windows subsystems such as -- er -- Active Directory, Windows Update, and the Windows Search indices.
Yes, the fragile, essentially single-user, easily-corrupted Access DB engine is an integral part of Windows Server.
Which is a bit odd considering MS also owns SQL Server (bought in from Sybase), and could in principle use that instead, which does not have these built-in limitations and is rather more robust.
Access was in part built in response to Lotus Approach, which brought Claris Filemaker-like simplicity to Windows end-user databases. MS could not tolerate that, so built its own Approach-killer, which was vastly more complex. It acquired FoxPro, a dBase III/IV clone, for its very fast indexing functionality, which was bolted onto MS Cirrus to make Access, and the rest of FoxPro went largely unmaintained until it could be discontinued.
Exchange Server of course replaced MS Mail, which was also bought in and was previously called Network Courier from Consumers Software. Other MS purchases include Powerpoint, Frontpage, Visual BASIC, and Visio.
There is a general pattern evidence in 1990s MS software which isn't universal but widespread. If it's lean, mean, simple, fast, or elegant, it was bought in. If it's overcomplex, fragile, has bizarre limitations for non-obvious reasons, and needs careful maintenance, it was built in-house, probably in response to a successful competing product.
(I was a certified Exchange admin, in the 1990s, and have cleaned up several big corporate systems that collapsed.)
It is not the tool you want for business-critical shared network data stores.
And yet, the pairing of Exchange and Outlook is THE MS critical tool that's won them a million corporate accounts.
That's a million corporates, of course. Not seats. Hundreds of millions of seats.
IIRC there is an easter egg in Microsoft Access 1.0 where the About box changes to an animation of a pond with two ducks in it that are then hit by lightning from a cloud above. I.e. a cirrus and a 'pair of ducks'...
Yes, true. I was never a database guy but my impression at the time was that this was more of a capable tool for pros who wanted to do machine-local standalone stuff, whereas Approach won reviews and tests for ease of use.
OTOH saying that I've seen amateurs do amazing stuff with Access by trial and error....
> IIRC there is an easter egg in Microsoft Access [...] > a cirrus and a 'pair of ducks'...
:-o That is harsh!